Nitpick - the buses weren't to blame, it was the bus drivers who were routinely flouting the "equal" part.
So, you're saying you support cannibalism?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.
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.
Speaking of the bus, you know where the bus itself is now? It's an exhibit at the Ford Museum. Yeah, you heard that right, Nazi sympathizer money keeps its chrome shiny these days. Irony, thy name is philanthropy.Nitpick - the buses weren't to blame, it was the bus drivers who were routinely flouting the "equal" part.
I know a lot of buses, and have yet to meet one that was a racist.
That he did. And he stopped being a Nazi in 1945. Funny how things go. Money is forever, though.
QFT!
Only when he’s hungry obviously.So, you're saying you support cannibalism?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.
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.
Speaking of the bus, you know where the bus itself is now? It's an exhibit at the Ford Museum. Yeah, you heard that right, Nazi sympathizer money keeps its chrome shiny these days. Irony, thy name is philanthropy.Nitpick - the buses weren't to blame, it was the bus drivers who were routinely flouting the "equal" part.
I know a lot of buses, and have yet to meet one that was a racist.
"You're not yourself when you're hungry."TMOnly when he’s hungry obviously.So, you're saying you support cannibalism?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.
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.
Only when he’s hungry obviously.So, you're saying you support cannibalism?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.
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.
She demanded something society was close to the tipping point on. A lot of people liked it but didn't want to be out in front. She got in front, a lot of people got behind her and it worked.
People who speculate tend to get burned. And note that they were houses needing fixing up--which says most people didn't consider it economic to fix them up. In the long run a good thing for the neighborhood.
Obvious in that the heart of the insurance industry is averaging out random risk and the response is big players. Same thing happens with any other market with substantial random risk. (But not markets with systematic risk: that's why insurance companies don't like floods, hurricanes, and earthquakes.) I had already pointed out one of the increased risks (greater harm from a bad tenant) driving it to larger players, you pointed out another that would have the same effect.
Your take on history has nothing to do with what actually happened, either before or after the Boycott. The country eventually changed a bit culturally, and Park's reputation within liberal circles has undergone hagiographic reformation into a civil rights hero. Deservedly, in my opinion. But the white population of 1952 Montgomery Alabama was not by any stretch of the imagination "close to the tipping point" of racial equality or any form of voluntary desegregation. Most people were angry as hell, and Parks was not treated with any leniency whatsoever. As the controversy continued, the ranks of the countermovement known as the White Citizen's Council more than doubled. Over the course of the next year, violence intensified and there were at least six bombings within the city aimed at the protestors. Riots spurred by Parks' arrest left even other American cities, notably New Orleans, in flames. It wasn't just Parks who wound up in jail, more than 800 community organizers were indicted and submitted themselves for arrest. The Black community of Montgomery, of course, was in a different situation, but even among Black Alabamans, there was much dispute about the best course of action, and it took extraordinary talent and perserverance for ED Nixon, Jo Ann Robinson, Martin Luther King Jr, Ralph Abernathy and many others to keep the Boycott together long enough for the Supreme Court to step in and force the city of Montgomery to cave.
But you're not demonstrating anything here, just automatic Wall Street = evil. Wall Street operates on a bigger scale than the individuals but that doesn't change the basic economics. Which, as you say, is driven by a lack of construction. Wall Street gains nothing from interfering with construction, they're not the ones doing it. Wall Street snaps up bargains, but that doesn't raise the basic price.
Housing without jobs isn't of much use.
And as soon as you attempt to do this you'll have the discrimination warriors all over you. Because that criminality has to be just due to more policing. You must ignore anything that is not under the control of the powerful.
I do have a big problem with the algorithm driven rent--that was in reality price fixing because one company managed to get control over enough rentals. Once a market becomes non-competitive you have all sorts of problems.
