Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
June LC Thread **Survivor White House Edition** June LC Thread **Survivor White House Edition**
View Poll Results: Who will NOT survive the month of June?
Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III
12 20.34%
John Kelly
4 6.78%
Jared Kushner
2 3.39%
Wilbur Ross
2 3.39%
Ben Carson
3 5.08%
Rudy Giuliani
9 15.25%
Scott Pruitt
9 15.25%
Kellyanne Conway
1 1.69%
Rod Rosenstein
8 13.56%
Write-in
9 15.25%

06-14-2018 , 10:09 AM
Everything since I moved away (1999) counts as new.

I guess building a LOT of housing might be the answer, but it seems like part of that solution is alleviating demand by increasing supply, but part is alleviating it by turning Berkeley (SF or any of these high demand locations) into a place where fewer people want to live.
06-14-2018 , 10:23 AM




gg GG
06-14-2018 , 10:41 AM
What a racist pile of idiotic trash that guy is

"Allegiances to their enclaves" i cant even
06-14-2018 , 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Everything since I moved away (1999) counts as new.

I guess building a LOT of housing might be the answer, but it seems like part of that solution is alleviating demand by increasing supply, but part is alleviating it by turning Berkeley (SF or any of these high demand locations) into a place where fewer people want to live.
I don't disagree with this at all, other than to note that the relevant metric is not how many people in total want to live in Berkeley. That doesn't matter, since the law imposes a de facto limit of ~120k people being allowed to live in Berkeley. The question is *how much* the people who currently or might be allowed to live in Berkeley want to live there. And it's absolutely clear that the people who currently live there think higher density is desirable, either because of "neighborhood character" or because of the potential impact on the financial value of their real estate investments. That's the reason they use the political system to block the construction of housing on historic parking lots.

The controversial questions are whether it's moral to enforce those preferences and whether the political system should permit it. Zoom out enough and it's really the same question as the immigration debate--how much power should the existing inhabitants of a region have to prevent outsiders from breathing the same air? (There is a get out of jail free card here from charges of hypocrisy at least. It's morally wrong to object to ethnic diversity, and it's not morally wrong to object to mid-rise apartment buildings. Maybe that's where you stand.)
06-14-2018 , 10:42 AM
Was that before or after Greenlol emigrated to Brasil?
06-14-2018 , 10:45 AM
beta cuck

06-14-2018 , 10:46 AM
If you haven't handwaved GG off by now, you aren't paying attention.

The amount of whataboutism on his Twitter rivals Hannity. He's either being paid off by somebody or is cynically spreading hot takes to separate himself from everybody else in order to gain attention and more money.

He no longer deserves to be read or listened to. I honestly find him worse than most of FOXNews because he provides the bona fides and appearance of being liberal but is really a liberal in conservative's clothing. At least FOXNews is upfront with their deplorableness.
06-14-2018 , 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Everything since I moved away (1999) counts as new.

I guess building a LOT of housing might be the answer, but it seems like part of that solution is alleviating demand by increasing supply, but part is alleviating it by turning Berkeley (SF or any of these high demand locations) into a place where fewer people want to live.
Mad a sardonic-but-serious post similar to this a couple of months ago. I do think in some markets there is a lot of potential for housing relief by reducing demand. In NYC I have long lobbied for the outright ban of kitchen islands, tile backsplashes, in-unit washing machines, Crate and Barrel furniture and artisinal beef jerky. In some neighborhoods, I think someone with a talent for political articulation could get a city council seat on such a platform.
06-14-2018 , 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Everything since I moved away (1999) counts as new.

I guess building a LOT of housing might be the answer, but it seems like part of that solution is alleviating demand by increasing supply, but part is alleviating it by turning Berkeley (SF or any of these high demand locations) into a place where fewer people want to live.
Easy to do - just elect republicans.
06-14-2018 , 11:01 AM
So Trump is now the defendant in what, three separate lawsuits? Imagine if the media bothered to talk about any one of the three with half the fervor of "but her emails!"
06-14-2018 , 11:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
I don't disagree with this at all, other than to note that the relevant metric is not how many people in total want to live in Berkeley. That doesn't matter, since the law imposes a de facto limit of ~120k people being allowed to live in Berkeley. The question is *how much* the people who currently or might be allowed to live in Berkeley want to live there. And it's absolutely clear that the people who currently live there think higher density is desirable, either because of "neighborhood character" or because of the potential impact on the financial value of their real estate investments. That's the reason they use the political system to block the construction of housing on historic parking lots.

The controversial questions are whether it's moral to enforce those preferences and whether the political system should permit it. Zoom out enough and it's really the same question as the immigration debate--how much power should the existing inhabitants of a region have to prevent outsiders from breathing the same air? (There is a get out of jail free card here from charges of hypocrisy at least. It's morally wrong to object to ethnic diversity, and it's not morally wrong to object to mid-rise apartment buildings. Maybe that's where you stand.)
I don't morally object to midrise apartments. High density mixed use developments including commercial (not just retail) are less bad for the environment than sprawl, so if anything it's a moral good. I'm just suggesting that there should not be a right to build a 40 story apartment building and that the 120k residents should have a say on whether or not they want it in their town.

Faced with rising prices they could decide more building is worth it, or they could have rent control or price controls and decide that competing applicants for housing be chosen by lottery, or like in Singapore the public can just own the housing. But I don't mean to suggest that community interest/majority rule should always win. There are a lot of rights and interests to weigh.
06-14-2018 , 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrollyWantACracker
Mad a sardonic-but-serious post similar to this a couple of months ago. I do think in some markets there is a lot of potential for housing relief by reducing demand. In NYC I have long lobbied for the outright ban of kitchen islands, tile backsplashes, in-unit washing machines, Crate and Barrel furniture and artisinal beef jerky. In some neighborhoods, I think someone with a talent for political articulation could get a city council seat on such a platform.
Ok, but tile backsplashes don't belong on the list.

No stores that sell just food for dogs.

In LA there's a gentrifying area adjascent to skid row. You can see people eating stuff from trash cans outside a store called "Just Food for Dogs."
06-14-2018 , 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Ok, but tile backsplashes don't belong on the list.

No stores that sell just food for dogs.

In LA there's a gentrifying area adjascent to skid row. You can see people eating stuff from trash cans outside a store called "Just Food for Dogs."
Don't know if that means "only food for dogs" or "morally appropriate food for dogs" but I love it either way.
06-14-2018 , 11:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperUberBob
If you haven't handwaved GG off by now, you aren't paying attention.

The amount of whataboutism on his Twitter rivals Hannity. He's either being paid off by somebody or is cynically spreading hot takes to separate himself from everybody else in order to gain attention and more money.

He no longer deserves to be read or listened to. I honestly find him worse than most of FOXNews because he provides the bona fides and appearance of being liberal but is really a liberal in conservative's clothing. At least FOXNews is upfront with their deplorableness.
It's the bolded I'm pretty sure. From my experience with the Intercept there are some really solid investigative journalists and writers there. Glem is not one of them.
06-14-2018 , 11:21 AM
I wish I had a better vocabulary. I can't think of what the right word for this is, but "whataboutism" is often used as a BS slander designed to dismiss something without consideration. And like whataboutism is inherent in the accusation of whataboutism itself.

Aside from that, if GG really wrote that "allegiances to their enclaves" bit he is deplorable.
06-14-2018 , 11:21 AM
An article about a 60 year old non citizen who was living a comfortable life after being here for 30 some odd years and got picked up in an ICE sweep.


https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...eport-him.html

Quote:
If you wanted an example of the (intentional) mission creep of supposedly rounding up and deporting MS-13 gang members, the story of the Garcia family in Los Angeles shows the insidiousness of blanket immigration raids. The Mercury News has the story of 62-year-old Luis Garcia, who, according to his daughter, was having his morning coffee and watering his lawn around 7 a.m. on Sunday when approximately eight Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents showed up at Garcia’s home, handcuffed him, and detained him. Now, they’re trying to deport him.
Quote:
She said the only blemish on her father’s record was a misdemeanor 18 years ago from a domestic violence dispute with her mother, for which her father completed an anger management class and spent a period on probation. And that appears to be enough for ICE to go ahead with trying to deport her father, a U.S. resident of a half-century. “Databases reveal that Mr. Garcia has past criminal convictions that make him amenable to removal from the United States,” ICE said in a statement. “Mr. Garcia is currently in ICE custody pending removal proceedings, where an immigration judge with the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) will determine whether or not he has a lawful basis to remain in the United States.”
An misdemeanor from years ago means a 62 year old guy could get sent to a country he hasn't been to for over 40 years, most likely to die. Away from his family. This is inhumane.
06-14-2018 , 11:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrollyWantACracker
Don't know if that means "only food for dogs" or "morally appropriate food for dogs" but I love it either way.
i hope they turn humans away- they certainly deserve to suffer from hunger more than dogs do
06-14-2018 , 11:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
I wish I had a better vocabulary. I can't think of what the right word for this is, but "whataboutism" is often used as a BS slander designed to dismiss something without consideration. And like whataboutism is inherent in the accusation of whataboutism itself.

Aside from that, if GG really wrote that "allegiances to their enclaves" bit he is deplorable.
Well yeah Comrade Greenwald would have to admit that Trump has done anything wrong for this to actually be whataboutism.
06-14-2018 , 11:36 AM
man i'm not about to do this devil's advocate **** because deporting him is stupid and the current policy is super evil, but man i'm pretty sure slate could have done just a tiny bit more in the way of journalism to profile somebody who doesn't have a conviction on his record for beating his wife (and it kinda rubs me the wrong way to see it handwaved away as a trivial "simple misdemeanor" and nbd)
06-14-2018 , 11:36 AM
Does Greenwald realize Mike Pence (and most of the Republican party) would, without hesitation, have him and his husband sent to a concentration camp for being Jewish and/or gay?
06-14-2018 , 11:38 AM
lol wait so he's jewish and gay and has the CHUTZPAH to carry water for this admin?

he deserves all kinds of calamity in his life
06-14-2018 , 11:42 AM
Alright Pruitt is LIVE

This is at least the second derp talking head I've seen this week calling for Pruitt to get got

06-14-2018 , 11:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by +rep_lol
lol wait so he's jewish and gay and has the CHUTZPAH to carry water for this admin?

he deserves all kinds of calamity in his life
And his husband and kids are Brazilian, I believe, so they certainly aren’t allowed to be real Amuricans
06-14-2018 , 11:51 AM
This is horrifying.

06-14-2018 , 12:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
I wish I had a better vocabulary. I can't think of what the right word for this is, but "whataboutism" is often used as a BS slander designed to dismiss something without consideration. And like whataboutism is inherent in the accusation of whataboutism itself.

Aside from that, if GG really wrote that "allegiances to their enclaves" bit he is deplorable.
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2...gument-in.html

      
m