nirgalm25.bsky.social
1,098 posts
244 followers
296 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
2k is the amount for MSBs. The guy in the screenshot doesn't appear to know that they're structuring so ig that's what their defense would be
comment in response to
post
Like this for example, would you recommend that Oscar reach out to a lawyer before continuing?
comment in response to
post
the logic should work both directions. you're saying that if my neighbor's rent gets frozen at 1,100 and mine doesn't then my landlord is going to increase my rent to cover the difference. but if im in a market rate apartment, why would i accept a greater than market rate increase?
comment in response to
post
the claims were that purposefully collecting money and passing it along to someone else so as to prevent gofundme from knowing that the recipients are Palestinian is legally very risky. do you think it's risky enough that you should contact a lawyer before doing so?
comment in response to
post
i dont understand why you think tenants cross subsidize each other but also believe housing is a competitive market
comment in response to
post
if my rent is is 1400 and my neighbors is 1,100 and rent control is repealed, do you think my landlord is going to give me a rent reduction?
comment in response to
post
How does it force people to subsidize their neighbors? Is my landlord going to give me a rent reduction? Because the city allows her to raise my neighbor's rent by 80%? If so, why?
comment in response to
post
If new construction lowers rents why is a freeze a long term problem?
comment in response to
post
Do you think his polls would have been better if the economy was bad? I don't get the implication. Someone delivered good things but didn't get the credit doesn't make me think they'd have gotten credit if they had done nothing.
There's no ROI if you don't invest
comment in response to
post
Thought about it more and revising my risk assessment up. You don't know how many others are doing the same thing, and it's possible that the admin could make it a big priority especially if they found that it was a good way to get a newsworthy number of organized leftists in jail
comment in response to
post
the supporters of the 2nd - 6th place runners consolidated to support one of the candidates. what am i missing?
comment in response to
post
dsausa.org/join
comment in response to
post
we're an explicitly antizionist org and have been since ~2017. the Palestinian resistance has made a strategic decision not to engage in violence outside of historic Palestine.
comment in response to
post
I disagree but there's no reason to have this debate on bluesky. We have plenty of forums.
comment in response to
post
yeah the way to do that would be not replying to me. mixed messages this way!
comment in response to
post
the smears were really bad but that's different than Obama endorsing someone behind the scenes
comment in response to
post
it's not rat fucking though. "materialism" isn't why Bernie lost, but if he was more popular than Biden among primary voters he would have won. It's not cheating to negotiate and consolidate support around a candidate. catastrophic in this case tho.
comment in response to
post
"something called materialism". It's very funny that vox editors think that their readers are unfamiliar with materialism.
comment in response to
post
Fair question, so of course I will not answer it here. I TRIED to clarify in my article but it didn't go well so in this tweet I'll just say something unrelated to your question.
comment in response to
post
hah i thought i was paraphrasing with the oof, listened again and it's "whoa"
comment in response to
post
"does that sound like chickening out? when i had to ask what the tariff rate was and then said oooff that's a little high and no one was doing any business with a major trading partner so I backed off, you think that's chickening out?"
comment in response to
post
Could be different in banking but from what I remember from talking to some compliance people it's not too different. You can also get another account at another bank.
Not trying to minimize, it'd be pretty bad send to someone in a sanctioned or or worse a sanctioned individual.
comment in response to
post
It's a big list of countries and I suspect it varies quite a lot. I hadn't spotted before but the US is on the list.
When I worked in fintech we rarely deactivated somebody's account. Way more frequently we would just file a SAR
comment in response to
post
Well if I understand right, the ask is to people who have bank accounts in other countries. Would be surprised if they were unbanked by the foreign Bank as a result of receiving money from GoFundMe
comment in response to
post
I do think it's low risk for most people because they're low profile and it's not easy to target multiple people at once. If I thought cash donations reduced suffering instead of picking winners and losers and overall likely making the situation worse, I wouldn't let the risk stop me
comment in response to
post
If I remember right , only the receiver who passes it to the terrorist to organization is subject to strict liability. But if they have probable cause that your recipient worked for the Gaza health ministry at some point in the last 5 years or whatever...
comment in response to
post
yeah everyone i talk to drives 65. you're next
comment in response to
post
fewer people smoke now than before. fewer people drive drunk. fewer people litter. why wouldn't fewer people drive 80 if they had more info about how much more dangerous it is than 70?
comment in response to
post
theres something about it where it's like "no theres no way a male person could ever give up their biological superiority over women. I could totally nuke my testosterone levels but by being MALE i would still be better than any FEMALE, dexterity and all"
comment in response to
post
hmmm. also, if you played on a coed team how is it impossible for boys and girls to be on the same field?
comment in response to
post
boys are ambidextrous?
comment in response to
post
Doesn't that just mean the rent control should allow for inflation to be passed along? Why include a buffer over the amount of inflation?
But still now you're just saying that it's the banks who are irrational, not the developers
comment in response to
post
I haven't seen yimby discourse push many people in that direction, it seems just as likely that people end up using yimby reasons to oppose or water down rent control and it doesn't make sense to me
comment in response to
post
Basically you think the developers are lying and I'm inclined to agree.
Still, given how expensive Austin is, it seems pretty clear that it will take government planning to make housing affordable.
comment in response to
post
If a city, even Austin, expects to change the cost of supply through policy but wants to protect current renters now while those changes go into effect, what's the argument against stabilizing rent? We already know that developers will keep developing even as rents fall.
comment in response to
post
Right, so in this narrative about what's going on, if prices stabilize and construction dries up soon it's because rent did get to the new market clearing level given the demand and cost of supply.
comment in response to
post
I do have my own guesses about these questions but I haven't made any here. I'm just observing that the arguments against rent control are contradictory. Or at least I haven't seen anyone explain how they're not
comment in response to
post
Why buffee over inflation? Do developers need to be assured that the asset that they produce will appreciate in real terms? The core contention of the yimby movement is that housing is the only real good that appreciates in real value this because of restrictions on supply
comment in response to
post
Basically, if you think developers are irrational, why do you expect them to respond rationally to price signals
comment in response to
post
If construction for market rate, housing only happens when prices are on average at least flat, then yimby policies will never substantially reduce rent.
The narrative you're telling is just completely incompatible with the argument that building restrictions have shifted the whole supply curve
comment in response to
post
I don't get it, they either expect rents to fall or they don't expect rents to fall. Presumably they do a financial projection before they build on what they think will happen to the market.
If rents do fall, say by 3% for 2 years in a row, do you think there will still be new housing starts?
comment in response to
post
If your policies will lower rent, why not pass rent control so that tenants don't have to wait?
comment in response to
post
By cap I thought you meant a specific rent limit that applied to all new construction. A freeze (which doesn't apply to new builds) would prevent the rent from increasing. Even if it applied to new construction, removing zoning restrictions will lower rent, so what's the downside to having a freeze?
comment in response to
post
But rent will be falling all over right? Isn't it freeze from policy less bad for landlords and rent decreases from the market?
comment in response to
post
This is always true of rent control and new construction. But the real estate lobby always argues that it sends a signal and makes developers worry that it will eventually apply to them. My point is that even if it did, it shouldn't matter if you think new construction brings down rent.
comment in response to
post
Are you using cap and freeze interchangeably? Bc a freeze on rent for new construction shouldn't be an issue if you think new construction will drive rents down
comment in response to
post
New construction has no cap on initial rent. Why would a developer not build and rent at a profitable rate?
comment in response to
post
"Rotating villain" isn't quite right bc it implies cohesion that isn't there. There's no to reason to think there are *no* pivotal votes but also Schumer is still maj leader bc a lot of senators were lying about the CR vote.
Re filibuster there were a *lot* of senators with cagey statements on it.
comment in response to
post
the critique is about the effect they have on elite discourse and how it sets the agenda for mass media. I see a lot of arguments like yours but I don't see a lot of people specifically challenging the points about agenda setting
does it not set the agenda and tone? does that not move voters?
comment in response to
post
the critique is about the effect they have on elite discourse and how it sets the agenda for mass media. I see a lot of arguments like yours but I don't see a lot of people specifically challenging the points about agenda setting
does it not set the agenda and tone? does that not move voters?