Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 81 posts

Re: Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

#61

Post by DiscourseFan »

ta1243 wrote: post #57
DiscourseFan wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its true, but the land that is available, like I said, is still being underutilized. Look a Japan, which is in a very similar situation near the major metropolitan areas: very little land where people can actually settle, and yet housing is relatively affordable for most. Its not an accident, they're just better at managing urban density--and Tokyo especially has the benefit of a fantastically complex and well manage…

Greater-Tokyo has a population density about 15 times more than Greater-LA. If LA had Tokyo density you could fit pretty much the entire US population in it.

See, we don't even need land use to be that efficient!

Re: Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

#62

Post by panick21_ »

ta1243 wrote: post #58
varelse wrote: post #4

[flagged]

You're living the libertarian dream. No pesky government getting in the way, just free association between you and the person who owns your means of life.

Except he still pays taxes for the services he doesn't use ...

Re: Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

#63

Post by panick21_ »

foogazi wrote: post #42
DiscourseFan wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but the residential parts of California, even in the nicer towns along the coast, don't really look very different from anywhere else in the US; lots of parking lots, plenty of underutilized space.

It might not look different but it feels different - year round weather is great Coastal SoCal has the best weather in the world. Natural beauty in beaches & parks LA & SF are world class cultural powerhouses. Silicon Valley is the tech capital of the world How can it not be expensive ?

> How can it not be expensive ?

By having supply increasing with demand.

It will likely never be as cheap as some place in bum fuck nowhere. But it could still be much cheaper.

Specially if you take into account both living and transportation cost.

Re: Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

#64

Post by panick21_ »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #36
DiscourseFan wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but the residential parts of California, even in the nicer towns along the coast, don't really look very different from anywhere else in the US; lots of parking lots, plenty of underutilized space.

I mean, California is larger than some countries. There is plenty of space but we all know that that space isn't equally valued. It's not just enough to be in an area with decent weather, you gotta be close to the hotspot hubs of SF/SD/LA. And that's where "shortages" start to come. Pareto principle at work. Also coastland is a minority of land in CA. Go out to the east in So Cal and it's all burning hot desert, with…

To much land is the problem. US land use pattern, zoneing, building codes, parking ordinance, traffic design, transportation design are all incredibly bad.

There is so much amazing coast land, and could be far better used if there was nice walk-able urban places all along the coast and well working public transportation to get there. That would also massively boost land values and commercial taxes.

Re: Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

#65

Post by biztos »

SllX wrote: post #45
biztos wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think this question can be properly answered without asking someone thus revivified.

So is it like naming rights for discoveries then? The first guy to get pulled out of the freezer gets to decide if he was alive or dead during his tenure as a popsicle?

IMO all we need is one successful reanimation and suddenly those popsicles will be presumptively "alive" in a legal sense.

But in a philosophical sense, yeah, every voice will count but the first voice will count most, until it's overtaken by a more eloquent one.

Assuming they can even communicate.

Re: Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

#66

Post by dredmorbius »

TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #59
skywal_l wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalism is the exploitation of men by men. Communism is the exact opposite.

Quite sure there was plenty of exploitation in communist countries.

GP is a variation of a JKG quote:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/05/john-ke...>

Re: Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

#68

Post by a_gnostic »

SllX wrote: post #19
thatguy0900 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a popular rumor that he froze his head in anticipation of being revived in the future

Ah. Let's generously say that did happen and it works out for him at some indeterminate point in the future. Would you then consider the frozen and completely inactive head disconnected from a living body vital for sustaining the living processes of the head of Walt Disney still living in the present? If this thread is to be completely pedantic, we have to go all the way here.

"That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons even death may die." –A. Alhazred

Re: Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

#69

Post by a_gnostic »

SllX wrote: post #49
tzury wrote: post #23

Trying to imagine the freedom one feels when working in a corporate that owns the town one lives in. Schools, clinics, police, and other community aspects are all controlled by the same entity. This is not communism per se , but perhaps even worse in some aspects. Feels like a ginat kibbutz (1) to me. And all was done in the name of capitalism and the free world. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz

Company towns had their problems, paying workers in company scrip for example to buy necessities at the company store (a practice which has been outlawed) among other things, but conceptually they were more like planned developments intended to house enough workers and support staff to engage in whatever land-based enterprise the company was engaged in, where previously there wasn’t a town to house them all before. T…

They want to return to a sort of corporate scrip; Central Bank Digital Currency on a national level.

Re: Scotia, California is owned by a New York investment firm

#70

Post by a_gnostic »

tzury wrote: post #23

Trying to imagine the freedom one feels when working in a corporate that owns the town one lives in. Schools, clinics, police, and other community aspects are all controlled by the same entity. This is not communism per se , but perhaps even worse in some aspects. Feels like a ginat kibbutz (1) to me. And all was done in the name of capitalism and the free world. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz

Fascism (1), actually.

1. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qdY_IMZH2Ko&t=320

Post reply on HN