Jan 29 G g commented on Update: Uber Keeps Driving Amid Taxi Strike, Announces $3M In Support of Ban-Threatened Drivers; Lyft Donates $1M to the ACLU.
It seems to me that Uber is on the same side as the taxi drivers, they just chose to express it differently (by providing $3M to help fight injury caused by Trump's order -- likely meaning they'd fund lawsuits against the executive order). It is also my understanding that Uber never MAKES drivers drive at any given time. It isn't clear to me what other action they could have taken...should they have forbidden drivers from picking up/dropping off at JFK? It was a cab DRIVERS' strike, not a cab company forcing their employees not to work. Am I missing something? (Don't mistake this for me arguing that Uber treats its employees well. This is about this one event, and I honestly am looking to understand rather than influence a discussion...because this article doesn't, and no other articles I've found on Google News do, make it seem to me like Uber is on Trump's side on this.)
Dec 13, 2016 G g commented on Your Next Landlord May Be Required to Offer You a Payment Plan for Deposits and Other Move-In Fees.
As a landlord, I generally agree that non-refundable move-in fees are just a way to extract money, and I almost never use them. However, the way the law is written currently, a tenant can (and they regularly do! even the otherwise best renters!) break a 12-month lease after 2, 4, 6 months for any reason, and there is no form of compensation for the landlord's having to get in a new tenant. You could point out that, yes, there is the protection to the landlord that if the landlord puts in true effort to rent out the apt and can't, then the tenant is on the hook for continuing to make payments. Sure. But that's separate; my point is that there is no compensation for the most difficult part of being a (single unit or just a few units) landlord: going through the process of showing the unit, screening applicants, and getting a new tenant moved in. What makes sense to me is a move-in fee that is returned to the tenant at completion of the (presumably 12-month) lease (but not returned with a broken lease). That way if you suddenly have 20 hours of extra work dumped on your plate as a landlord when a tenant moves out after 3 months, you don't need to spread that cost to the tenants who actually stay the length of their lease.
Nov 1, 2016 G g commented on Guest Editorial: Initiative 732 Is a False Promise for Climate Justice.
"This initiative doesn't provide unicorns and world peace and end cancer; it just combats climate change and makes our taxes less regressive" -you.
Nov 1, 2016 G g commented on The Morning News: Men Are Babies About Birth Control, Cynthia Whitlatch Trial Begins.
@8: yes. Charles Mudede is embarrassingly uninterested in Cliff Mass' actual statements, and there is no reason to follow Charles' silliness. The Stranger is good at pointing out when the Right ignores facts (all the time); it would do well to point out when the left does (now and then) as well.
Oct 27, 2016 G g commented on Westneat Weighs In On the "ATTACKIEST ATTACK AD EVER!".
@17: I first saw the idea that Brady added "PiƱero" halfway through the campaign written by Jayapal fans on her facebook page, accusing him of adding it when a woman of color entered the race. And you know what? I have Brady's actual campaign announcement from Dec 4th using all 3 of his names -- before McDermott dropped out, let alone Jayapal had anything to do with the race. And you know what else? He was using it before that, too.
Oct 15, 2016 G g commented on What Does Cliff Mass Have to Say About The Storm That Wants to Not Be Forgotten?.
@29: Are you Donald Trump? Because you're telling jaw-dropping lies that can be easily disproven with a quick google search.
Oct 15, 2016 G g commented on What Does Cliff Mass Have to Say About The Storm That Wants to Not Be Forgotten?.
Charles, you're just wrong on this point. We meteorologists are forced to point out regularly that events cannot be specifically attributed to global warming. It would be great if it went without saying (like you suggest), but unfortunately people's first question -- including the media's first question -- is predictably "is this storm due to global warming?" Often it's best to nip it in the bud and say "no" before it's asked instead of providing the explanation that "certain types of extreme weather in certain areas are likely to be more common with climate change, and it stronger storms aren't inconsistent with this." Because the take-away after the conversation (or in the case of the media, the HEADLINE) needs to be "we have a dangerous storm coming: be prepared", NOT "Scientist ties storm to global warming" which it inevitably will be.
Oct 5, 2016 G g commented on Why Are You Worried About Creepy Clowns When There's a Dinosaur on the Loose in Seattle!?.
I can't believe I actually voted in this. And now commented.
Sep 19, 2016 G g commented on Seattle Subway: Think ST3 Is Too Expensive? Check Your Seattle Times Subscription.
@4, what does the city have to do with this? We're voting for a Sound Transit proposal, not an SDOT proposal. Sound Transit, since it was reorganized way over a decade ago, has an outstanding track record of building quality infrastructure on-time (often early!) and under-budget. And if you're complaining about residents of Seattle (I'm sorry you feel that way), not Seattle government entities, well then...Seattleites are a minority of the Sound Transit Region, so there ya go.
Sep 19, 2016 G g commented on Seattle Subway: Think ST3 Is Too Expensive? Check Your Seattle Times Subscription.
@3, There is no "better proposal", and your "thoughtful concerns" about funding source changes would have been just that several years ago (or even, still, a year ago), but voicing them now reveals you as simply someone who is against transit and has decided to concern-troll against it instead of being honest and openly arguing why you're against transit. ST3 wasn't created in a black box, it was created over years with nearly unprecedented levels of transparent public input (look it up!). Voting against the package sets us back years. It's not perfect because different people and communities have different needs, and different levels of government have different restrictions on funding sources. But within the restrictions our region has, this is the best package we will see, and it truly will help everyone in the region, either by providing transit access in their community, or by reducing congestion from their driving commute due to other people choosing transit. It is so important that this passes if our region wants to prosper for decades to come.