Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Nearly 50% of Millennials Reject Capitalism
Comments
-
The tax is on regular housing to pay for affordable housing by the way. Making regular housing less affordable
A plan by our next governor -
Just fucking kill yourself loserMosster47 said:
Weed has already been monopolized by everyone knowing how to grow it. The government fucked up that cash grab.BearsWiin said:
I think the poont is that new industries will be created, not that new companies will challenge established industry leaders. Weed, renewable energy, and hoverboards are still up for grabs.Mosster47 said:
Right, because the fucking internet is going to be invented again.RaceBannon said:There is no more competition. Amazon, Google, eBay, and Netflix won. Seriously, what business are you going to start that some titan doesn't already have a complete monopoly on
The people that started those businesses weren't fucking stupid enough to think everything had been invented
CHRIST
How many new major car and oil companies have popped up in the last 50 years that have put a dent in the big boy's wallets?
Ford, Chevy, Chrysler.
Exxon, Shell, BP.
Anymore sound Boomer logic?
Renewable energy is a joke. My holdings in WNDW hit two weeks ago. Thanks for the 212%, but it's a joke. Our president is balls deep in cole.
Hoverboards that catch on fire after three hours?
The internet is already monopolized and the FCC just locked them in.
Millennials will be the generation that brings it all down by waiting for Baby Boomers to die and swooping their retirement dream homes for pennies on the dollar, shopping at thrift stores and outlets, and buying used cars and driving them until they die. The generation after them are even cheaper. -
You are so cute when moving the goalposts back tracking your FS comment.RaceBannon said:
I didn't say he did. Incentives to put people in little boxes to ride the bus to their little job aren't needed. Builders build what people want. They make money without your fucking stupid incentives to build what people don't want.2001400ex said:
He didn't say builders needed incentives to make money. Read his quote again.RaceBannon said:And builders don't need incentives to make money. That's hondo fucking stupid
Congrats
I didn't think I needed to spell it out. I was wrong -
LA is proposing it. I linked it here awhile back. The thread was not @MikeSeaver popCirrhosisDawg said:
What “LA” are you referring to? The state CEQA law is a notorious tool for NIMBYs, and municipalities add layers to the bureaucracy builders go through (density, parking, transit, prevailing wage, and other environmental). The one scared cow has always been affordable housing however, especially within LA County and the 88 incorporated cities.RaceBannon said:
It's not a dog whistleBearsWiin said:
I knowingly put that dog whistle in there2001400ex said:
Right about there, doogie, Pawz, sledog, and Race just started screaming communist!!!!!BearsWiin said:
Even in the early 1990's when I was working for the studios, most guys I worked with owned in Canyon Country, or further out in Palmdale/Landscatter because they preferred to have a 3000sqft home over a smaller Toluca Lake townhouse. That said, the Bay Area does a pretty pisspoor job of creating higher-density housing. Generally not as profitable as single-family homes, so it's up to local govt. to step in and create incentives for builders and developers to build housing that takes some pressure off of the transportation networks. Plus, sitting in traffic sucks.RaceBannon said:
The Bay Area is a hard one but not impossible at your level. Probably will need some kind of commuteWilburHooksHands said:
Fuck McMansions. I would live in Houston if there were any tech jobs there worth a shit.RaceBannon said:
You can buy a McMansion in Houston for 400KWilburHooksHands said:
I have a 6 figure salary and work in arguably the highest demand industry (tech). My partner (who has a higher 6 figure salary than me) and I can't even dream about buying a home within 30 miles of our workplace. Granted, I don't consider myself a millennial (I'm 36), but if we can't buy a house, things have just changed.RaceBannon said:I don't agree with @Sledog . The millennials I have worked with lived n the film room and are more than willing to do what it takes to win. Nothing has changed
I graduated high school in 1974 as America was descending in to hell. Guess what? Hard work still worked. Always has, always will
its idiots like mooster running around saying all is lost that need to get a fucking clue
Best thing I ever did was walking away from a career and starting over and working with millennials. We both benefited from it
That's why I defend them here.
Even in Cali you can get a nice house at your income levels.
When we bought our house the interest rate was double digits
What has changed is the banking laws after the crash. 20% down as a hard number is hard to come up with unless you bank most of your income for a year or two
Or work from home.
Local Cali government makes housing more expensive. That's what they're good at.
LA wants to tax home builders for affordable housing. Making housing more expensive to make it affordable
That's only part of the issue in the Bay Area. Like Seattle there's only so much room. Location will cost you
There’s a tax on affordable housing development?
Not my problem if you can't read.2001400ex said:
You are so cute when moving the goalposts back tracking your FS comment.RaceBannon said:
I didn't say he did. Incentives to put people in little boxes to ride the bus to their little job aren't needed. Builders build what people want. They make money without your fucking stupid incentives to build what people don't want.2001400ex said:
He didn't say builders needed incentives to make money. Read his quote again.RaceBannon said:And builders don't need incentives to make money. That's hondo fucking stupid
Congrats
I didn't think I needed to spell it out. I was wrong -
I didn't know Houston was Communist.WilburHooksHands said:
I lived under communism in the 70's. Nothing special.BearsWiin said:As somebody who has taught both political theory and comparative politics at the university level, I always find these threads to be an absolute hoot.
-
Anywhere you need to sidestep shit on the sidewalk or needles in the park is fucked. Fuck CiscoRaceBannon said:
It's not a dog whistleBearsWiin said:
I knowingly put that dog whistle in there2001400ex said:
Right about there, doogie, Pawz, sledog, and Race just started screaming communist!!!!!BearsWiin said:
Even in the early 1990's when I was working for the studios, most guys I worked with owned in Canyon Country, or further out in Palmdale/Landscatter because they preferred to have a 3000sqft home over a smaller Toluca Lake townhouse. That said, the Bay Area does a pretty pisspoor job of creating higher-density housing. Generally not as profitable as single-family homes, so it's up to local govt. to step in and create incentives for builders and developers to build housing that takes some pressure off of the transportation networks. Plus, sitting in traffic sucks.RaceBannon said:
The Bay Area is a hard one but not impossible at your level. Probably will need some kind of commuteWilburHooksHands said:
Fuck McMansions. I would live in Houston if there were any tech jobs there worth a shit.RaceBannon said:
You can buy a McMansion in Houston for 400KWilburHooksHands said:
I have a 6 figure salary and work in arguably the highest demand industry (tech). My partner (who has a higher 6 figure salary than me) and I can't even dream about buying a home within 30 miles of our workplace. Granted, I don't consider myself a millennial (I'm 36), but if we can't buy a house, things have just changed.RaceBannon said:I don't agree with @Sledog . The millennials I have worked with lived n the film room and are more than willing to do what it takes to win. Nothing has changed
I graduated high school in 1974 as America was descending in to hell. Guess what? Hard work still worked. Always has, always will
its idiots like mooster running around saying all is lost that need to get a fucking clue
Best thing I ever did was walking away from a career and starting over and working with millennials. We both benefited from it
That's why I defend them here.
Even in Cali you can get a nice house at your income levels.
When we bought our house the interest rate was double digits
What has changed is the banking laws after the crash. 20% down as a hard number is hard to come up with unless you bank most of your income for a year or two
Or work from home.
Local Cali government makes housing more expensive. That's what they're good at.
LA wants to tax home builders for affordable housing. Making housing more expensive to make it affordable
That's only part of the issue in the Bay Area. Like Seattle there's only so much room. Location will cost you
I forgot puke but that's ok because it means somebody was partying their balls off. Ok SF good for some things but fuck the traffic. -
You should assassinate him.RaceBannon said:The tax is on regular housing to pay for affordable housing by the way. Making regular housing less affordable
A plan by our next governor -
For builders, single-family homes are profitable. High-density stuff like townhomes and condos are also profitable, but less so. Builders prefer to build single family homes for this reason; they're in business to maximize profit.RaceBannon said:
I didn't say he did. Incentives to put people in little boxes to ride the bus to their little job aren't needed. Builders build what people want. They make money without your fucking stupid incentives to build what people don't want.2001400ex said:
He didn't say builders needed incentives to make money. Read his quote again.RaceBannon said:And builders don't need incentives to make money. That's hondo fucking stupid
Congrats
I didn't think I needed to spell it out. I was wrong
People want affordable housing. Builders want to maximize profit. This leads to a suboptimal aggregate outcome unless local govt. steps in to provide incentives for builders to build housing that people want, where people want it, for a price they can afford.
That liberal rag The Economist spelled it out pretty clearly many years ago, specifically in reference to Bay Area housing policy. I paid special attention to it at the time because it dealt with how Bay Area local govt. incentives affected the housing market in the Central Valley, and why my parents' efforts to become Modesto property barons in the early 1990's didn't work out the way they hoped. -
POTDhaie said:
I picture you flipping burgers, phone in one hand while snickering like a fag as you post your next shitty link.2001400ex said:
I picture Race shaking his fist cussing out the clouds half the day when he's not on here.BearsWiin said:
Race just likes to argue for the sake of arguing, and not necessarily because he actually belives what he says.2001400ex said:
He didn't say builders needed incentives to make money. Read his quote again.RaceBannon said:And builders don't need incentives to make money. That's hondo fucking stupid
Congrats -
Sounds like you’ve read a lot of Academics writing about building theory.BearsWiin said:
For builders, single-family homes are profitable. High-density stuff like townhomes and condos are also profitable, but less so. Builders prefer to build single family homes for this reason; they're in business to maximize profit.RaceBannon said:
I didn't say he did. Incentives to put people in little boxes to ride the bus to their little job aren't needed. Builders build what people want. They make money without your fucking stupid incentives to build what people don't want.2001400ex said:
He didn't say builders needed incentives to make money. Read his quote again.RaceBannon said:And builders don't need incentives to make money. That's hondo fucking stupid
Congrats
I didn't think I needed to spell it out. I was wrong
People want affordable housing. Builders want to maximize profit. This leads to a suboptimal aggregate outcome unless local govt. steps in to provide incentives for builders to build housing that people want, where people want it, for a price they can afford.
That liberal rag The Economist spelled it out pretty clearly many years ago, specifically in reference to Bay Area housing policy. I paid special attention to it at the time because it dealt with how Bay Area local govt. incentives affected the housing market in the Central Valley, and why my parents' efforts to become Modesto property barons in the early 1990's didn't work out the way they hoped.
