251–260 of 452 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
They are being sarcastic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A substantial reason why these people have substance addictions is because they are homeless and use substances to cope. Reducing the price of rent can prevent people from becoming homeless in the first place.
What mechanism of enforcement do I have when this person continues to use substances in their subsidized housing? How do I prevent my young children from smelling this person's marijuana? How do I prevent my young children from interacting with these people when they play outside?
Well, maybe you should just give them judgmental glares until they realize that being poor is a bad choice and stop it!
Or maybe you should move, since you apparently have such stringent standards for what's "allowed" to be around you and your children.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> rather that the press constantly criticizes tech Clearly we're consuming different types of media, because on my estimation tech gets let off fairly light relative to the damage we cause. As practitioners, we're not entitled to get angry about being criticised for the damage we cause at least until we've stopped it.
I’m not a big fan of online performative self-hate and classic elite-liberal virtue signaling, so maybe this article and these replies are not for me.
The "all opinions I don't like are not held honestly, it's a trick" meme is very tiring. In respect to your original point, no this isn't some unique critique that singles out SV. The SV disruptor is just a shorthand for the rich and landed that will always be opposed to new housing. This could be drop-in replaced with a mid-career NYC finance bro, or successful Texan oil & gas professional, just exchange some things for prayer and bootstraps.
They are the same because in all those cases their wealth (real o perceived potential) depends in housing value go only up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What mechanism of enforcement do I have when this person continues to use substances in their subsidized housing? How do I prevent my young children from smelling this person's marijuana? How do I prevent my young children from interacting with these people when they play outside?
Poor people are people. "My child should never have to interact with a person living in subsidized housing" is a rather remarkable claim. Is your plan simply to imprison all poor people?
Mundane actually. I want my children to play outdoors without interacting with drug users. Your perspective is skewed.
> Is your plan simply to imprison all poor people?
No, and this doesn't follow.
This is not helpful, funny, or intelligent. It’s a child’s rant about the world. At the end of the day, the reason more housing isn’t built is that the incentives are greater to not build it. You can build a high rise with shoebox apartments that have to be aggressively managed and make a profit. Or you can build a high rise with half the units, higher reoccurring revenue and less hassle and make 2x the immediate pro…
I really want to see a whole town built in US out of commie block style high rises or Chinese dystopian ant nests, and how quickly it will devolve into a ghetto, because there’s no authoritarian arm to keep it in check.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What mechanism of enforcement do I have when this person continues to use substances in their subsidized housing? How do I prevent my young children from smelling this person's marijuana? How do I prevent my young children from interacting with these people when they play outside?
"What mechanism of enforcement"?? Well, maybe you should just give them judgmental glares until they realize that being poor is a bad choice and stop it! Or maybe you should move, since you apparently have such stringent standards for what's "allowed" to be around you and your children.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I live in a relatively affluent (upper-middle class) area away from any urban center. It's not poor people that are smoking more pot, sorry for the bad news.
It's gone up among many demographic slices, including the two we're discussing. At this point I don't have to experience it. The commenters here --including yourself-- think that I do and some think that I should, and I'm wondering how I would continue to prevent it. They've provided no clear answers, only insults and condescension. And that's fine! I just leave here unconvinced and will not follow their prescription…
I guess I thought better of my fellow citizens. You don't really see people drinking a beer in line at school, or sitting in traffic. I assumed it would be the same with pot, and I'm genuinely confused on what is different in peoples' minds.
The original point I responded to was that if you have homeless people around you, you'll have the smell of pot. The point I'm trying to get across is that it isn't homeless folks or poor folks. It's everyone.