trias10

joined 1 year ago
[–] trias10 1 points 1 year ago

It's not just a corporate thing, police, military, and fire brigade aren't allowed to wear overt political badging either.

There's a general rule that if you work for an organisation which asks you to wear a work related uniform of some kind, you don't get to add anything to it, political or otherwise. You don't see bobbies with a Pink Floyd sticker on their chest.

[–] trias10 20 points 1 year ago (28 children)

I'm with Amazon on this, seems a reasonable ask for employees to not wear any political/cultural/social things at work with their official uniform.

[–] trias10 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

How much money do you get if you file?

[–] trias10 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have spoken to a few Republicans, and they just don't see any of it as treason. In their minds, Democrats being elected in any office would lead to the country being destroyed, so any sort of coup is actually saving the country, it's patriotism, not treason. It's basically the Franco mindset.

[–] trias10 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Didn't Colorado make big news a while ago for eliminating qualified immunity in the state?

[–] trias10 5 points 1 year ago

Fucking hell, it's all basically Call of Duty. Mental.

[–] trias10 -3 points 1 year ago

I have no idea, I'm not Republican.

[–] trias10 -3 points 1 year ago

I have no idea, I'm not a Republican.

[–] trias10 14 points 1 year ago

Hope the driver goes to jail.

[–] trias10 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why is it not accurate? House prices come down but cost of materials and labour stay constant or go up, what am I missing?

Also, I feel like we have gotten so far off track so as to forget what exactly we are arguing about.

The original discussion was how to fix the housing market so as to create way more affordable housing. My original argument was the government has to do that, by building houses at a loss, which only the government can do.

Your argument seems to have originally been that the true problem is the zoning and government red tape, but I feel like we have both come to the conclusion that neither of those is true. Firstly, even if zoning isn't a problem, in places like LA and NYC there's no physical space left to build, except vertically. In London, the only new land to build is way outside Zone 5. Furthermore, what incentive is there for private sector builders to flood the market with new supply, either horizontally or vertically? No industry likes it when the price of their product goes down, not a single one, and no industry is going to help that happen.

Finally, building vertically requires way bigger companies to get involved, meaning there are fewer of them, meaning it's easier for them to collude to keep prices high. Building a ranch house out in Wyoming can be done by some local two-bit builder, but a skyscraper in Manhattan would need to be some big multinational. Ergo, even if the only solution is Shanghai style vertical flats, the prices are even more suspectible to collusion by the few big companies able and willing to build them.

Or, like I said, bypass all this bollocks and have the government build loads of houses and sell them at a loss, flood the supply and bring prices down for the altruistic, non-profit motive of getting more people into housing. Done and done.

view more: ‹ prev next ›