Funny thing is that economy should be the least of the concerns. Trust, freedom, peace, and probably lives should be the (maybe not so obvious?) consequences.
When you live in a capitalist society, the economy is never the least of the concerns. Nor, in fact, can you afford for it to be. This in itself wouldn't be a bad thing if the distribution of wealth were not biased towards assholes.
You'd be surprised to learn that there's even dumber reasons people call
...
Why don't they tack on a $100 "911 call charge" to the caller's phone bill for every call? That ought to make the idiots learn pretty quickly.
The charge would be waived if any emergency personnel are actually dispatched.
Ouch, that's a lot of EDM time. I presume the wheels were built to do some deformation, anyway.
I'm trying to find a reference for "tiviozing". Can you explain?
I was following the conversation up to then.
I plugged 'tivoizing' into wikipedia and the top result was Tivoization. Now you, too, know how to use the internets. HTH, HAND.
Hyperbole much? Unlike kidnapping, making somebody late for work is not a federal crime.
No, but in California, attacking people in a vehicle is often considered to be a carjacking, which is a felony.
There's a difference between "the middle class leaves" (because middle-class jobs are gutted) and "the middle class is forced out of their homes by the upper-middle-class."
There's only so much San Francisco to go around. Why should the people who got there first have a right to it? We pretty much destroyed that precedent when we founded this nation on top of the natives' ground. In fact, if we follow American historical precedent, those people should not only be forced out of their homes, but also murdered, raped, etc.
Perhaps you don't believe anyone should be allowed to settle down and work and live in a small but reasonably comfortable home if they can't pull a six-figure salary
The issue is whether they should be able to live anywhere they want. The truth is that if the value of your home increases to the point that you can't afford to pay the property taxes, you can afford to sell your home and move someplace else. People are always complaining about civilization arriving where they live. Here's a nice example. There's some folks on our road who have been here apparently since before it was paved. One day I evaporated one of their chickens with the Astro because they couldn't keep them under control and they were out on the road. One of them decided to dart under the van as I was passing by it and the rest (and the chicken) is history involving a gigantic expanding spherical cloud of feathers behind the van. Their response was not to improve their coop, but to spray paint SLOW DOWN on the road, which is [a minor, admittedly irrelevant form of] vandalism. They did in fact do a crap job so it does in fact look like shit.
These are some people who wanted to live on a dirt road in bumfuck, but when civilization showed up, they didn't move. And let me tell you, their place is a crap little shit-shack, but they could have sold it to a grower and slid out of there long before now, and surely made a massive profit. They could move to some other shit-shack in this shitty town and actually improve their situation but they're married to a particular shitty piece of ground. And instead of making themselves happy, they're standing against the tide and being upset about it.
But civilization always arrives, and if I'd hit that chicken with the front of the vehicle and damaged the plastics, they'd have been liable because civilization recognizes that you can't have chickens running around the road. Instead of moving to where people won't be going by so fast, they demand that everyone else alter their behavior to please them. And the reality is that they could be living someplace nicer if they weren't so addicted to false stability. That little piece of ground could be wiped out by anything next week; since they have grossly inadequate clearings and fire danger has been increasing year on year, fire is a likely candidate. They have no security whatsoever in their tin box that could be opened with a can opener.
Maybe you were raised with a silver spoon in your mouth, with zero experience of the actual struggles and concerns of the majority of working American families.
Well, I was raised with beans and rice in my mouth, and I still think it's bullshit. You don't have a right to make the world stop around you. The only people I feel bad for in SF are the young people trying to get out. They haven't had time to make any money, and it's difficult to make any money in SF while paying living expenses. People pay for part of a room (often one which doubles as a hallway in the crappy floor plans of the narrow dwellings of SF) for what I pay for half a house (shared with my lady.) How is a youth going to climb out of that money well?
Is the TSA kidnapping people now also?
Kidnapping. False imprisonment. Theft. Rape. Fraud. The TSA is an agency specifically created to engage in felonious behavior, and it does.
People erroneously think SF is a metropolis, like NY - it's not. By that standard, there's more late night food places in Ogden, Utah, than there is in SF.
It used to be, or at least, it was more like NY than it is now. But late-night stuff has been driven out of the city by gentrification. You could at least find stuff to do on the weekend nights, before.
So unless you are an alcoholic or a "club kid", you are not living in SF for the thriving night life.
Alcoholics are accommodated pretty much everywhere (except maybe Utah) but club kids live in LA or SD, where they actually still have clubs. They shut down all the good ones in the city, so the last ones left are not only shitty but shitty and crowded.
That is the fundamental flaw of property taxes - the taxes can go up even if your property stayed exactly the same just because a bunch of people around you overpaid.
That's not a flaw. You don't in fact have a natural right to private property. And since we live in a capitalist society, money is used to decide who gets to have scarce things. The flaw lies in the distribution of wealth. If people who are superassholes weren't rewarded with economic success, then you wouldn't have the superassholes living in all the nice spots and so on.
What's the big difference between not having a job in Detroit and not having a job in San Francisco? Probably that you can afford the rent in Detroit, considering that everyone's fleeing...
Banks are overwhelmingly not renting out foreclosures. Instead, they would prefer to see them sit idle for years, possibly getting torn apart from the inside for their scrap metal and fixtures.
Yeah, I don't get it, either.
If a sufficiently large group of people got together they could buy whole city blocks in places like those. You'd need some kind of business plan for employing those people, though, if they weren't retirees. You would have to plan for security, but some citizen patrols coupled with some private security drive-bys might be enough.
-_- Guys... if you're gonna have a protest against the rich, go pitch a tent on the CEO's lawn, not in the middle of the street where a bunch of people only doing slightly better than you are take the bus to work every day.
Slightly better? That is bullshit.
I think this is a misguided protest, but the real problem as always is that there are a lot of have nots that think they're haves, and are thus on a different page and contributing to the problem. Are these google employees part of that problem? Sure. Google is not unique in attempting to save money by not improving communities, but that's what needs to happen, not this busing bullshit.
No. Baking recipes are not protected by the law.
Sure, but if you discovered a previously unknown gastronomic technique for making some kind of odd food derivative, and it required the slightest bit of equipment, you could patent that, and have a restaurant with a [legally] unique food item. The process would be uncopyrightable, but patentable.
It is logical... unless you're the U.S. Patent Office, which claims that IP is responsible for 40 million jobs and 35% of the U.S. GDP. [...] if 90% of businesses say its not important,
No. And also no. I mean, I'm as skeptical of the patent office's numbers as the next guy, but seriously. If I'm the guy who buys the solution, I might not think the patents are that important, because I'm not explicitly licensing them. I buy a product from someone who's licensed the patent, all that is abstracted away from me. But if I'm dependent on that thing, and the thing wouldn't have been created/marketed without a patent, then I'm dependent on the IP. The real question then becomes how much of this stuff would be designed, built, and sold even if anyone could build it. Some things clearly fall into that category, and there's probably plenty the USPTO is taking credit for there that they shouldn't.
On the other hand, exports of American media are wholly dependent upon IP. If anyone could legally profit from copying your movie, then you wouldn't spend a lot of money making one. Whole classes of entertainment involving costly special effects would not exist at all. Clearly, there are industries wholly dependent upon it.
Fuck the release notes, I'm talking about real-world experience. And in my real-world experience, if you've got a crashing Android device, you've got a shitty Android device.
It's not as though this problem is unique to Android, iDevices crash and/or lock up hard as well. You're pretending that only Android crashes. That, sir, is a lie.
If you have "land", then the ubiquitous "single wide mobile home" is usually a better choice than the "same thing in a shipping container".
Why?
By the time you turn an ISO into a lodging structure (as many firms do, check the Sea Box site for great ISO container pron) they cost more than a single-wide.
Horseshit. They cost more if you buy them completed, they cost more if you buy a kit in many cases (though not all) but they do NOT cost more to put up, nor even nearly as much. You can get a 20' container delivered for under two grand even in bumfuck where I live. Granted, it's Bumfuck CA, so I'm relatively near a port, but it's three hours by truck from where the containers are to where I am, one of them on twisty and hilly roads. If you bought them in bulk you could likely get 40' containers for a thousand a piece. Empty containers are stacked up so high at some ports that they're a nuisance.
They don't necessarily save much if anything in construction costs if hiring out the work, but you wouldn't know that from the many people pimping them.
It depends on how fancy you're planning to get.
I just spend the day welding a splice strip between my roofs
I presume you don't live in quake country, or it would be preferable to leave them separated.
and after coating the roofs (about a grand in materials)
If you were building apartments for the homeless, you'd stack the containers. You'd put walkways and stairs at one end with an entry door, and you'd put a window with a fire escape ladder at the other end to meet code. You'd put a greenhouse on the top of the structure, eliminating most of the roofing requirements entirely. Or you'd build a green roof there, which consists mostly of laying down a layer or two of fancy plastic. Either way you'd go up three stories or so, taking advantage of the natural properties of shipping containers, and your roofing costs would be reduced that many times. You'd trade them for the cost of building walkways, but those could also be built from scrapped containers...
Heard that the next Space Shuttle is supposed to carry several Guernsey cows? It's gonna be the herd shot 'round the world.
