Apr 17
Ross commented on How an Error in a Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet Tanked the Global Economy.
It's also a bit overstated to suggest that the failed austerity policies of so many countries (including the U. S.) were the result of this one paper. Even if you believe the paper is correct (as it was written way back when) most economists feel that the policies of the U. S. and the U. K. (to name two) were stupid. Boneheaded Republicans and Tories would mention the paper, but they ignored the actual evidence presented. None of the papers suggested that we had anything to fear by the amount of debt we have. Our policies are simply the result of fear mongering by folks who have the same sort of stubborn adherence to a failed philosophy as old line communists -- ignore the evidence, this will work if we just try harder!
Apr 17
Ross commented on Hey, Olympia: You Have a (Columbia River Crossing) Bridge To Sell Me.
@7 nailed it. This is a ridiculous boondoggle. The Seattle Transit Blog did a great series of articles about this. Here are some links:
http://seattletransitblog.com/2013/03/30…
http://seattletransitblog.com/2013/03/29…
http://seattletransitblog.com/2013/03/28…
It would be really cool if The Stranger wrote something like this. That is, wrote an in depth article about a project that could cost all a bunch of money. This blog entry is a start, but it doesn't go far enough.
http://seattletransitblog.com/2013/03/30…
http://seattletransitblog.com/2013/03/29…
http://seattletransitblog.com/2013/03/28…
It would be really cool if The Stranger wrote something like this. That is, wrote an in depth article about a project that could cost all a bunch of money. This blog entry is a start, but it doesn't go far enough.
Apr 14
Ross commented on Sunday Morning News.
The Seattle Times article is great news indeed. Lots of apartments are being built in Seattle. Way more than are being built in other parts of King County. This reverses a trend of only a few years ago. If there is a bubble with a hard landing, then it means that some investors get hurt. Tough. That's the nature of investing. Of course, some builders might get hurt, and I have sympathy for those folks. Unfortunately, that is the nature of work these days. Ask a software engineer what it was like working (or not working) ten years ago. The good news is that if the bubble collapses, rent gets a lot cheaper. Ideally, there would be a soft landing, but if not, then I still think it is a lot better than what we have right now -- really high housing prices for folks who can barely afford it.
Apr 13
Ross commented on Saturday Morning News.
A California Senator proposed a bill ...
Why not just name her. I mean, doesn't everyone know the California Senators. Oh, it's not a Senator, it's a Representative. That explains everything. Oopsie.
Why not just name her. I mean, doesn't everyone know the California Senators. Oh, it's not a Senator, it's a Representative. That explains everything. Oopsie.
Apr 2
Ross commented on The Contradiction of the Suburb.
This is the standard structure of third world cities (Charles knows this). You have your very rich in the middle of the city, and your poor people on the outside. Of course, the U. S. isn't quite there yet (we have a middle class that Mexico would kill for) but we have been heading that direction since 1980 (as predicted). The urban poverty pattern was simply a result of redlining. Prevent racial minorities from living in the outer city and the inner city contains racial minorities and/or poor people. This continued through the 70's, even after the redlining laws were removed. It didn't start changing until lots of young people (artists and openly gay folks especially) moved to the inner city by choice. The inner cities rebuilt, and now you have to pay a really steep price just to find a room that shares a kitchen.
Meanwhile, guys like Conlin are called racist because they want to build low income housing next to a train station in a part of the city that is fairly close to many of the jobs in the area. If we get a handle on the gang problem (and maybe even if we don't) then those low income apartments will be the only affordable spots in the area.
Of course, the rest of the city council wants to stop really big buildings from being built in the city. This will only make things worse, of course. Restricting luxury apartments will simply trickle down through the system. Almost luxury apartments will be a bit more expensive, which gives the landlords of moderately priced apartments a chance at raising rates, and on through the system. Well, at least the poor people will have a nice view when they ride the bus in from the 'burbs.
More...
Meanwhile, guys like Conlin are called racist because they want to build low income housing next to a train station in a part of the city that is fairly close to many of the jobs in the area. If we get a handle on the gang problem (and maybe even if we don't) then those low income apartments will be the only affordable spots in the area.
Of course, the rest of the city council wants to stop really big buildings from being built in the city. This will only make things worse, of course. Restricting luxury apartments will simply trickle down through the system. Almost luxury apartments will be a bit more expensive, which gives the landlords of moderately priced apartments a chance at raising rates, and on through the system. Well, at least the poor people will have a nice view when they ride the bus in from the 'burbs.
Apr 1
Ross commented on Licata to Developers: Pay Six Times as Much Toward Affordable Housing in South Lake Union.
Licata believes that the law of supply and demand disappears on South Lake Union. He is wrong. If you restrict the supply of apartments (and apartments) it affects the cost of all apartments. If we build a few more really expensive apartments then the not quite as expensive apartments get a bit cheaper. Apartments that are a bit less expensive than those get a bit cheaper, etc.
Of course, if overall restrictions are pushing up the cost of all housing, then we won't see any real reduction, but the cost won't go up as much as it would otherwise. That is the point. This restriction (like all restrictions) is paid by all renters. Allow people to build everywhere, with no parking requirement (or any other requirement) and you would see renting costs go way down. I'm not suggesting that, I'm just saying that is what would happen.
Licata wants to tax these folks because he thinks he can, not because it is right. It plays on the whole "development is bad, because I like the way Seattle used to be" idea. Using affordable housing fees just makes these people feel better. Stick it to the nasty developers and build some affordable housing at the same time -- everyone wins.
Not only is it cynical and wrong, but it is unfair. If we want to pay for more affordable housing, then everyone should pay. Not just renters (which is who will pay these fees) but everyone, including home owners.
More...
Of course, if overall restrictions are pushing up the cost of all housing, then we won't see any real reduction, but the cost won't go up as much as it would otherwise. That is the point. This restriction (like all restrictions) is paid by all renters. Allow people to build everywhere, with no parking requirement (or any other requirement) and you would see renting costs go way down. I'm not suggesting that, I'm just saying that is what would happen.
Licata wants to tax these folks because he thinks he can, not because it is right. It plays on the whole "development is bad, because I like the way Seattle used to be" idea. Using affordable housing fees just makes these people feel better. Stick it to the nasty developers and build some affordable housing at the same time -- everyone wins.
Not only is it cynical and wrong, but it is unfair. If we want to pay for more affordable housing, then everyone should pay. Not just renters (which is who will pay these fees) but everyone, including home owners.
Mar 26
Ross commented on Be Careful What You Wish for on Prop 8 and DOMA.
From a political standpoint, this is a lot more like Loving than it is Roe. With or without Loving, anti-miscegenation laws were going to end. It would take some states longer than others (Maryland would have changed the law before Mississippi) but eventually all the states would have done it and just about everyone else would wonder how the hell they felt otherwise.
Abortion is a different matter. If you asked me about gay marriage ten years ago, I would have guessed that it would take us twenty years to get this far, but I knew that eventually we would get there. It is just as obvious. At some point someone in Alabama or Mississippi will wonder why their grandpa made such a fuss about two guys getting married. Those same folks will probably still be arguing about abortion, even if it remains (more or less) legal.
Abortion is a different matter. If you asked me about gay marriage ten years ago, I would have guessed that it would take us twenty years to get this far, but I knew that eventually we would get there. It is just as obvious. At some point someone in Alabama or Mississippi will wonder why their grandpa made such a fuss about two guys getting married. Those same folks will probably still be arguing about abortion, even if it remains (more or less) legal.
Mar 22
Ross commented on This Morning a Man Told Me to Smile....
The guy is a dick. He has no right to ask you to smile, let alone put you down because you don't feel like smiling. He is a rude jerk.
Cute puppy, though. Now that made me smile.
Cute puppy, though. Now that made me smile.
Mar 22
Ross commented on The Kids Are... Just Fine.
@13 -- Likewise, if there are health dangers for teens, that doesn't mean that it is dangerous for adults.
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
An income tax would be great, but it simply isn't going to happen. On the other hand, a small increase in the sales or property tax would raise way more money and not hurt as much. If Inslee is too chicken to make this proposal, then some other Democrat should, and force his hand. There is no way he would veto a proposal that increased taxes a little bit but paid for the things we need to pay for (like education).