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

Zohran and the Short Link

iamwillwang.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 236 posts

Re: Zohran and the Short Link

#101

Post by thunderfork »

arijun wrote: post #51
Aboutplants wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What specific policies do you disagree with out of curiosity

I'm not from NYC (nor do I have the same difficulty seeing past politics that gp seems to have), so I didn't research this stuff so closely. But from what I saw, it seemed that a lot of his policies seemed populist. - Rent freezes do not seem to work. When he ran on that position I did look up briefly to see if there was any recent publications that reversed the previous consensus that they don't work, but didn't fin…

As a counter-example, the LCBO (Ontario government liquor store) has been demonstrably fine for decades. Failure modes exist, but I don't think they're guaranteed.

Re: Zohran and the Short Link

#102

Post by pjc50 »

piker wrote: post #90
voidUpdate wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question, what is it you don't like about Mamdani? I don't live in NYC, so I don't have first-hand experience with him, but I've not seen many complaints about him (other than things like "he broke the dress code at the swimming pool that one time", which is "Obama's tan suit" levels of petty)

His policies are socialist. Some of us still perceive that as a bad thing.

I think the endless labelling of everything rightwingers don't like as "socialism" has backfired. A generation has been told that affordable food and housing, usable public transport, healthcare, not getting shot at school, not getting racially abused etc. are "socialism". So obviously they want to have some of this "socialism" as soon as possible.

Re: Zohran and the Short Link

#103

Post by thunderfork »

klipt wrote: post #33
the_gastropod wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have my suspicions about what’s going to happen. I worry the demand is going to be too high to realistically deal with. But dammit am I excited to see someone try something a bit different to address a very obvious need. State-run stores aren’t really that special. A bunch of states have state-run liquor stores. The military runs commissaries. These don’t elicit much fear-mongering or attention on cable news for so…

Exactly what problem does it solve that food stamps cannot solve more simply?

* Jurisdictional: Food stamps can't be adjusted by NYC itself (as far as I know), so if they're insufficient this works around that issue

* Store access: Food stamps don't necessarily solve the problem of "there's no grocery store close to me", and if the market can't be nudged in that direction, a direct intervention solves it faster.

Re: Zohran and the Short Link

#104

Post by empath75 »

mikaeluman wrote: post #98
voidUpdate wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, as far as I'm aware, "socialism" just means that the means of production are owned socially, instead of privately. But is there anything that he's actually done that is disagreeable, or is it just that many news outlets are saying "socialism = bad, Mamdani is socialist, therefore Mamdani = bad"?

Take the case of "city owned stores" to "combat food price inflation". Well. The city does not actually produce food. Stores get their produce from wholesalers. This is where the "city stores" will get them as well. Only now, regular stores know the city will undercut them in price using taxpayer money. So any location next to a city store will become poison. And soon all you will have (for some people) are the city…

I agree with everything you said, but I think it's also a fairly low stakes experiment that might even be worth trying, and the real test of his competence as mayor is how quickly he realizes it that it won't work and shuts it down, rather than doubling or tripling down on it. Sometimes it's worth it to just take your best shot at implementing a probably bad but popular idea, as long as the consequences for failure are not too harsh.

There's a version of this, I think, that _doesn't_ fail, where they give up selling below cost and focus on setting up ABC-like grocery stores in "food deserts" that sell staple goods that bodegas don't carry.

Re: Zohran and the Short Link

#105

Post by jrrv »

pjc50 wrote: post #102
piker wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His policies are socialist. Some of us still perceive that as a bad thing.

I think the endless labelling of everything rightwingers don't like as "socialism" has backfired. A generation has been told that affordable food and housing, usable public transport, healthcare, not getting shot at school, not getting racially abused etc. are "socialism". So obviously they want to have some of this "socialism" as soon as possible.

Socialism is when the government does stuff, it would seem.

Re: Zohran and the Short Link

#106

Post by jackb4040 »

dfxm12 wrote: post #96

These aren't case sensitive, which is good, but some are presented as CamelCase and some are separated-by-hyphens. They should pick one and run with it. I prefer no hyphens...

Idk how they pick the one they use in the video, but it looks like they reserve all casings:

nyc.gov/RentalRipoff nyc.gov/rental-ripoff

Re: Zohran and the Short Link

#108

Post by micromacrofoot »

jachee wrote: post #7
micromacrofoot wrote: post #2

this is how the government should communicate with its people - push out via all social media channels but always link back to something everyone can access! hopefully this stuff gets pushed out via email too? not enough open protocols to receive pushes from otherwise

What if I told you there’s an existing protocol for doing Really Simple Syndication?

sounds like something only nerds would be aware of

Re: Zohran and the Short Link

#109

Post by derektank »

mikaeluman wrote: post #98
voidUpdate wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, as far as I'm aware, "socialism" just means that the means of production are owned socially, instead of privately. But is there anything that he's actually done that is disagreeable, or is it just that many news outlets are saying "socialism = bad, Mamdani is socialist, therefore Mamdani = bad"?

Take the case of "city owned stores" to "combat food price inflation". Well. The city does not actually produce food. Stores get their produce from wholesalers. This is where the "city stores" will get them as well. Only now, regular stores know the city will undercut them in price using taxpayer money. So any location next to a city store will become poison. And soon all you will have (for some people) are the city…

I agree with everything you said, but is worth mentioning that while, “There is put simply no way this experiment ends in a way that is positive for New Yorkers,” is true, the most likely outcome is that (a) the stores will open and consistently lose a small amount of money, relative to the NYC budget, (b) some small grocers or bodegas will be either priced out or receive city subsidies which incur another small cost on the city’s budget, and (c) customers will experience some kind of annoying quota or identity check system which prevents aggressive arbitrage, but which ultimately doesn’t make the stores unbearable.

This will indeed be far from Pareto optimal, and a slow drain on the city’s budget and local economy, but could be successful enough that the stores can remain in operation in perpetuity, which boosters will frame as a “win”

Re: Zohran and the Short Link

#110

Post by voidUpdate »

derektank wrote: post #109
mikaeluman wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take the case of "city owned stores" to "combat food price inflation". Well. The city does not actually produce food. Stores get their produce from wholesalers. This is where the "city stores" will get them as well. Only now, regular stores know the city will undercut them in price using taxpayer money. So any location next to a city store will become poison. And soon all you will have (for some people) are the city…

I agree with everything you said, but is worth mentioning that while, “There is put simply no way this experiment ends in a way that is positive for New Yorkers,” is true, the most likely outcome is that (a) the stores will open and consistently lose a small amount of money, relative to the NYC budget, (b) some small grocers or bodegas will be either priced out or receive city subsidies which incur another small cost…

It could end up having positive effects on the population which could help with income for the city. I'm not an economist, but it seems possible to me
Post reply on HN