prev <-> next
[2022-03-22 15:17:49] - a: It still doesn't seem like currency? Seems like an asset they donated and Ukraine then converted it to traditional currency and used that to buy stuff. It does seem easier to donate than say stocks or shares of gold but it seems like a system for that could be set up as well. -Daniel
[2022-03-21 22:14:32] - the crazy person with this address: has been sending $100k to the government of ukraine every week for the past five weeks. ~a
[2022-03-21 21:59:49] - daniel: for some additional context, patreon literally closed an account that accepted money for ukraine military efforts. ~a
[2022-03-21 21:51:01] - daniel: "If the goal is to be currency then I think its debatable" (from you, in 2020). do you have any thoughts on the 0.1b+ usd donated to ukraine using addresses like this one? forbes (etc) have reported these addresses have been used to literally equip the military with thousands of bullet proof vests / binoculars, etc. ~a
[2022-03-21 20:20:46] - paul: i know i've said it before: but, i'm sorta pro-car. i especially like to have the option to drive somewhere. but i also especially like to have the option to not drive somewhere. and one of those two scenarios doesn't work in most places in america. ~a
[2022-03-21 20:14:43] - i believe you. ~a
[2022-03-21 20:14:29] - a: If I gave that impression, I'm sorry. I'm all for letting developers build what people want. You might not believe me, but I could even see myself living in a walkable community under certain conditions (especially later in life). -Paul
[2022-03-21 20:14:09] - paul: when it comes to cars, highways, roads, pedestrians, public transportation, (and bikes). unironically, yes
~a[2022-03-21 20:13:17] - a: Okay. And you think the raving mad libertarian supports zoning laws?
-Paul[2022-03-21 20:13:05] - paul: "Not sure I've said anything implying I am for current zoning laws" it's what i'd call tacit. you haven't explicitly said you are for current zoning laws. ~a
[2022-03-21 20:12:13] - paul: zoning often/usually/almost-always makes walkable communities illegal to build. ~a
[2022-03-21 20:11:57] - a: Not sure I've said anything implying I am for current zoning laws. Pretty sure most of them cause more trouble than they solve. -Paul
[2022-03-21 20:11:17] - are you ignoring me? zoning? ~a
[2022-03-21 20:11:01] - a: Why aren't developers making more walkable communities then? If there is such an untapped desire, one would think there's a golden opportunity to create supply for a horribly overlooked demand. -Paul
[2022-03-21 20:09:30] - https://reason.com/2018/06/27/developer-of-historic-laundromat-in-san/ e.g. - mig
[2022-03-21 20:08:45] - a: I think we should change most zoning laws. The NIMBY-ism alone is pretty destructive for attempts to use land efficiently. - mig
[2022-03-21 19:39:24] - (a definition of walkable community i found online: "most things within a 5-10-minute walk from home and work. streets designed to enable and encourage walking. access to public transit." most things is pretty subjective but i'd like it to include some food, some recreation, and maaaybe some sort of clinic/doctor/health/etc *or* a school?) ~a
[2022-03-21 18:59:03] - a: I think I would support relaxed zoning laws / changing zoning laws. -Daniel
[2022-03-21 18:54:11] - mig: you did literally say "I agree that zoning laws are kind of fucked up". do you and paul still feel this way? are zoning laws fucked up? i feel like we've gone backwards from that statement, but maybe not. do you and paul both think we should change zoning laws until ~53% (or fuck, ~5.3%) of america can give up some space in their homes and move to a more walkable community? ~a
[2022-03-21 18:50:59] - paul: "Are those 53% able to find walkable communities?" flat out no. definitely no. these walkable communities represent less than 1% of the us. maybe closer to .1% of the us? is .1% approximately equal to 53%? ~a
[2022-03-21 18:49:55] - a: Agreed that it's nice for a poll to imply the trade-offs and not just as if people want a walkable community. Do we have a sense of how much that need is getting filled, though? Are those 53% able to find walkable communities? Or do we need more? -Paul
[2022-03-21 17:33:31] - a: sometimes zoning laws do reflect what people want in a way. There's usually some NIMBY-ism going on with at least some zoning regs. - mig
[2022-03-21 17:05:49] - (the link to the poll is broken. and the study was performed the national association of realtors. so there could be biases there, but honestly i'm not sure which direction a bias would exist. whichever bias gets people in more expensive homes, i guess). 53% means we have a giant way to go to get to 53% of the people into homes that are more walkable. the problem is that in most places we've specifically made that illegal. ~a
[2022-03-21 17:03:27] - paul: in this poll people were specifically asked if they'd prefer a walkable community or a larger home. 53% said they'd prefer the walkable community. i think that's an honest question! they weren't naively asked if they want to live in a walkable community, but specifically asked if they'd prefer a bigger house or a more walkable community. 53%. ~a
[2022-03-21 16:32:05] - paul: through zoning laws, when they conflict, we usually make it illegal to build what people want. ~a
[2022-03-21 16:30:41] - a: "we should be optimizing for both" But what about when they conflict? Optimizing government income means all walkable communities and no garbage. What if there are some people who don't want to live in a walkable community and want to be able to drive to a gas station or a taco bell? How about we allow some of those? -Paul
[2022-03-21 15:22:33] - paul: "should we be optimizing for government income or instead focus on building what people want" we should be optimizing for both, duh
they don't always conflict. often when they do conflict we literally write zoning laws to *ignore* *using the full force of the law* what people want. zoning laws (and parking minimums, wtf) are almost always part of the problem about what people want. ~a[2022-03-21 15:15:48] - a: "some of the medium-density places that were walkable were also much more profitable than the medium-density non-walkable places" Sure, and that's probably a proxy for the amount of roadways (which likely require a lot of upkeep and don't provide a lot of income). But should we be optimizing for government income or instead focus on building what people want? -Paul
[2022-03-21 15:13:24] - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHPuqzP668m45uF5yNBMusw/videos I've been enjoying watching these and trying to guess the outcome before it starts. Helps give me some perspective on what units beat which. Make sure to note potential upgrades. -Paul
[2022-03-21 15:08:53] - paul: we all wish that suburbs weren't so inefficient. but they are. and that doesn't mean that everything that makes money has to be high-density. ~a
[2022-03-21 15:07:39] - paul: you and daniel seem to be focused on the density as the only thing that makes money. this isn't the case. as he points out multiple times in the video, some of the medium-density places that were walkable were also much more profitable than the medium-density non-walkable places. ~a
[2022-03-21 15:05:51] - a: Well, right. Isn't like a glorified rest stop along a highway? I don't disagree that it can be profitable for the government to have high population density areas. I just don't think that means we should make everything a high population density area. -Paul
[2022-03-21 14:56:13] - what's more, breezewood, your example, is an awful hellhole. almost literally nobody lives in breezewood, i think there are something like close to zero residents. most of the workers in breezewood do not live there. the census said it had a population of 178, but i guarantee they don't live near this area. and i (*don't* guarantee, but) guess that a lot of them don't patronize those businesses. ~a
[2022-03-21 14:08:04] - i agree that if you have an agenda, you can make any kind of place seem like an awful hellhole, but I'm not sure that changes that it can often be profitable (to cities and businesses alike) to build with pedestrians in mind at the expense of less space for parking/highways. ~a
[2022-03-21 13:58:11] - coin=could. ~a
[2022-03-20 23:55:30] - paul: i don't know what to say about the eth domain. you know about as much about it as i do. but, in general multiple wallets will sometimes/often let you use the same keys / addresses(s). also i thought eth domains coin have multiple "addresses" associated with them. ~a
[2022-03-20 23:53:23] - sure, i'd like to see the replay, thanks! ~a
[2022-03-19 13:53:36] - a: Also, I have a meta mask... wallet? now. The problem is that I also have a coinbase wallet and apparently only one of them can be linked to a .ETH domain? That's moderately annoying. -Paul
[2022-03-19 13:51:52] - a: btw, I played a 1v1 SC2 game last night where I was Protoss and successfully defended a cannon rush by presumably a platinum level player. I didn't play perfect by any means, and it's possible he messed up too, but happy to share the replay if you think it might be helpful. -Paul
[2022-03-19 02:35:10] - a: Right, I get that it's a unique place. I am referring to the picture of all of those gas stations and fast food restaurants that makes it look like "garbage". My point is that if you have an agenda, you can make any kind of place seem like an awful hellhole. -Paul
[2022-03-19 01:47:07] - Paul: what, no you could not find a place like Breezewood in Springfield. they exist in Virginia sure but not in Springfield or Reston. think less of a group of gas stations, and more of a truck stop, but bigger. ~a
[2022-03-19 00:30:24] - https://twitter.com/dodgersfanpg/status/1504498353668829186 holy fucking christ. - mig
[2022-03-18 23:07:57] - I'm 100% certain you could do the exact same thing in most places I've lived, like Springfield (we have one intersection with 4 gas stations) and Reston (the McTacoHut). -Paul
[2022-03-18 23:06:36] - a: Nope! I didn't even recall the name. Had to look it up. I just remember the picture occasionally popping up as an example of ugly American capitalism and usually somebody points out how the photo is very carefully framed. -Paul
[2022-03-18 20:11:22] - paul: have you ever been to Breezewood? i love that Breezewood is your example. ~a
[2022-03-18 15:24:13] - I kind of wish we had done that. Still probably a bad financial idea, but it doesn't seem as stupid now (especially with gas prices). -Paul
[2022-03-18 15:23:37] - Random aside, but a few weeks ago I had this flight of fancy where I thought we should take advantage of high used car prices and sell our Camry to buy a Tesla. I discarded that idea as totally unreasonable but now it's so much harder to find a Tesla. Used prices have gone through the roof, they raised prices on new ones, and even then you can't get one for a few months. -Paul
[2022-03-18 15:21:46] - Daniel: "Also I'm weird in that in general I'm pro higher taxes" Question, but pro higher taxes for you? Or others? Or both? Or some subset? -Paul
[2022-03-18 15:19:06] - a: If there's some discrepancy in the tax code which unfairly penalizes walkable communities, then I'm happy to have that discussion, but if we're treating these zones equally and it just so happens that some types are more tax efficient than others.... well, I would rather developers develop based on what people want versus what is most tax efficient for the governments who largely have proven completely unable to balance their budgets. -Pa
[2022-03-18 15:17:15] - a: I think it's a little bit interesting to note the discrepancy in terms of subsidization here, but I don't know if it begs for proactive steps to be taken to "fix" it. There's always going to be discrepancies like this. Northern Virginia subsidizes the rest of (mostly rural) Virginia. Is that a problem? Maybe. Should we fix it by taxing the poorer rural Virginians more? Maybe not. -Paul
[2022-03-18 12:57:18] - a: But more important than looks, which would I rather have nearby? Honestly, probably the "garbage" place. We've got "walkable communities" like Reston Town Center nearby that we hardly ever go to because it's a bit of a hassle in terms of paying for parking. We're more likely to visit "ugly" places like Herndon Centre or Metrotech or Greenbriar because they have shops we want. -Paul
[2022-03-18 12:53:04] - a: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-24/why-the-internet-loves-this-pennsylvania-rest-stop And isn't more like the Breezewood rest stop, which is a bit infamous for being used as an example of what is wrong about America but was also a very carefully staged shot and if you look at the rest stop at another angle it looks very different. -Paul
[2022-03-18 12:52:10] - a: Is it garbage? I dunno. Seems harsh. Sure, it's not really pleasing to the eye, but this is obviously a very handpicked example. You could just as easily show... I dunno... a residential area in Vienna which looks super nice? I have very little confidence that this is at all representative of these types of zones. -Paul
[2022-03-18 12:41:25] - a: "did you see what he was showing during that quote? do you not agree that what is in that specific part of the clip (9:31) is garbage?" Just so we're clear, we're no longer contesting whether he was making definitive statements on whether certain types of zones were good or bad, but arguing the aesthetics of them, right? -Paul
[2022-03-18 12:39:27] - a: If I doubled the people living in my house, then we would double the income. Yes, food spending would also double, but since fixed costs like repairing the roof wouldn't, our income to spending would improve. -Paul
[2022-03-18 12:39:14] - a: If I doubled the people living in my house, then we would double the income. Yes, food spending would also double, but since fixed costs like repairing the roof wouldn't, our income to spending would improve. -Paul
[2022-03-18 12:37:32] - a: "both you and daniel got this part wrong!" No, I understood that, but the thing driving that discrepancy is almost certainly population density, no? Tax revenue is half the equation. If you greatly increase population but keep the area constant... that explains a lot. -Paul
[2022-03-17 22:15:08] - I'll take the win, we all agree that zoning is fucked. ~a
[2022-03-17 20:30:07] - I'm a bit leering about arguing for maximizing government ROI because it tends to lead to ugly government actions. I mean, I agree that zoning laws are kind of fucked up, but the video loses me at oversimplifying the financial state of American cities. They're broke for lots of reasons.- mig
[2022-03-17 18:16:20] - daniel: it might be surprising to paul, but i'm pro lower taxes. i'd actually hope that we first look at the people overpaying and get them all fixed up. but also, that i'm mooching off of other people really doesn't seem right. (i know i still don't have you believing this, but i'm fine with this). ~a
[2022-03-17 18:14:02] - My family always talks about the ways they protest their house valuations which drive property taxes (which is the main tax vehicle here in TX since we don't have sales tax) and I don't ever protest because I'm ok paying more taxes. -Daniel
[2022-03-17 18:13:18] - Also I'm weird in that in general I'm pro higher taxes? I think that puts me in the minority of most people. -Daniel
[2022-03-17 18:12:53] - I would believe there is some level of subsidization but I don't know its the simple metric of tax revenue per acre minus expenses per acre. -Daniel
[2022-03-17 18:09:58] - daniel: i don't know either. but i'd hope that such an analysis was included. ~a
[2022-03-17 18:09:25] - a: I don't know? My understanding based on watching was tax revenue - expenses. Does that account for what proportion of the downtown tax profits are attributable to having that single family housing that allows for the employees that work there to provide that tax profit? -Daniel
[2022-03-17 18:07:25] - daniel: he's literally being paid by a broke town to analyze the economic impact of new development. so a broke town saw they have a problem, recognized it, and hired some experts? these experts are human, of course, but if he's not looking at the residential are that is supporting the commercial area, then i think he'd be considered negligent. do you agree? ~a
[2022-03-17 18:05:00] - daniel: are you assuming he's not already accounting for the benefits of having that housing to the profitable tax areas? ~a
[2022-03-17 18:04:36] - If the pattern is that the businesses supporting the residential area's should offset the money lost on those residential area's then maybe we should be taxing big foot print businesses (walmart / bestbuy / ikea / etc) more? -Daniel
[2022-03-17 18:03:14] - a: "lets lower the taxes on the mixed use, and medium-density," - maybe? Thats the part where I'm not sure? Do we know those residential people aren't also being subsidized? Less strict on zoning / promoting mixed used areas I'm in. Raising taxes on single use family areas to better reflect their expense? Maybe but I'd want to explore the benefits of having that housing as well to the profitable tax areas. -Daniel
[2022-03-17 17:47:51] - daniel: lets lower the taxes on the mixed use, and medium-density, and be less strict on zoning of the mixed use, and medium-density. agreed? ~a
[2022-03-17 17:47:21] - daniel: "I guess not so strict on the zoning" yes. here we agree. i understand your point, that sometimes low-density suburbs support real estate. and his graphs don't highlight that very well, and of course i agree with you on that point. but that low-density suburbs are inefficient (and undertaxed) and low-density commercial real estate is inefficient (and undertaxed) is the overall takeaway. ~a
[2022-03-17 17:45:02] - Do we care if businesses are subsidizing residential areas of all kinds? I think the point of less dense area's being more expensive is still valid but I don't know what conclusions follow from that in terms of city planning. I guess not so strict on the zoning. -Daniel
[2022-03-17 17:43:32] - I still think there is a commercial / residential aspect that's being ignored / conflated by doing it per acre. -Daniel
[2022-03-17 17:35:14] - daniel: per acre makes the most sense to me . . . if you counted it per tax payer then you could easily be as inefficient with the land as you'd like, right? ~a
[2022-03-17 17:22:38] - I also do wonder about the synergy of the single family area's providing economic support for all those tax paying areas. -Daniel
[2022-03-17 17:22:03] - a: his metric was difference of tax rev vs expense per acre. Not per tax payer or something so in the mixed use case how do you separate whether the families there are being subsidized too? Couldn't the conclusion of businesses subsidize residential also be supported by this data? -Daniel
[2022-03-17 17:21:16] - paul: "or they can build more of this garbage, and go bankrupt". did you see what he was showing during that quote? do you not agree that what is in that specific part of the clip (9:31) is garbage? if you don't agree that what you see in that part of the clip is garbage, then i guess we'll probably have to agree to disagree. ~a
[2022-03-17 17:16:01] - daniel: i don't follow, sorry. "line of thought" i could understand. but you're saying he's incorrectly conflating things, and i'm not sure i see what you mean. i understand that you're uncomfortable, but that's probably because he's saying we're all mooching off of other people, which will never sit right. ~a
[2022-03-17 17:08:37] - so higher density will have higher revenues, duh. but also higher density will have higher costs. the walkable communities are the surprising data points: that their revenues are *modest* and that their costs are *modest*. you don't see that in the public-transit-denied car-for-everything-always suburbs. the revenues are modest and their expenses to support are high! ~a
[2022-03-17 17:06:34] - paul: "areas with more population density generate more tax revenues?" nope. he's showing that the places with fewer parking lots and drive throughs generate more tax revenue. the walkable communities generate more tax revenue. and strictly speaking he was never looking at the tax revenue (both you and daniel got this part wrong!): he's always been looking at the *difference* of revenue and expense. ~a
[2022-03-17 16:50:38] - line of thought*
[2022-03-17 16:50:24] - Which might still lead to an argument of balancing taxes or promoting mixed use to support more local businesses but I think his metric makes me uncomfortable some still. -Daniel
[2022-03-17 16:50:03] - I also think there is a line of though on his metric having some flaws that by breaking it down by acre it conflates commerical and residential. Like I don't know how much taxes the families are paying in the mixed use areas vs those in the single family areas and maybe both are being subsidized by the commercial taxes? -Daniel
[2022-03-17 16:29:08] - a: So, yeah, I feel pretty justified saying that he is making some definitive statement on the goodness and badness of certain types of zoned areas. -paul
[2022-03-17 16:28:05] - a: And to reinforce my earlier statement, he basically closes on this line: "or they can build more of this garbage, and go bankrupt" -Paul
[2022-03-17 16:22:30] - a: Isn't that kind of obvious since those areas have more people and more businesses? Using this metric, wouldn't farmlands be super horrible? But we can't really just get rid of farmlands. -Paul
[2022-03-17 16:21:08] - a: Okay, I finished the video now, and am not sure my opinion has changed much. He pretty clearly has a set viewpoint going in which he is trying to impart, which is fine, but it makes me really distrustful of how he is presenting stuff. I mean, by measuring how he is, isn't he basically just showing that areas with more population density generate more tax revenues? -Paul
[2022-03-16 21:53:27] - daniel: "If you took it to the other extreme and disallowed single use family areas would that work out for a city?" i would not take this extreme, no. would it work out for the city? i don't know. i do not propose we disallow anything. ~a
[2022-03-16 21:52:27] - daniel: "I'm not sure what we're debating" i'll argue against having as much motor-vehicle designed asphalt as we often do when planning new communities. the video does touch on this briefly. that's what i'm debating at least. do you agree with me? "Attempt to encourage people to want to live in mixed use areas more?" no. but i'll argue we should increase taxes on the non-mixed-use areas so they we aren't subsidizing them? ~a
[2022-03-16 21:49:49] - If you took it to the other extreme and disallowed single use family areas would that work out for a city? Also unsure so I'm not sure that the metric holds up when holistically thinking about city planning? -Daniel
[2022-03-16 21:49:08] - I'm not sure what we're debating. Is there anyone who wouldn't concede that mixed use is more effective on a naive strict $ earned tax revenue metric? I'm not sure what the point is. Zoning laws are dumb? Attempt to encourage people to want to live in mixed use areas more? I think there are probably better ways. -Daniel
[2022-03-16 21:45:03] - walkable communities will always be able to support themselves: and acres of asphalt between your residential and commercial units will eventually lead to financial ruin. ~a
[2022-03-16 21:42:29] - daniel: ooooonly if you have enough families nearby! otherwise it'll make you negative money. which is kinda the point. make the transportation from housing to/from commercial more efficient. ~a
[2022-03-16 21:40:43] - Also I definitely don't know enough about property taxes to talk intelligently on this but like if downtown has 1000 businesses isn't that going to always pay more taxes than a same size amount of land with 1000 families living on it? -Daniel
[2022-03-16 21:40:29] - daniel: "cities aren't taxing houses appropriately that is a thing to talk about" he does this though. ~a
[2022-03-16 21:39:23] - a: I think the overall point of where there is density there is more tax revenue seems obvious and doesn't need a video? I mean I get that if cities aren't taxing houses appropriately that is a thing to talk about about I don't think suburbs having lower tax returns is shocking or something? -Daniel
[2022-03-16 21:36:49] - daniel: downtowns make more money for cities. true. and he does discuss this. but: 1. people live in downtowns. 2. people live in *walkable* non-downtowns as well. he mentions #2 a lot. i added #1 because it's worth mentioning that he never said that where people live can't support themselves. ~a
[2022-03-16 21:34:48] - a: He keeps pointint out downtown's make more money for cities than where single family homes are. And how where single family homes are is where its costing the city money. He's kind of repeated that point a lot. -Daniel
[2022-03-16 21:32:39] - daniel: "This property tax ROI thing seems weird to me" why? "I think overall his arguement seems to be that where more businesses are more property taxes get paid and where its more just people living less taxes get paid?" he definitely never says this. ~a
[2022-03-16 21:31:13] - daniel: "modern development" you dropped the "car" in that sentence when you typed it out in your last sentence. it's the density, not the age: the modern approach of spreading everything out by having giant drive-through and huge sprawling parking lots you literally lose all of the efficiency of the location. by jamming in all that asphalt, you turn a usable community that supports itself into financial insolvency. ~a
[2022-03-16 21:31:11] - daniel: "I don't think the implication he thinks the modern development is bad there is a stretch" hard disagree. he's all about modern cities. ~a
[2022-03-16 21:31:02] - I think overall his arguement seems to be that where more businesses are more property taxes get paid and where its more just people living less taxes get paid? And therefore that mixed use communities are better because more taxes get paid for those areas? This property tax ROI thing seems weird to me. -Daniel
[2022-03-16 21:26:56] - a:I'm watching more - just was commenting on that part since it was the part in question at the moment. I mean I'm paraphrasing but I think his quote is "In this example a 100 year old commercial block, built in the traditional style of development drastically outperformed a shiny new developement, created in the modern car centric style." I don't think the implication he thinks the modern development is bad there is a stretch. -Daniel
[2022-03-16 21:21:19] - daniel: what's with you guys and watching 90 seconds of a video? i watched that video on 1.75x and it took like 5 minutes. you said the same thing paul did: "its bad to do the modern development". i guess i'm the crazy one here, but he literally didn't say that. he suggested that the one development was worse, but NOT because it was modern. ~a
[2022-03-16 21:19:41] - not paul but after watching the first 1:30 I don't think I have quite the reaction Paul did but I also feel like he lost me already by showing me some example of two blocks that have different tax revenues(does say why and I have no idea) and stating that its bad to do the modern development. I don't understand his conclusion there. -Daniel
[2022-03-16 20:51:44] - paul: can you explain what you mean? ~a
[2022-03-16 20:51:41] - paul: you say that after just a minute of video you find it "hard to take it seriously"? how? he's not just showing information that leads you to only sustain 100 year old commercial blocks, right? he's showing information that leads you to avoid having a drive-through / huge parking lot surrounding a *single* tiny food establishment compared to dozens of walkable shops in the same sized lot? ~a
[2022-03-16 20:47:29] - a: Not in those exact words, but he did say it "drastically outperformed" and talked about how converting it to the modern style was "destroying its wealth". Hard not to read that any other way. -Paul
[2022-03-16 20:15:40] - no. he doesn't. ~a
[2022-03-16 20:10:03] - paul: i'm also not sure he ever said it was better. did he? ~a
[2022-03-16 20:09:28] - paul: sure, ok. i'd just encourage you to listen to the rest. it's a very short video and he goes into why. ~a
[2022-03-16 20:08:45] - a: I'm only a minute into the video, but it's a little hard to take it seriously when it's trying to encourage me that a 100 year old commercial block is better than a modern block.
-Paul[2022-03-16 19:46:50] - "but, i want to live in low density single family home"
~a[2022-03-16 19:46:47] - suburbia is subsidized (mar 2022). this video is so fucking amazing. it's not surprising that downtown areas make a lot of money, but it IS surprising which parts of the non-downtown commercial areas make a shit-ton of money! (and it is surprising that poorer areas seem to subsidize the richer areas, but i still don't know why) ~a
[2022-03-16 17:37:02] - one downside with etfs are there are no (us) etfs that literally hold crypto. as far as i know. there are a few etfs that hold futures. and a bunch that hold shares in bitcoin companies. and then there's gbtc (the premium is now gone, which is good. otoh, technically not an etf). my question is . . . why is it so hard to buy shares on canadian exchanges? like, i thought we had a system to handle trading on a foreign exchange? no? ~a
[2022-03-16 17:31:03] - a: Sounds fair. I don't follow the crypto / web 3.0 / whatever else it is called. My main problem is ignorance. Maybe I need to just buy a crypto etf.
-Paul[2022-03-16 16:50:27] - i disagree on your standardization point. i think there have been a lot of time spent on standardization and a lot of time spent on interoperability. (i do agree that it's the wild-west: you can fuck up in a major way very easily. and that you're . . . ignorant?
. . . or at least that it does require a lot of base-knowledge before things get borderline-reasonable) ~a[2022-03-16 16:31:40] - a: I haven't had to deal with any of that yet, mostly because of my biggest issue, which is that it's still kind of the wild west with nothing "standardized" yet. What is MetaMask? Is it like the .eth stuff? Is any of that like the coinbase wallet I have? I have no idea! Maybe my real problem is I'm ignorant.
-Paul[2022-03-16 14:47:46] - my biggest problem with ethereum in general, and defi in specific, is the crazy high fees. and i mean crazy high: $100+ to make single transactions required to set up communication with distributed exchanges. bitcoin fees finally started falling a few years ago, but even at their peak i was never staring down $100 in fees for a single (non-typical) transaction. looking at the graphs, things recently have gotten a bit better. ~a
[2022-03-16 14:27:51] - a: Didn't realize it was all of those things. I guess the wallet? The short story is that there is supposedly going to be a Motley Fool NFT in the near future that I would like to claim and they are suggesting setting up a MetaMask wallet as part of it. -Paul
[2022-03-16 14:25:54] - paul: the wallet, the token, or the dao? i've used the wallet i think, but stopped using it for some reason. i forget what exactly. ~a
[2022-03-16 13:59:27] - a: You ever heard of metamask? -Paul
[2022-03-16 13:15:53] - a: They must've seen my tweet and were terrified. -Paul
[2022-03-15 21:27:01] - thank you, us senate. pleeeeease vote this shit up. you need a win. ~a
[2022-03-15 19:31:28] - yeah, any time someone takes a big loan with an adjustable interest rate, i usually just roll my eyes. ~a
[2022-03-15 19:28:48] - a: Nope, I agree it's a good thing (said so 5 lines down), but I do think it will lead to some pain for US tax payers, which most would say is not ideal. -Paul
[2022-03-15 19:14:32] - paul: you say all that like it's a bad thing. won't this be a good thing? maybe we'll be less likely to get into another war? ~a
[2022-03-15 19:13:37] - a: Then not only do taxpayers have to pay for the government we have now (instead of paying for like half of it), but we also need to start worrying about paying off the debt too. -Paul
[2022-03-15 19:12:56] - a: Federal government has been able to run up huge deficits at minimal costs thanks to the usd being the reserve currency. If that goes away, not sure there will be as much foreign demand for treasuries, interest rates go up, debt is more expensive. -Paul
[2022-03-15 19:04:43] - paul: "a major pain point for the federal government" can you explain what you mean? i'm having a hard time realizing any downside for tax payers. ~a
[2022-03-15 19:02:17] - a: I agree it's a good thing, although it almost certainly would be a major pain point for the federal government, which could lead to some pain for US tax payers. -Paul
[2022-03-15 18:23:53] - paul: it also means that the president and the chairman of the fed have a much smaller ability to "fix" "problems". (of course this is impossible. imo, the fed can only wreak havoc) ~a
[2022-03-15 18:22:40] - paul: this is a good thing. (i'd mostly look to daniel to disagree) there shouldn't be one point of failure. there shouldn't be one government, one fed, that decides the wordwide interest rate. if the usd stops being the world reserve currency, then say fed rate hikes will have a MUCH smaller blow on the world economy (AND the us economy). it also means who's president, or chairman of the fed, has less of an ability to fuck shit up. ~a
[2022-03-15 15:14:53] - https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-considers-accepting-yuan-instead-of-dollars-for-chinese-oil-sales-11647351541?st=ma7jg4ogvjk0r5h&reflink=desktopwebsha Might be paywalled, but the headline is all you need. Could the USD as the reserve currency be under threat? -Paul
[2022-03-15 12:02:53] - https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/14/asia/aircraft-carrier-kitty-hawk-scrapping-history-intl-hnk-ml/index.html Inflation is being seen almost everywhere.... except oil powered aircraft carriers. -Paul
[2022-03-15 12:02:21] - a: I'm half tempted to find some China focused (but not Taiwan, necessarily) etf to have a chunk of my 401(k) dollar cost average into. -Paul
[2022-03-15 12:01:43] - a: Don't think I am going to be of any help here, sorry. If you're looking at bottom fishing, though, you could also consider Chinese equities (to a lesser extent). A ton of them are down big I guess on delisting fears and maybe just because China is tied to Russia right now. -Paul
[2022-03-14 20:22:37] - yah . . . ok. that might make sense. like maybe some sort of market that happens in places where sanctions don't apply? ~a
[2022-03-14 20:17:29] - a: Yeah in this case I have no idea. Maybe there is some very small market? Like maybe 5 transactions went through somewhere? No idea. -Daniel
[2022-03-14 20:09:23] - daniel: like for instance, if we somehow magically knew there was a 10% chance that russia would bounce back (even *partially* bounce back). then, the $.07 is strictly incorrect. how could they possibly know that there's not a 10% chance that they'll bounce back? ~a
[2022-03-14 20:07:32] - daniel: i think i understand what you mean. i think that's close to the ebitda method. but, i can't imagine they are doing that in this case: if they were, why would they come up with $.07? why did they say -99.9% of the worth of every company in the country has gone away since the start of the year? how do you evaluate the effect of sanctions on a country of that size? without a market checking your work? ~a
[2022-03-14 20:01:32] - I think. -Daniel
[2022-03-14 20:01:28] - a: Sort of? I think that's why price of things can swing a lot after IPO's but I think like lawyers (or accountants? or someone? look at metrics / balances / debt / etc and maybe comps or something like real estate and come up with what they think the initial offering should be. -Daniel
[2022-03-14 19:59:44] - daniel: determining what a company is worth, without selling a part of it, is basically impossible. think about it, why even have a stock market? if such a method existed, you could just use that method and sell at that price. iow, this is why the stock market exists . . . at all. without a market, buying and selling part of things, it's all just a guess? ~a
[2022-03-14 19:58:19] - daniel: well ipos are magic to me too! but, it seems like you get a bunch of people to promise to buy at a specific price. that doesn't happen in this situation. valuating the physical assets is possible. or taking the ebitda and multiplying it by a pre-decided weighting-factor is possible (but i guarantee the $.07/share is not taking this into account unless that factor is very small). ~a
[2022-03-14 19:53:54] - a: I think there is a way to valuate things that aren't being sold - kind of how an IPO happens but its much more slow and deliberate. I'm not sure if thats what they would do or not in this case though. -Daniel
[2022-03-14 19:42:44] - paul/daniel: a more extreme case: erus. the nav says $0.07 even though the *last* price, from weeks ago, was $8. (it's totally irrelevant, but the price at the beginning of the year was $42). if it's *last* traded price was $8, who decides that it's changed -99% from that last traded price? and how? if nobody (domestically or internationally) is trading it? ~a
[2022-03-14 19:39:28] - paul/daniel: i wonder how mutual funds decide their price? i assume it's similar to how ETFs decide their NAV (which is once per day, and not the same as their price). but i don't know how that's done either? so, for a less extreme case, look at vtiax . . . how are they valuating the russian equities they hold? how do you decide what something is worth, if people aren't trading it? no markets (anywhere) trade these assets. ~a
[2022-03-14 14:32:27] - mig: prices changing is a feature, not a bug. ~a
[2022-03-14 14:32:16] - mig: i had a second thought on this: "unless you are willing to enforce lowering that demand at gunpoint, we're going to have to deal with meeting it". why is it biden's job to meet this demand? shouldn't that be mostly up to the market? prices increase until suppliers love the new price? suppliers will go out of their way for higher prices. certain decisions get made differently when you have more money to work with? ~a
[2022-03-12 04:25:50] - I'm just thankful that Biden seems to have been pretty steadfast on his insistence on staying militarily out of Ukraine, including trying to implement a no-fly zone. Seems like having Americans shoot down Russian planes is asking for escalation. -Paul
[2022-03-11 21:59:03] - a: I'll give kudos to the admin that I think we've played it mostly right on the foreign policy part so far. Maybe sanctions should have come faster, but they did come and they actually appear to be doing what they're supposed to. - mig
[2022-03-11 21:58:52] - everybody seems to love his looong-table. ~a
[2022-03-11 21:58:28] - the world that putin has made ~a
[2022-03-11 20:40:33] - paul: i'm with you on ukraine. i'm not sure the right answer either. sanctions are a good start, imo. stopping poland from sending things to ukraine sounds bad, but i'm a bit confused why we were even involved with that transaction in the first place. and why they made it public before first checking with the whitehouse/pentagon seems dumb. ~a
[2022-03-11 20:36:18] - paul: "We have to rename Lee district because there exist people with a confederate flag?" very indirectly, yes. because there exist a large group of people that mistreat another large group of people on a regular basis, we should rename lee district. ~a
[2022-03-11 20:10:34] - a: "what should the us do about ukraine?" I know I'm late to this, sorry, but I have no idea. Every option seems like a pretty terrible one. I tend to think less military involvement by the US in situations like this is better, but I acknowledge that's still a pretty awful option. -Paul
[2022-03-11 20:06:59] - brb. ~a
[2022-03-11 20:04:49] - a: "almost literally anybody with a confederate flag?" I guess I'm confused when those people entered into the conversation? We have to rename Lee district because there exist people with a confederate flag? -Paul
[2022-03-11 20:01:36] - mig: that's not what a quote means. our taxes don't pay for the total cost of our roads, and theirs do. our gas taxes are outrageous: because they don't pay for the total cost of our roads. we spend $200b per year on our roads. average fuel tax is $.5264 per gallon for 123 billion gallons of gas per year. so, not even close. our gas taxes need to be about 3x where they are now. ~a
[2022-03-11 20:00:20] - a: that's fair but unless you are willing to enforce lowering that demand at gunpoint, we're going to have to deal with meeting it. Which is something the Biden admin is realizing, which is why we're now begging Maduro and MBS for oil. - mig
[2022-03-11 19:52:01] - a: European nations charges pretty outrageous (by our standards) taxes on gas. Comparing their prices to ours is pretty specious, because just to quote you, "they're doing it to their selves". - mig
[2022-03-11 19:48:16] - mig: i'd rather have a pipeline delivering oil than trucks, usually. but not always. and it still won't affect supply regardless. regarding the tone: that's rich. but, i think they're not going far enough. everybody is looking at the supply problem instead of the demand problem: link. we're doing this to ourselves. ~a
[2022-03-11 19:45:20] - mig: you're always incorrectly on about whataboutism. you suggest that gas prices are too high, and what makes you say that? why do you think they're too high? i point to how gas prices are much higher than ours: it's not just one country, or one continent, it's all of them in the developed world. and somehow THAT's whataboutism? you fuck right off. ~a
[2022-03-11 19:25:38] - It's also not the pipeline itself, but also the overall tone of the administrantion, which has been pretty hostile to any energy producer that isn't green, which tends to spook futures markets (which also impacts near term and long terms prices). - mig
[2022-03-11 19:24:26] - a: transportation helps get supply over there. You'd rather have a pipeline delivering oil than trucks, usually. - mig
[2022-03-11 19:20:36] - mig: ok, you can fuck right off. ~a
[2022-03-11 19:20:09] - And you can fuck right off with whatabout-ism for Europe oil prices, which are artificially inflated through taxes/fees. US prices had been steadily creeping up well before the Ukraine/Russia crisis. You can't blame Biden for all of it, but you can blame him for a good chunk. - mig
[2022-03-11 19:17:42] - mig: i feel like i'm responding to peter doocy, here, but how does a pipeline affect a supply issue? transportation isn't the current issue, that drove up the prices. right? we didn't have a pipeline before, when prices were low. and a pipeline didn't affect a price change due to recent issues? ~a
[2022-03-11 19:14:59] - a: I can blame a lot of that on Biden. He emphatically cancelled Keystone XL (I'll take canadian oil over saudi or venezuelan oil). While the thousands of permits is technically accurate, they can't just drill right now because of lawsuits/red tape over actually beginning to do that. - mig
[2022-03-11 19:00:56] - mig: for what it's worth, the us pays radically small amounts of money for gas compared to europe. in germany, france, italy, and ireland, regular gas costs $8/gallon. in spain it's $7/gallon. you don't want to know how much it costs in norway, denmark, or sweden. it's harder to blame all of that on biden . . . or us domestic oil production. ~a
[2022-03-11 18:52:01] - mig: "increasing domestic production is a no go" what? says who? there are literally thousands of unused approved permits to drill in the us. if increasing domestic production was a no go, why would there be thousands of unused approved permits to drill??? that doesn't even count the millions of acres of unused land that has been leased to the oil and gas industry? who is saying that increasing domestic production is a no-go? ~a
[2022-03-11 18:47:37] - a: we're begging authoritarian shitbags for more oil imports in response to shutting out Russia but apparently increasing domestic production is a no go. What. the. fuck. - mig
[2022-03-11 18:41:59] - mig: "I'm mostly angry at the response in domestic policy" can you be more specific? ~a
[2022-03-11 18:40:57] - paul: I just find it weird there's apparently some rather arbitrary lines we can't cross (sending in general equipment is ok, but sending actual fighter jets is not). But I'm mostly angry at the response in domestic policy. - mig
[2022-03-11 17:55:07] - russia has officially attacked belarus (though, until it shows up on wikipedia, how real is it indeed). i noticed there hasn't been much ukraine talk here. so i'll post a question: what should the us do about ukraine? exactly what we're doing is a valid answer. so is increasing or decreasing sanctions. for the record, i don't think we should send soldiers (though i think it's possible we are already increasing presence). ~a
[2022-03-11 15:57:07] - paul: almost literally anybody with a confederate flag? or an iii flag? roughly one third of the people who voted both times for trump? i'll admit lee district probably doesn't have too many of these people. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:50:49] - a: "people literally can't stop being black. but people can stop being pro-confederacy. people can stop longing for an easier simpler plantation-life." What? Who is pro-confederacy or longing for plantation life here? -Paul
[2022-03-11 15:50:43] - paul: politics is often random and arbitrary. it's always been about what will get you elected, or reelected, or lose you an election. to get reelected it'd be nice if consistency was something people cared about, but it often is not. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:49:00] - a: It's not about what I find it evokes. It's about where the cut-off line is. How many people does it take to trigger a renaming? Because right now it seems completely random and arbitrary, based largely on whatever pet peeve a loud busybody has at any given moment. -Paul
[2022-03-11 15:42:14] - ok. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:41:55] - No, I was just saying that there's more to the costs than just the actual work in implementing the renaming. - mig
[2022-03-11 15:40:48] - mig: wait, are you confusing the two? i stated that renaming ft belvior would be expensive? ~a
[2022-03-11 15:40:20] - The costs aren't just the actual labor and materials in replacing all the naming, Ft. Belvior's staff resources are being sucked into this, and they have been for quite a while. - mig
[2022-03-11 15:40:11] - ok. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:39:16] - The former isn't really free. There's commissions behind these renaming pushes. Those cost money, though I don't know if they receive any state/federal funding. - mig
[2022-03-11 15:35:53] - mig: the big difference (in my mind) between renaming the lee district and renaming fort belvoir, is that the later will be insanely expensive, and the former will be essentially free. i'm not sure if either of them will be worth the money, but i'm at least a little more amenable to the former. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:33:56] - mig: people literally can't stop being black. but people can stop being pro-confederacy. people can stop longing for an easier simpler plantation-life. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:33:30] - mig: yep. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:33:14] - Michelle is currently dealing with people wanting to rename Ft. Belvoir. They want it changed because the land used to be a plantation, and changing it will do ... something. - mig
[2022-03-11 15:31:54] - mig: "changing names is going to be at best symbolic". uuh, how do you know? it's not going to make anybody disappear, but how do you know there won't be a smaller subtler change to society? if, one day, everybody (like, literally everybody) started telling me that being pro-choice was bad, or being an atheist was bad, i wouldn't change my views overnight. but i would (slowly, and over long periods of time) rethink my views. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:29:06] - I guess my main issue is that changing names is going to be at best symbolic. It's not going to make the Magas go away, it's not going to magically make everyone nicer to each other. It's just do-something politics at work. - mig
[2022-03-11 15:26:41] - ok. that's what paul is also suggesting. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:26:21] - a: I really don't see how the mere name of "Lee Distrcit" affects anyone. - mig
[2022-03-11 15:08:48] - paul: to the rest of your statements, i just say "ok". i get that you don't like this renaming, and you think it's unnecessary, but that's (imo) because you aren't directly affected by backwards (southern? confederate?) culture constantly telling you that the south will rise again, or things were better in the 60s. or this is trump land, now, or whatever. i'm not directly (or indirectly) affected by it either, to be clear. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:08:05] - paul: "invokes to who?" well, voters. and the lawmakers that take their polling. ~a
[2022-03-11 15:04:53] - a: And that one was apparently directly named after him! Plenty of people could legitimately have the name "Washington" evoke images of slavery. -Paul
[2022-03-11 15:04:09] - a: "it's about the image it invokes" Invokes to who? I know I'm weird, but it was years (decades?) because I had any kind of connection between Lee Highway to Robert E Lee. -Paul
[2022-03-11 14:55:09] - paul: right, (despite one bad sentence, that i can reword if you want) it's never been about who it's named after. it's about the image it invokes. it's about the culture that lives on surrounding the name. ~a
[2022-03-11 14:54:03] - a: "It may have been named for Fitzhugh Lee, who was a Confederate officer, or other members of the Lee family." So it sounds like it is some sort of reference to the confederacy? -Paul
[2022-03-11 14:53:28] - a: https://alexandrialivingmagazine.com/news/should-the-lee-district-in-fairfax-county-changes-its-name/ "the Commission was unable to definitively confirm where the Lee name came from. However, it is very likely the name is related to the Confederacy: The Lee District may not have been named for Robert E. Lee, the infamous Confederate General." -Paul
[2022-03-11 14:53:18] - i can see now why you said that though. so try to ignore the inconsistency in my language.
~a[2022-03-11 14:52:46] - no. i don't care what it was named after. and neither does fairfax county. ~a
[2022-03-11 14:52:11] - a: Wait, so are you arguing that Lee district is secretly (or maybe not-so-secretly) named after Robert E Lee? I guess I assumed it was named after somebody else, but if we really DON'T know who it was named after.... that's also interesting. Do we know when the district was named? -paul
[2022-03-11 14:50:41] - Which is why I think it's interesting the justifications, right? Like, they left some names in place for slave owners like Mason and Mount Vernon because those are "well-known landmarks and tourist attractions" and "Founding Father and the author of Virginia’s precursor to the Bill of Rights and likely the principal author of the national document" -Paul
[2022-03-11 14:50:12] - paul: "hitler comparison is a bad one" ok, that's fair i guess? except no, it's not? it's not whether hitler is common today. it's whether hitler was common when things were named after people. presumably we renamed all of *those* things, but not the *lee* things, right? i dunno, i think it's fine to rename this thing, but i also recognize that cost matters a bunch. ~a
[2022-03-11 14:49:38] - paul: "money is wasted renaming things" agreed. i presume this will be fairly cheap. there are hardly any signs or anything for this. (we did just rename lee road in arlington though, heh) ~a
[2022-03-11 14:47:44] - a: Nearly all of the founding fathers were major slave owners. -Paul
[2022-03-11 14:47:17] - a: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Lee_III But there are a ton of Lee's including relevant historical Americans like Lighthorse Henry Lee. -paul
[2022-03-11 14:46:26] - a: "do you think the various lees are justification enough?" I honestly don't care about the name changing much. I hardly ever use district names in my day-to-day. Maybe mildly annoyed at whatever money is wasted renaming things. I agree with Miguel, though. The Hitler comparison is a bad one. There's basically no other well known Hitler. -paul
[2022-03-11 14:45:56] - paul: a different lee . . . who was also a major slave owner?
~a[2022-03-11 14:44:54] - a: Ah, maybe I read too much into a few possibly unrelated statements? They mention a few times there's no indication that Lee is named after Robert E Lee and then they mentioned a different Lee which I assumed they were saying it was named after, but I guess that was in the context of Sully? -Paul
[2022-03-10 22:36:44] - a: not really a good comparison. Hitler is not a common name (probably for good reason). Lee IS a common-ish surname (though these days among asians). - mig
[2022-03-10 20:30:03] - paul: regardless of your answer, do you think the various lees are justification enough? regardless of the actual tie? for instance, i assume you'd be cool with renaming hitler city even if it's actually named after some other unrelated hitler. no? (sorry for the hitler reference, hopefully this one is permitted) ~a
[2022-03-10 20:27:37] - paul: "even though that wasn't what it is named after?" waaaaait, where does the article say this??? the dcist article doesn't say that it *wasn't* robert e lee, right? (SORRY i only skimmed it, so hopefully i'm not putting my foot in my mouth) just that "did not find proof of a clear historic link" and richard bland lee was ALSO a (major) slave-owner? npr suggested the same this morning. ~a
[2022-03-10 20:13:54] - https://dcist.com/story/22/03/09/report-recommends-renaming-lee-sully-districts-fairfax-county/ I thought this was an interesting read in terms of the rationale being used to decide to rename (or not rename) certain Northern Virginia districts. I guess Lee is getting renamed because people think it might be tied to Robert E Lee, even though that wasn't what it is named after? -Paul
[2022-03-10 18:11:48] - a: Heh, thanks. I would be happy with just a decent amount of money. I'm ready to spend all of my time hanging out with the family, playing games, and maybe doing some traveling. -Paul
[2022-03-10 18:07:13] - no that's enough details, thanks. i hope you make a shit-ton of money. a month ago i listened to an NPR on basically this: how to turn a simple kids toy (they had three examples of dead-simple toys in the 80s/90s you might have heard of) into something you can market and mass produce. ~a
[2022-03-10 18:03:54] - a: It's just a silly simple kid's toy/decoration that I want some measure of protection for before I send out some descriptions to people on Fiverr so I can get a prototype. I can tell you more if you care. -Paul
[2022-03-10 18:02:30] - a: Got it, that's why I numbered them in the email to make it clear it was different. I mean, they almost certainly have different answers. Find it hard to believe the permit required for a lemonade stand anywhere is the same as the permit for a food vendor in a specific place? Maybe not? -Paul
[2022-03-10 17:23:15] - paul: arlington has this website called capp, and i've been able to do lots of stuff through that (mostly just paying personal/corporate taxes). for a while, i was like . . . do i even need to pay county taxes (for my company)? it was hard for me to determine that. ~a
[2022-03-10 17:20:27] - paul: "If you were the fairfax county official?" right. "Are you saying I accidentally made them seem too much like the same question?" right. the questions maybe seem to be related? "patent" oooooh that's exciting! what's the patent regarding? i'm surprised you need to fax something these days. uspto doesn't have a website? multiple times i've almost gotten work with the uspto. and i know some people who've worked there. ~a
[2022-03-10 15:53:04] - a: I think part of the frustration is feeling a bit stonewalled at every turn. There's this permit question, the aforementioned FCPS question, and also my attempts to figure out how to file a provisional patent which is currently stuck at the "fax us this form" phase. -Paul
[2022-03-10 15:51:57] - a: "i probably wouldn't have answered your question either" Huh? If you were the fairfax county official? Or the vendor? Are you saying I accidentally made them seem too much like the same question? -Paul
[2022-03-10 15:14:04] - paul: yeah, i probably wouldn't have answered your question either
it makes it seem like your questions are related. i wouldn't bet on it, but i'm guessing they have a permit. ~a[2022-03-10 15:07:55] - oh fuck. i get it now. sorry. ~a
[2022-03-10 14:06:27] - https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/10/cpi-inflation-february-2022-.html iBonds keep looking attractive. -Paul
[2022-03-10 13:55:40] - a: I'm basically wondering if the kids could just set up a lemonade stand there some day to maybe leech off the traffic the other vendors are getting. Maybe I should just ask the vendors there if they had to get a permit or anything. -Paul
[2022-03-10 13:54:41] - a: And yes, it's often a food vendor (almost like a food truck, except I think technically the truck is only used to tow around a smoker for BBQ) and sometimes a tent set up to serve coffee. Both seem more like actual businesses versus random kids or anything like that. -Paul
[2022-03-10 13:53:35] - a: That was the two questions. I even numbered them.
-Paul[2022-03-10 03:59:51] - paul: 1. no clue. but based on your comment, without a permit, it's not allowed anywhere? 2. vendors? like food vendors? or lemonade vendors set up by kids? still, no clue, but based on your comment, and the wsls link, yes? 3. i assume you're intentionally not telling me the second question, which is fine, but if that's not the case, you'll tell me, right? ~a
[2022-03-10 02:21:59] - Nobody seems to know what is going in in that second question. I am worried I am inadvertently snitching on somebody. -Paul
[2022-03-10 02:20:48] - a: 1) Are there any rules for where a lemonade stand run by kids is allowed to set up? 2) I have noticed some vendors setting up in the parking lot of the Reston South Park and Ride. Is any kind of permit or registration required to set up there? -Paul
[2022-03-09 21:47:10] - paul: i reread your original message a few times and didn't see the first or second question. just that you were asking about the process for setting up a lemonade stand. you did reference that they ignored your second question twice, though. ~a
[2022-03-09 21:27:31] - Between this, my still unanswered second question (not overly relevant to this conversation) and that I am going on 7 months without a response from FCPS from a question I asked them.... I feel like I am living through some origin story for a person who decides to run for office later in life (obviously not me, because I would lose horribly). -Paul
[2022-03-09 21:25:37] - a: But no, not only was it a bureaucratic maze to even get an answer, the answer was basically: "Yes, here are the sub-section regulations you have to follow and then pay us $200" -Paul
[2022-03-09 21:24:47] - a: I basically 99% agree with you. I like to think I'm a rule follower, though, so I wanted to try to cover my bases just in case. I was mostly expecting (or at least hoping) to get a response like, "You're kidding, right? We don't care about a kid's lemonade stand". -Paul
[2022-03-09 21:08:23] - found this on google. so maybe my parents were just rolling the dice. ~a
[2022-03-09 21:05:06] - if fairfax county was trying to shut down a lemonade stand, i can't imagine the bad press they would get. but yeah, otoh, this is not legal advice
~a[2022-03-09 21:04:26] - paul: ok, you're just doing it on your block, right? the * one * time my parents help me set up a lemonade stand, i was like 10, or something. it was in annandale. i guarantee my parents didn't contact fairfax county. we were much further from the nearest major road, though. ~a
[2022-03-09 20:58:32] - a: "a lemonade stand requires interacting with the county government? can i get a bit more context?" Well, I wanted to be sure since I didn't want them to get fined or anything. Apparently the answer is yes? -Paul
[2022-03-09 20:57:36] - "In addition, you would need to apply for an administrative permit through the Planning Land Use System (PLUS) and pay the fee, which is $205.00." Also, they only answered the first question I asked and completely ignored the second. -Paul
[2022-03-09 20:57:08] - I emailed this second person. Didn't hear back. Followed up with a second email. Was then then told to contact a third person OR the department that I first contacted. I emailed the third person who, to their credit, promptly replied with: "A lemonade stand could be approved with an administrative permit for a special event, if it met the standards of subsections 4102.1.I and 4102.8.I of the Zoning Ordinance." Paul
[2022-03-09 20:56:42] - uuuh, what? a lemonade stand requires interacting with the county government? can i get a bit more context? ~a
[2022-03-09 20:55:43] - I feel like my interactions with the Fairfax County government is reaching parody levels. A few weeks ago, I emailed asking about the process for setting up a lemonade stand for the kids. About a week later, I was told to email somebody else (not sure why they couldn't have just checked with that person for me). -Paul
[2022-03-09 16:17:46] - a: Either seems pretty unenforceable, but catching people at state borders seems particularly unenforceable. -Paul
[2022-03-09 16:14:11] - as someone who works in the biz, it surprises me that *spent* nuclear fuel requires cooling? i figured spent nuclear fuel would continue to radiate, but i didn't know it needed to be actively cooled. ~a
[2022-03-09 16:12:06] - yah, ok, understood. i'd be very surprised if that's what they intend. but, you could be right. ~a
prev <-> next