Full agree on all of this. Reduce red tape and increase legal immigration a lot to free up the system to refocus on actually stopping the people we don't want.

Credit to Cato for publishing the truth when really neither party has been up for discussing the nuance on this.

deleted by creator

He has been in office for 2 weeks I can't imagine this is a result of his policies yet.

Damn I thought be believed in the Constitution. Colorado is just abiding by the bedrock document of the Republic.

I bet there's at least one amendment he would be upset at the Colorado Supreme Court if they didn't abide by it.

I'd like to have access to the content without having my current stuff swamped. I guess the question is how the algorithm treats an instance with a lot more activity. If it overwhelms, I can just go get a different username and monitor them separately.

Also how does Threads deal with sublemmys? Seems like this might be more of a question for Mastodon.

If you're firmly going to buy a house in 2-3 years, putting a down payment into stocks just adds volatility to the amount you're putting down, meaning volatility to the type of house you're able to afford and/or whether or not you are able to afford a house at all. Stocks usually go up 10% ish as a long term average, but they could easily go down 20% in both of the next 2 years.

If you're willing to take the risk and maybe wait up to 3 more years or something to actually buy a house, probably putting them in stocks helps you because the money grows faster. But most people, for lifestyle reasons, want a house in the next 2-3 years and that timeline is firm and not really relying on that money to grow. That is why the advice is usually a CD or high yield internet savings account like Ally or Discover.

I don't think so. In theory it sounds great, but it's a little bit of the power fantasy "what if I was the landlord?"

The lack of a profit motive helps but you still get taxed on a growing property value, and you probably have to pay at least some of the people...there's always going to be repairs needed and plumbing to be fixed and a new roof every decade or two. And since those prices are going up, rent will keep going up by necessity.

So it's a lot of work and fundraising to provide a good deal for not actually that many people. If a community gets priced out of a neighborhood except for the 4 people in your multiplex, you haven't really combatted gentrification much.

36 hour shift in a 36 hour week actually sounds kind of cool. Kill yourself for 2 days and have 5 days off. Would definitely not want to do 36hrs in 2 days and then proceed to have 15 hour days for the rest of the week too.

I believe solidarity strikes are actually illegal in the US.

Yeah not to use the same metaphor everyone seems to use but email didn't go through "enshittification" and like fax machines didn't, even though fax died out, because it's a feature of the business cycle, not a feature of technological innovation.

Ford had $42.5B in profit in 2023 Q2, while they spend an average of less than $8B annually on R&D. Obviously if they needed to spend more, they would already be doing it, they have the money to do so.

So they have about $160B annually they could spend before it even eats in to anything other than pure profit. They have 57k UAW workers at Ford.

So unless they are giving each new employee an additional $2.8 million PER YEAR, it will not eat into R&D whatsoever.

The obvious dunk is that it's crazy to remove so many things and it looks like he just removed enough to get down to 2%. But used car prices have actually deflated over the last 12 months so the inflation number would be lower if he included them.

The lobbying is not the problem. The donations that sway opinions are the problem. If it was entirely unrelated to donations and the congress person was just hearing out all sides of an issue, that's a good thing.

Some vacation homes are not habitable year-round, I'm not like making that up. There are cabins on Minnesota lakes without insulation, you want to bus people from the streets of LA there and call it the cure for homelessness? It's so good that it is impossible that we could improve the idea by doing both and giving people more options?

My imagination doesn't end on what gets the votes, it's that there are people who need help right now, so I think we should work with the system we have now to do SOMETHING. It doesn't preclude still doing your thing when possible. Waiting for the revolution is the same as doing nothing to the people who need help right now. You can smugly pretend that anything less than your one idea is inhumane so we shouldn't do anything to help anyone, but why not advocate for any solution that can help people?

Or we could do both.

They are a fire hazard if they are done in an unregulated fashion, we can build them to code and that would prevent people from doing it in secret and causing fire hazards.

This is like saying you can't have legal abortion because people will die of the complications from coat hangers. Actually, the legality is the thing that stops that.

"Whoops we built more prisons" except specifically the type of prisons with 2-3x the space that are entirely voluntary to enter and leave. The 'not being allowed to leave part is a big part of why people don't like being in prison.

That stay is highly misleading for this purpose because it doesn't mean 27 homes are empty that a person could move into. It includes vacation homes that are not habitable in the season they are not being used, and apartments that are empty in the one month between when someone moved out and someone else moves in. You couldn't actually house someone there. And a lot of second homes even if they are insulated and habitable year round are in the middle of nowhere.

But that said, I never said we couldn't do that too, if you can get the votes to pass your thing then sure let's do both.

You're real proud of...letting people be unhoused.

If you build something someone can live in, and let them decide whether or not they want to live in it optionally, the people who take advantage of it will be the ones who will be helped by it. I'm not saying anything other than that.

I can't make more apartments, I don't have the money to build them or the political votes to fund them. If you do, go live your values. I'm trying to deal with the political realities, and 100sqft of optional free housing that does get built is better than the nothing that is currently being built.

We can do both, if your idea can get the funding. If it can't, all the more reason we need a compromise solution to help the people who are hurting right now.