81–90 of 101 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is this any different from someone driving a 2017 Lexus versus a 1990 Toyota? Both may be a reflection of the income one receives. Both take up the same public infrastructure of the road and parking spaces.
I'm sorry, but no. Private busses using public bus stops — and blocking public bus traffic — is not an income issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, right. Housing can never fall. I've heard that one before.
Housing fell a little bit off the 2005 highs and the result was very nearly a total collapse of the financial system. The Fed and the government did everything they could to backstop housing (at the expense of housing affordability and banking system reform) and it's now permanently unaffordable. More accurately we could say that housing will never be allowed to fall. The entire economy will be sacrificed at the alta…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you don't actually have data, just anecdotes you've selectively remembered. Noted. Side note- Nice work attempting to attach the pejorative term "violently" to my position. Not that it makes your side any more convincing, but it's smart in terms of contemporary rhetoric.
This comment is pretty rude.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In that respect — traffic congestion — I think the buses are a good thing. But there's definitely a down-side. Gentrification, for example, though usually regarded as a net, long-term win, is short-term very painful for many people. Families that have lived somewhere for years, and communities that have grown up over generations, are being shredded as property-owners rent-seek. Now, yes, it's their property to do wit…
Maybe teachers shouldn't take jobs in areas they can't afford. Serious point. The market would then have to raise the prices for that labor due to the shortage until the rate equals the amount a teacher would need to afford the area. But the real issue is that supply and demand is distorted in the area: no new supply, increasing demand. It doesn't take an engineer to see where that equation leads. Add rent control on…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment is pretty rude.
Which part was so rude you felt it necessary to make this comment?
First, you assumptively respond as if 'DannyBee doesn't have any data, because you dispute the provenance of his data. But there's a difference between "I agree with the validity of your data" and "you knowingly are arguing without evidence".
Then, you pointlessly barb him about the selectivity of his memory.
Finally, you deploy the classic message-board-jerk "nice work" rhetoric, which exists solely in order to inform the person you're talking to that you don't respect what they're writing.
That's a lot of rudeness to pack into such a lightweight comment.
A writer with exactly the same information trying to persuade people of the exact same position could accomplish what you've accomplished so far with just the words:
"I don't agree with you".
San Francisco is one massive "tech slowdown" (although I suppose more like a tech collapse, given the baseline level of employment further down in Silicon Valley) from turning into Detroit-on-the-Bay.
That's some very wishful thinking. You have rich people like Robin Williams or Michelle Pfeiffer living here unlike Detroit, not to name countless CEOs and retired VCs who wont disappear. As for the rest of us plebs, SF has survived many boom and bust cycles [0], unlike Detroit. [0] http://sfist.com/2015/10/07/san_francisco_has_always_been_a_...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which part was so rude you felt it necessary to make this comment?
Sure, I'll answer that. First, you assumptively respond as if 'DannyBee doesn't have any data, because you dispute the provenance of his data. But there's a difference between "I agree with the validity of your data" and "you knowingly are arguing without evidence". Then, you pointlessly barb him about the selectivity of his memory. Finally, you deploy the classic message-board-jerk "nice work" rhetoric, which exists…
There's nothing pointless or "barbing" (another word attempting to rhetorically paint my position) about my selective memory comment. I simply do not believe he talked to 200 people who all said SF sucked in the past. I truly think that he's leaving out people who believe otherwise.
And it's not a controversial or "rude" opinion to say anecdotes are not data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, I'll answer that. First, you assumptively respond as if 'DannyBee doesn't have any data, because you dispute the provenance of his data. But there's a difference between "I agree with the validity of your data" and "you knowingly are arguing without evidence". Then, you pointlessly barb him about the selectivity of his memory. Finally, you deploy the classic message-board-jerk "nice work" rhetoric, which exists…
No, I do not respect the rhetorical tactic attempting to paint my opinion with the the pejorative "violently." It's a cheap dishonest trick, and I will treat it as it deserves to be treated. There's nothing pointless or "barbing" (another word attempting to rhetorically paint my position) about my selective memory comment. I simply do not believe he talked to 200 people who all said SF sucked in the past. I truly thi…
Another person I read religious is 'dang, whose comments are the informal moderator log of HN.
And why I'm saying this to you is, pretty much everyone that gets called out for incivility on HN deploys the argument you just did: "my incivility was justified by the comment that preceded it".
I'm not persuaded.
You asked!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I do not respect the rhetorical tactic attempting to paint my opinion with the the pejorative "violently." It's a cheap dishonest trick, and I will treat it as it deserves to be treated. There's nothing pointless or "barbing" (another word attempting to rhetorically paint my position) about my selective memory comment. I simply do not believe he talked to 200 people who all said SF sucked in the past. I truly thi…
I saw this comment because I read all of DannyBee's comments, because they are frequently pretty great. That's a big part of how I read HN. Another person I read religious is 'dang, whose comments are the informal moderator log of HN. And why I'm saying this to you is, pretty much everyone that gets called out for incivility on HN deploys the argument you just did: "my incivility was justified by the comment that pre…
So here we are. :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, right. Housing can never fall. I've heard that one before.
Housing fell a little bit off the 2005 highs and the result was very nearly a total collapse of the financial system. The Fed and the government did everything they could to backstop housing (at the expense of housing affordability and banking system reform) and it's now permanently unaffordable. More accurately we could say that housing will never be allowed to fall. The entire economy will be sacrificed at the alta…