• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

California Doing California Things

Elixir said:
That doesn’t mean they have to “solve the problem” unless “the problem” is broken down into single ratchet clicks. Like, equal access to seats on buses. The “problem” that caused unequal access to bus seats. WAS NOT SOLVED BY ROSA PARKS.
Click to expand...
She did not personally attain equal access to bus seats, either, though her act certainly contributed to the overall effort. Parks got arrested; that would have been the end of the stotry were it not for the actions of a great many people in response to the incident. But more to the point, she was not "just" asking for a single ratchet click. She was asking, as were all of her compatriots in the Civil Rights, for a full and complete recognition of the equal rights of all American citizens, and very explicitly, for an end to the four centuries of systematic oppression of Black Americans by Whites. a very tall order, and she demanded it openly, boldly, and at considerable risk to herself. It was, in your words, a "moon shot".
 
Politesse said:
She did not personally attain equal access to bus seats, either, though her act certainly contributed to the overall effort.
Click to expand...
A click on the ratchet. Thanks for agreeing.
However it is not what I referred to ewhen I mentioned moon shots. A moon shot would have been getting rid of the racism underlying/causing unequal access to bus seats, not merely getting access to bus seats.
Politesse said:
She was asking, as were all of her compatriots in the Civil Rights, for a full and complete recognition of the equal rights of all American citizens, and very explicitly, for an end to the four centuries of systematic oppression of Black Americans by Whites
Click to expand...
She didn’t get that or we would not be discussing it.
Earlier you said “she got what she demanded”. Remember?
 
Elixir said:
A moon shot would have been getting rid of the racism underlying/causing unequal access to bus seats, not merely getting access to bus seats.
Click to expand...
Which is exactly what the Civil Rights Movement in general, and Rosa Parks herself through her advocacy, were demanding.
 
Politesse said:
Elixir said:
A moon shot would have been getting rid of the racism underlying/causing unequal access to bus seats, not merely getting access to bus seats.
Click to expand...
Which is exactly what the Civil Rights Movement in general, and Rosa Parks herself through her advocacy, were demanding.
Click to expand...
They didn’t get it. They got a click out of the ratchet.
 
Politesse said:
Elixir said:
Politesse said:
Elixir said:
Politesse said:
Support for Rosa Parks is insanity?
Click to expand...
Nobody said that Poli. You don’t have to do that crap. Especially if you have a valid points
Click to expand...
Well, her example is what I was writing about. If that accusation of insanity wasn't relevant to my post, then it was just a random personal attack.
Click to expand...
Whatever, dude. I’m not interested in your personal offense at what was said, because I did not see it as a personal attack. You seem to arrive at this point in a lot of discussions, where you advocate for moon shots that have little or no chance to achieve anything notable. Not even a single click of the ratchet.
Click to expand...
What, genocide is bad? The Civil Rights movement was good and necessary? The Constitution should be defended? What "moon shot" are you even referring to here?
Click to expand...
I am tired of these non-sequitur “comeback” snippets that ignore what was offered. You’re not a seventh grader.
 
Elixir said:
Politesse said:
Elixir said:
Politesse said:
Elixir said:
Politesse said:
Support for Rosa Parks is insanity?
Click to expand...
Nobody said that Poli. You don’t have to do that crap. Especially if you have a valid points
Click to expand...
Well, her example is what I was writing about. If that accusation of insanity wasn't relevant to my post, then it was just a random personal attack.
Click to expand...
Whatever, dude. I’m not interested in your personal offense at what was said, because I did not see it as a personal attack. You seem to arrive at this point in a lot of discussions, where you advocate for moon shots that have little or no chance to achieve anything notable. Not even a single click of the ratchet.
Click to expand...
What, genocide is bad? The Civil Rights movement was good and necessary? The Constitution should be defended? What "moon shot" are you even referring to here?
Click to expand...
I am tired of these non-sequitur “comeback” snippets that ignore what was offered. You’re not a seventh grader.
Click to expand...
What "moon shot" are you referring to?
 
Elixir said:
TSwizzle said:
I am so looking forward to Newsom taking a shot at it so the rest of the nation can see what a moron he is.
Click to expand...
Can you name someone (other than The Felon) that you would like to WIN the presidency* in ‘28?

* what’s left to preside over
Click to expand...
I like Corey Booker. I like Hakeem Jeffries. I have nothing against Mayor Pete except I think he’s too wonky and not charismatic enough and unfortunately I think it’s a road too far to eject an openly gay POTUS. I like Whitmer and I’d love to see AOC if only to watch Dereck’s head explode. But seriously, she’s really smart and competent.
 
ZiprHead said:
Loren Pechtel said:
We are not seeing large scale speculative buying, we are seeing large scale flight from individuals renting out houses because it has become too risky for them. Same market, but the small fish are mostly driven out in favor of those big enough to be able to average out the risks. And those risks as always show up as an increased cost to the consumer.
Click to expand...
Do you have any proof that it's what you say and not what Gospel said below?

Gospel said:
Small landlords selling out doesn’t automatically lead to a handful of corporations controlling huge swaths of housing, unless you already have a system where Wall Street money can outbid working families every time. That’s not created by tenant protections, that’s a feature of the current market structure.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I will say that in my town, a number of older homes in need og fixing up ( aka cheap) are being bought up and turned into Air bnbs. I am not a fan because too many families are already stuck in cramped apartments. In the case of my town, it is less outside big spenders than it is a greedy little sob who grew up around the corner from me and his mom speculating in real estate. Again, not a fan.
 
Toni said:
Elixir said:
TSwizzle said:
I am so looking forward to Newsom taking a shot at it so the rest of the nation can see what a moron he is.
Click to expand...
Can you name someone (other than The Felon) that you would like to WIN the presidency* in ‘28?

* what’s left to preside over
Click to expand...
I like Corey Booker. I like Hakeem Jeffries. I have nothing against Mayor Pete except I think he’s too wonky and not charismatic enough and unfortunately I think it’s a road too far to eject an openly gay POTUS. I like Whitmer and I’d love to see AOC if only to watch Dereck’s head explode. But seriously, she’s really smart and competent.
Click to expand...
I like Corey too, but I'm not sure this country is ready to vote for another black president, considering the rise in racism, sadly enough. I've also read that short men almost never win presidential elections, so Pete has more than being gay going against him. I don't see him as being very appealing. I like him, but there are plenty of other jobs he can do.

I think someone like Governor Beshear has the best chance. He's a Democratic governor in a very red state. I don't think this sexist country is going to elect a woman for president, probably not during the rest of my life time. After two highly qualified women ran and were defeated by a felon who was acused of sexual assault by over 20 women, we aren't going to see a female president any time soon, imo. There are too many people too sexist to support a female president at this time.

We simply need someone who has enough appeal to get voters to support him from both sides of the aisle. Someone like Beshear or maybe Shapiro could get that type of support. While no politician or human for that matter is perfect, either one would be a great improvement compared to the monster we have in office now, who is rapidly destroying our country. it's true that with every step forward, we often take a couple of steps backwards, but this. horror show is nothing like anyone has ever seen before.

I will vote for whoever wins the primaries and isn't a Republican. Right now, the best we can hope for is to get back in the right direction and take it from there. We couldn't even get George McGovern elected despite his opponent being a crook. Things weren't as far to the right in the 70s as they are now, so hoping someone further to the left might become our next president is just wishful thinking imo. Plus, it's important to get out the vote. Too many people simply don't bother to vote. Voter apathy is a big problem in the US, so maybe Stacy Abrams can get that organized.
 
Elixir said:
Politesse said:
Elixir said:
Politesse said:
It was, however, what she demanded.
Click to expand...
She got what she demanded because it was a single click on the ratchet. Why can’t you see that?
Click to expand...
Wrong. She demanded full and equal rights, and she was right to do so. What she got was several clicks (as well a jail sentence, a 14 dollar fine, and riots in Louisiana).
Click to expand...
Not wrong.
She got what she demanded because what she demanded was within the limit of what was attainable at that moment in history.
Click to expand...
This seems like a good place to point out that when Rosa Parks picked a seat to get arrested out of, she picked a seat in the black section of the bus. She got ordered to give up her seat because the white section filled up and the driver wasn't willing to have a white lady sitting next to a black lady. If Parks had actually been demanding full and equal rights then she'd have sat down in the white section. That would have challenged segregation itself; instead what she did just challenged the buses ignoring the "equal" part of "separate but equal". So you're correct -- she was demanding a single click of the ratchet that was within the limit of what was attainable at that moment in history.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
TV and credit cards said:
Bomb#20 said:
The trouble is, this market situation screws over any landlord who only has one or a few units. Theoretical diversifiability doesn't make him actually diversified -- he doesn't own enough units for that. So the ordinance in effect orders him to sell a high-risk-to-him option for the low-risk price. So it reverses the comparative advantage. In a free market for rentals the small landlord has a comparative advantage over the giant corporation. He's intimately familiar with the local housing market, he can make repairs himself or else knows who will do them at the best price, and he knows his tenants personally. But require him to give tenants an option on extending their stays and the giant corporation has the comparative advantage. Now the economically rational move for the small owner is to sell out to the giant corporation.
Click to expand...
B - I can't find support of this, not that it's my job to do so. Got an LAHD link?
Click to expand...
This is a totally obvious effect.
Click to expand...
What you quoted from my post isn't what Tacc said he couldn't find support of. He was talking about my claim that in Los Angeles "if you want to sell somebody one-year occupation of your property, you're required to throw in an option for much longer occupation." He was quite right to challenge me to back that claim up. (So I did.)

As far as what you quoted being obvious goes, if that's obvious to you you must be a lot smarter than me. None of this was covered in Econ 101; I only know it because at an electronics company I used to work for one of the other engineers had taken a portfolio theory class, where he'd learned all about risk correlations and option price theory, which he only told the rest of us about because the company sold us stock at a discount so we'd have an incentive to care about profits, so he was explaining why we'd be wise to all sell it right away. Which is to say, I only know this stuff at all because of dumb luck.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
You have not demonstrated that this is in any way a cause, it sounds like more of the rich = automatically evil position.
Click to expand...

Bruh, Wall Street’s influence on California housing isn’t the sole driver (the cause as you put it), but in many markets, where they buy, everyone else sees prices rise. About 19% of homes in California are investor-owned, with rural and tourist counties showing highs of 60–80%; even coastal counties like LA and San Francisco hover around 15–17% (The Guardian, SF Gate).

Not saying Wall Street is the cause (as you put it), but pretending they don’t distort markets, especially where they cluster, is ignoring reality. You really think building more homes (which California really needs and is the main issue) will stop Wall Street, with their cheap money and armies of lawyers? Investors absolutely do purchase newly built homes, and by concentrating in certain markets, they reduce homeownership opportunities and raise both home prices and rents. I don’t have an issue with individual homeowners flipping or renting, that’s a service to their community. The problem is when corporate giants hoard properties, outbid families, and treat shelter like a speculative asset, artificially driving up prices for profit.

Edit: Btw I'm sick of you always demanding people to demonstrate anything when you haven't demonstrated shit in the last decade.
 
Politesse said:
She did not personally attain equal access to bus seats, either,
Click to expand...
At a granular level that’s how reality operates. Like fish in a school, we sense each other’s subtle changes of direction and response in near perfect synch. You want to throw a rock into the pond to make all the other fishies “go over there and behave”, but doing that just scatters them, maybe injuring one or two. It also delays or prevents coordinated action.
 
Toni said:
Elixir said:
TSwizzle said:
I am so looking forward to Newsom taking a shot at it so the rest of the nation can see what a moron he is.
Click to expand...
Can you name someone (other than The Felon) that you would like to WIN the presidency* in ‘28?

* what’s left to preside over
Click to expand...
I like Corey Booker. I like Hakeem Jeffries. I have nothing against Mayor Pete except I think he’s too wonky and not charismatic enough and unfortunately I think it’s a road too far to eject an openly gay POTUS. I like Whitmer and I’d love to see AOC if only to watch Dereck’s head explode. But seriously, she’s really smart and competent.
Click to expand...

Agree with you. But I also don't think that Booker is quite charismatic enough either. I don't know Jeffries well. Whitmer is awesome. Don't disagree with AOC. She's very smart. My issue is that so far, she's only won in very strong democratic areas. To go head to head with Vance, I think that we need a Dem who is charismatic, understands economics, and can win in mixed areas: Whitmer, Shapiro, Besher, and Frost.
 
Bomb#20 said:
Yes, I'm quite familiar with you caring more whether what you say is effective rhetoric than whether it's true; what I was aiming for was to make sure others are quite familiar with that too.
Click to expand...
But he means well. 🙄
I’ve been pleading with him to try to restrain the torture treatment of others’ statements to attribute ridiculous extreme opinions to his “opponents” in discussion, turning every discussion into a debate over the merits of leftist extremism over realism.
No luck so far. I wish you better outcomes.
 
Elixir said:
Politesse said:
She did not personally attain equal access to bus seats, either,
Click to expand...
At a granular level that’s how reality operates. Like fish in a school, we sense each other’s subtle changes of direction and response in near perfect synch. You want to throw a rock into the pond to make all the other fishies “go over there and behave”, but doing that just scatters them, maybe injuring one or two. It also delays or prevents coordinated action.
Click to expand...
Obviously. Did you forget that you're the one trying to police my opinions, not the other way around? I'm no rock-chucker.
 
Elixir said:
Bomb#20 said:
Yes, I'm quite familiar with you caring more whether what you say is effective rhetoric than whether it's true; what I was aiming for was to make sure others are quite familiar with that too.
Click to expand...
But he means well. 🙄
I’ve been pleading with him to try to restrain the torture treatment of others’ statements to attribute ridiculous extreme opinions to his “opponents” in discussion, turning every discussion into a debate over the merits of leftist extremism over realism.
No luck so far. I wish you better outcomes.
Click to expand...

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let’s not go full extreme here. I can ease up a bit, sure, but to quit attributing ridiculous opinions to opponents entirely? That's a big ask.
 
I'm gonna quote Rosa Parks again.

"You spend your whole lifetime in your occupation, actually making life clever, easy and convenient for white people. But when you have to get transportation home, you are denied an equal accommodation. Our existence was for the white man's comfort and well-being; we had to accept being deprived of just being human... I have never been what you would call just an integrationist. I know I've been called that... Integrating that bus wouldn't mean more equality. Even when there was segregation, there was plenty of integration in the South, but it was for the benefit and convenience of the white person, not us."
"I talked and talked of everything I know about the white man's inhuman treatment of the Negro."

She was not advocating for incremental change. Nor should she have been.
 
Politesse said:
Loren Pechtel said:
Politesse said:
So, what, Rosa Parks should have been petitioning for better padding in the colored section and just sort of hoped that her grandchildren's grandchildren would one day be allowed to sit in the middle rows as long as they aren't too loud? Fuck that. A citizen is a citizen, and should accept nothing less. If saying that causes conflict, win the conflict. And if genocide is wrong, it's wrong. Politics requires concessions, yes, but if all you ask for are concessions, you'll never even get those. What politician cares about a constituency that demands nothing and doesn't ask for much? Trump isn't sliding back toward the mean, he's sliding deeper into insanity, because that's what his most active and vocal supporters want.
Click to expand...
By demanding perfection you are assisting our slide into insanity.
Click to expand...
Support for Rosa Parks is insanity? I strongly prefer insanity, that being the case.
Click to expand...
That's a gross mischaracterization of what he wrote. He was quite clear in saying that it was tipping point and that he country was ready for it.

The movement had already begun, so seminole events could be happen.

The backlash to screeching transactivism and young people screaming on social media for free Everything and expressing nothing but hate for this nation is real. Roe is history and Obergefell will be too. We're now at a place where women and gay rights are disappearing and we're stuck with it for decades. Incremental and imperfect change are the only way back.

Everyone above the age of 50 or so will be dead before (if) we see the same rights the nation had before Trump, so slight changes for the better until the big goals are achieved is the only practical solution, if any solution can be had (I don't think it can).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom