https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/03/23/shootings-southeast-dc-killed/

Ever thought the problem was that you just aren't very good at looking?

https://www.reddit.com/r/washingtondc/comments/so0iws/kathy_henderson_everyone/

I submit

Your entire premise is flawed.

A) There is little evidence that immigrants actually suppress wages of native born workers. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/23550/chapter/2

This is true for both blue collar and white collar workers.

B) Immigrants are also job creators. They are more likely to found businesses (and employ others) than native born Americans. https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/immigrants-to-the-u-s-create-more-jobs-than-they-take/amp

C) The idea that it is incumbent on the United States to prevent people from entering the country as an altruistic measure to prevent brain drain in other countries is ludicrous. Not only does it actively hurt the United States, but it is not up to the United States to decide to help other countries in need of doctors by preventing them from immigrating to the US

D) Many countries with universal healthcare currently have high levels of immigration, so it is most certainly possible.

E) Many of these people who want to immigrate are incapable of “working to get their country to US levels” because of risk of persecution, war, climate disaster, authoritarian regimes, bad policymaking and more.

Immigration is proven to be good for the economy, good for immigrants, and good for workers.

And even if it wasn’t good for american workers (which it is), As a communist, you might remember that a certain someone said “Workers of the world, unite!” He didn’t say, “Workers of the world, as long as you’re American, unite.”

Wun Wun is also supposed to be Phil Simms. Patrek of Kings Mountain references the Dallas Cowboys

It's a terrible example.

The US is currently experiencing a labor shortage, which is why you saw help wanted signs everywhere. Immigrants arent taking people's jobs, they help fill the gaps in working class fields.

Highly skilled immigrants on the other hand aren't lowering anyone's wages, they're just working in jobs in white collar industries and are treated the same as everyone else. Not to mention that immigrants have a massively positive economic benefit toward the country and are massively overrepresented in innovation and startups.

And then there are the moral implications of stricter immigration policy.

He did the same with Jordan, and I assume others too.

House Jordayne of the Tor, led by Lord Trebor (Robert backwards)

Nationwide, homicide dropped about 5% this year, while it has dropped 11% in DC this year.

It's almost like all the law and order folks have a narrative they push about cities being hyper dangerous or something.

Good.

Salaries should be high, otherwise only those who can sustain themselves otherwise (rich people) will run for office

Does introducing new cars make old cars more or less expensive than they were previously?

Supply and demand skepticism literally only exists for housing, and its idiotic

yes, because the current model is NYC not building enough of any type of housing

Yes, I negatively judge criminals

? I agree that combatting subway deserts and increasing access is important! I just think we should judge access based on population and not land mass

https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-size-pickup-truck-you-need-a-cowboy-costume

Okay, but it doesn’t matter if 50% of the land mass is far from transit if only 25% of people like there. The actual solution you care about is giving those 25% better access, not land that has no people access

Land mass seems a weird statistic to use here, why wouldn’t you use population?

I mean, in this case the person is literally parked int the sidewalk, which is unacceptable no matter whether you really need a pickup truck or not.

Só i feel totally okay for shitting on them

I actually kinda think the opposite. NYC has an almost universally convenient subway option, and yet almost 50% of NYers still have cars. Clearly there are many people who don't need cars but they use them anyway.

Only 35% of truck owners use their truck to tow something more than once a year. My bet is that this is even lower when it comes to people in NYC. The odds are highly unlikely that this person actually needs this.

The research roundup shows that market-rate housing (that you call luxury housing) is not responsible for increasing rents!

If you have particular evidence (not anecdotal data, but actual proof that rents are rising not because of increased demand because of increased supply) that this is untrue in Queens, the burden is on you to show that.

The UCLA research roundup (it's not a single study) actually talks very specifically about the role of development on displacement. If you think it "ignores that fact" it means you didn't actually read all 18 pages! Which makes sense considering you responded to my comment 4 minutes after I made it.

>There’s already displacement BECAUSE of these units. Rents are rising artificially through these developments.

It would be really great if you could provide any evidence of this fact, beyond "I've seen an apartment building in the area, and also my rent has increased" which is a correlative statement, not a causal one.

Your anecdotal evidence means nothing when we have actual clinical data points that prove the reverse of your argument.

Hi friend!

Here's all the best data on how "luxury housing" decreases rents! Just from a basic level, if you build no housing, and more people come in to the area, displacement will increase. If you build more housing, there will be less displacement. Really simple!

https://www.lewis.ucla.edu/research/market-rate-development-impacts/

If we don’t build more housing, then the same number people will move to the area but there will be less housing, so more displacement will occur

So, Robert Graves is my favorite author, and I just read Claudius the God a couple days ago.

I think both of them were fantastic, but I Claudius is one of those 6/5 books for me, while Claudius the God was just 5/5. What makes the books absolutely incredible is Graves' prose, as well as the great narration that Claudius provides.

But, he's obviously more incisive (intentionally, I presume) about characters other than himself, which makes the first book, where he's less actually in the spotlight, more interesting from a content perspective.

Anyway, that's my two cents on the matter, but I agree that I Claudius was the stronger

Trump had a 30% chance to win in 2016. That’s just a bit different than 3%

Yes, we need to build less housing, that’s the answer