prev <-> next
[2025-09-12 03:01:20] - paul: yes, vemax is ~90% asia. it is 1% europe, 2% north america, etc. ~a
[2025-09-12 02:57:22] - paul: i do feel that the "US government / economy /monetary supply" are all three pretty divorced from the stock market value. to some measurable degree, anyways. the US is pretty shitty at a lot of things, but retaining value to the share holders is one thing we've consistently done pretty well (with 2025 as a notable exception). ~a
[2025-09-10 17:47:41] - a: I believe VEMAX doesn't contain Europe, right? Or a least most of Western Europe? I remember way back when I wanted exposure to the rest of the world but not Europe.
-Paul[2025-09-10 17:46:28] - a: Honestly, watching VTIAX / VGTSX / VXUS consistently underperform VTSAX for decades no matter how messed up the US government / economy /monetary supply got.... it really opened my eyes to how screwed up the rest of the world was (as well). -Paul
[2025-09-08 00:42:52] - yeah, vtiax == vgtsx == vxus. you can convert them (with a lot of exceptions) without it being a taxable event. yes, i agree it has drastically underperformed before 2025. ~a
[2025-09-05 21:00:21] - a: I've got VEMAX and VTIAX instead but I've had them for probably 20 years of underperformance vs VTSAX. I guess I'm glad to see things turn around a bit, even if temporarily? Except my VTSAX holdings are still larger so.... maybe not? -Paul
[2025-09-05 18:18:49] - for the first time, maybe ever, vxus is beating vti (year to date). i always felt like a dummy investing in vxus (and vtiax), and maybe i was, but finally we're here, it's finally happening. ~a
[2025-08-26 14:31:21] - mig: all four judges signed on that the finding was supported by the record? ~a
[2025-08-26 11:17:56] - They also didn't all agree that the conviction should have stood. 2 judges wanted a new trial, and 1 was in favor of tossing the case entirely. That's a majority wanting at minimum to retry the case, but the impracticalities of bringing a civil case against a sitting president meant though those two judges ultimately decided to punt the issue to a higher court. - mig
[2025-08-26 11:17:29] - a: it doesn't sound like there will be a new fine. The fine was completely tossed unanimously. - mig
[2025-08-24 06:19:40] - mig: hmmm fun. seems like a split decision, and that they all agree the conviction stands. I hope the new fine accounts for the loss of the defendants: I assume the defendants are maybe just the citizens of new york? ~a
[2025-08-22 16:57:01] - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/show/new-york-appeals-court-throws-out-500m-fraud-penalty-against-trump we talked about this a fair amount at the time, seems like a pretty strong rebuke of the NY ag even if the conviction technically stands (for now). - mig
[2025-08-15 13:57:21] - Maybe, top three per four year term, otherwise it is unfair to FDR, dude did a lot, but he had most of 4 terms.
[2025-08-15 13:56:22] - Paul:Honestly, a "top three" list of accomplishments per President (while in office, and as a political action) and a similar "top three" of other facts about the guy, would probably help with a lot of historical education in general, and probably stop some of the mythologizing we're continuing to experience. -- Xpovos
[2025-08-10 00:56:26] - a: So that way I can at least understand their rationale, even if I disagree that creating a lot of government programs was a good thing. -Paul
[2025-08-10 00:55:49] - a: So maybe for FDR it's: + Saw us through WW2. + Created a lot of government programs. - Imprisoned a lot of American citizens based solely on their race. -Paul
[2025-08-10 00:54:56] - I feel like instead of just vague categories with simple number ratings it would be more helpful to have a few bullet points for each president explaining the factors/accomplishments considered for ranking them so high (or low). -Paul
[2025-08-10 00:51:42] - a: "biden rated high on "ability to compromise" and "court appointments"" I'm genuinely confused on this. I know it's more a product of the era than a ding on Biden, but where exactly did he compromise? I assume court appointments go beyond KBJ? -Paul
[2025-08-01 12:50:22] - FDR: Paul hit important highlights, but I'll reiterate that probably the single most important was the executive power grab. It's been increasing all along, but certain Presidents were the most responsible for the ratcheting. Jackson, Lincoln and FDR get most of my ire for it. Lincoln at least had a constitutional crisis he was trying to solve. Jackson and FDR just created their own. -- Xpovos
[2025-08-01 12:48:02] - Grant: Before Trump's first term, the most corrupt presidency. Even worse than Harding. All of the hate that Johnson got for Reconstruction mostly belongs here. -- Xpovos
[2025-08-01 12:46:15] - Johnson: He's particularly hated because he was seen as ineffectual in his Reconstruction efforts, but they were actually pretty good. There's a lot of Southern smear there, and the Northerners hated him because it cost a lot of money. But it was probably the closest thing to a genuinely effective solution to the Civil War. -- Xpovos
[2025-08-01 12:44:43] - Jackson: War hero turned president. Probably personally committed war crimes. My guess is with a smile on his face. It's a good song, though. Absolutely atrocious (beyond atrocious) handling of the native population. Disasterous relationship with the courts. Probably the first president to set in motion the wheels of oppressively increasing executive power. That first bit of inertial push is infinitely important. -- Xpovos
[2025-07-30 13:23:34] - (also if you have any animosity towards fdr that isn't covered below, i'd be interested in that too) ~a
[2025-07-30 13:21:48] - xpovos: hi, it's me: i don't know any history. i know some of the details of jackson being violent and reckless in his personal life, but what's your other basis for johnson, grant, and jackson? ~a
[2025-07-30 02:07:14] - Those rankings are hugely upsetting. I get that no one likes Andrew Johnson, but that’s ridiculous. Grant and Jackson in particular being middle of the pack shows how little history these historians know. I have tremendous animosity towards FDR, so obviously Forrest is upsetting. I’d maybe see him in 10th, where his intelligence is ranked. — Xpovos
[2025-07-28 13:19:19] - biden rated high on "ability to compromise" and "court appointments" ~a
[2025-07-28 12:48:03] - nixon rated high on "willing to take risks" and "foreign policy accomplishments". reagan had a high rating in "party leadership" "speaking ability" "leadership ability" "luck" and "relationship with congress". what drug reagan down was an even combination of everything else. ~a
[2025-07-28 12:04:23] - paul: historians also think fdr should go on mount rushmore (search for "rushmore" on that pdf). also that historians hate the electoral college and that donald trump (ci 2022!) weakened the presidency more than any other president. ~a
[2025-07-28 12:02:37] - paul: i don't think they're rating the most "impactful President" or the presidencies "during a pretty important time". if you look at the columns on "this one where fdr got number one" you can see their rating system. "luck" was a column (and lincoln was unlucky). read the whole thing, the future-prediction at the end was pretty interesting. ~a
[2025-07-27 19:01:47] - But I would hope historians would have a more nuanced take and might appreciate Presidents who presided over peaceful times and, through no "fault" of their own, didn't preside over a huge war. -Paul
[2025-07-27 19:00:34] - Like, I can understand the average Joe who maybe can only name 5 Presidents and most of those are the ones who presided over major wars (FDR, Woodrow Wilson, Lincoln, etc) and why they might choose them. -Paul
[2025-07-27 18:59:44] - a: Love him or hate him, though, I think it's kind of hard to dispute he was an impactful President during a pretty important time. Biden was.... not so much? I guess I can't figure out what the metrics are that are being used. -Paul
[2025-07-26 13:04:50] - paul: my dad always hated reagan: so I have a lifetime of arguments built up on why reagan sucked.
I'm sure he could also argue biden was great, but I won't try to do that. ~a[2025-07-26 13:02:45] - paul: "Trump was popular enough to get elected twice" I agree that's the wrong metric. especially if you look at the electorial numbers it's pretty obvious that fdr was much much more popular with voters. 98% isn't even in the same ballpark. ~a
[2025-07-26 03:29:44] - a: Biden over Reagan!? Again, you can disagree strongly with Reagan's policies but it seems uncontroversial that the President during the fall of communism (who was also super popular) was probably more historically significant than the guy who got booted by his own party for being too senile. -Paul
[2025-07-26 03:25:32] - a: Same things for Lincoln and Washington. But at the same time I just can't figure out the historical reason for ranking Biden at 14 and Trump at 45. I hate Trump as much as the next guy, but I feel like he's probably had a bigger historical impact than Biden's presidency so far. -Paul
[2025-07-26 03:21:15] - a: I think historians just have a bias towards Presidents who do "great things" and it almost doesn't matter what those things are? No matter how much I dislike FDR, I can't deny he dramatically altered the course of the US government. -Paul
[2025-07-26 03:15:44] - a: "mostly that if you talk to people of that time they didn't consider it that bad" Yeah, I just have a hard time getting there (especially if those same people are throwing a fit about immigration actions now). Locking up US citizens for no reason seems pretty bad no matter how I try to slice it. -Paul
[2025-07-26 03:12:11] - a: He WAS popular, though. You don't win that many elections by being unpopular. I honestly am not sure why (don't understand what the populace was feeling at the time). At the same time... Trump was popular enough to get elected twice so I'm not sure how great a metric that is...
-Paul[2025-07-26 03:09:14] - a: And I'll fully admit I'm probably in the minority of doubting that his policies helped (in fact, I think they largely hurt) and that he did anything special to help us win the war. -Paul
[2025-07-26 03:08:34] - a: And if you don't worry about the details, you could definitely argue that there was a depression before his administration, and after his administration we were an economic superpower... -Paul
[2025-07-26 03:07:39] - a: Yeah, I guess my best steelman for why people would like FDR (especially historians) would be that (1) WW2 is one of the biggest world events in recent history (2) FDR left the US for basically the entirety and (3) The US came out on top in a big way. -Paul
[2025-07-25 14:21:30] - paul: his best point, maybe that i didn't know, is that fdr was wildly popular among voters: 98% of the e-c in his second election (1936). 85% of the e-c in his third election (1940). but, like fuck the electoral college (so those two numbers are 61% and 55% for the popular vote). trump has MUCH lower percentages here. (he argued fdr should not have run a fourth time and that the 2-term-max amendment was good). ~a
[2025-07-25 14:09:45] - paul: the other thing he emphasized that fdr got us out of the great depression (i had a lot of issue with this, because by some accounts the depression was over before he became president). he emphasized winning ww2 (though recognized that he died before the end of the war). ~a
[2025-07-25 14:08:05] - paul: he obviously didn't downplay the internment too badly, but honestly, he did downplay it some in ways that seemed pretty gross to me. mostly that if you talk to people of that time they didn't consider it that bad. (i had a lot of issue with this line of argument) also he was adamant that the loss of businesses and homes was not fdr's responsibility: specifically that fdr only approved the internment, not the other loss.
~a[2025-07-25 14:06:02] - paul: i was right. try as i might, i wasn't able to push him off of "fdr is in my top five" position (not "top 1" or "top 2" like the historians link). i know you would have done better than me arguing your side, but i tried really hard and basically had all day to do it with a lot of down time to think and strategize. ~a
[2025-07-23 16:11:05] - paul: i should see my dad tomorrow, i'll ask him. my dad loves history and i'm sure he'll have a bunch of good things to say about fdr. ~a
[2025-07-23 16:09:59] - paul: according to google's ai, it's three-fold: 1. the new deal (i think we covered this a bit already). 2. leadership during wwii (we covered this, but maybe we understated it? maybe it was closer to him "winning" wwii single-handedly
). 3. "restoring confidence and hope" (we didn't cover this at all: not just getting us out of the great depression, but doing it in a way that made people happy. fireside chats, and whatnot) ~a[2025-07-23 16:06:59] - paul: i agree, but apparently the historians do not. imo nothing could make up for the internment, but apparently there's some huge stuff we are missing? ~a
[2025-07-22 20:11:10] - a: Even if I thought the FDIC and SEC were great programs, though, I'm not sure it makes up for the Japanese internment, bullying the Supreme Court, and running 4 times. -Paul
[2025-07-22 20:08:46] - a: Yeah, maybe I am underrating the popularity of the social programs that he put into place. Is that a great measure, though? I mean, social security is a huge driver of our fiscal problems and is likely very popular because it pays out a bunch more than it takes in. -Paul
[2025-07-22 13:48:08] - paul: it seems weird that you didn't even mention social security or fdic or the sec when giving him lip service. ~a
[2025-07-22 13:47:06] - paul: love it or hate it, most americans like social security (9 out of 10). but also they love the sec and fdic. tons of these programs that are universally beloved (read that democratic and republican voters both like them: i know you seem to hate everything that the average american likes). the tennessee valley authority? ~a
[2025-07-22 13:41:59] - paul: i guess the good in terms of everything? there's probably a reason a majority of historians think he's the second best president? in the 2022 ranking they even put him at literally in first place. better than all presidents. i think he probably helped get us out of the great depression? though you can also thank ww2 for that: but, like, he did good things in ww2 too i assume? ~a
[2025-07-22 05:47:50] - a: "can we at least do lip service to some of the good he did?" The good in terms of winning the war? I guess I wonder what masterstroke of strategy he had that helped win the war for us. Honestly, the war kind of went as poorly as possible with us still on the winning side. We sat by and let Europe fall to the Nazis. We kind of got caught with our pants down at Pearl Harbor. How did FDR help? -Paul
[2025-07-21 18:13:50] - paul: otoh, can we at least do lip service to some of the good he did? i'd have a much harder time doing any lip service to anything good that trump has done so far. ~a
[2025-07-21 18:12:16] - paul: i reaaaaly don't know much about history, sorry paul. but, if japanese internment is the only thing we look at (an executive order) it does make me question any historical ranking that puts fdr near the top. 2nd place? wow. ~a
[2025-07-21 18:11:23] - a: Idiotic economic policies which would lead to increased inflation? Check. Dog whistles to racists? Check. Cozying up with dictators? See the Yalta conference and giving away Eastern Europe to Stalin. -Paul
[2025-07-21 18:09:58] - a: Cruelly locking up US citizens? The Japanese would like a word... -Paul
[2025-07-21 18:09:36] - a: Ignoring the courts? When the Supreme Court kept stopping his unconstitutional programs he threatened to pack the courts so they started backing off. -Paul
[2025-07-21 18:08:27] - a: Like, almost every criticism you can levy at Trump can be levied at FDR (and oftentimes FDR was worse!). Wannabe dictator? FDR actually DID serve more than the not illegal but traditional two term max. -Paul
[2025-07-21 18:06:27] - a: https://x.com/Fat_Electrician/status/1946076650677932357?t=bXsSqnfwtZStzqfyMrdvxg&s=19 This kind of touches on what I was talking about before about being baffled why FDR is held in high esteem (especially by historians). -Paul
[2025-07-21 18:06:02] - a: I don't think there is always a Q&A session afterwards, right? -Paul
[2025-07-17 15:06:38] - do the reporters in the room not get followup questions? ~a
[2025-07-16 13:14:43] - imo someone has some bad calculus. i legit think this is the one and only thing trump could have done (save shooting someone on 5th ave) that will lose him 10% of his base. ~a
[2025-07-16 12:24:07] - a: I’m with you on just release the files. I don’t know why the sudden change of heart, other than the fervor doesn’t go away even if they release the files since there’s likely nothing juicy there so the calculus might just be if they sit on it it does eventually fall off the news cycle. - mig
[2025-07-16 12:09:45] - mig: fwiw i never thought trump was in the client list. no joke, elon was probably high when he posted that. ~a
[2025-07-16 12:05:04] - mig: you're probably right, but then why not release it anyways? why push so hard and go against your own campaign promise? i see face losing only. "There’s just no way it wouldn’t have leaked" wait but did it . . . not . . . get leaked? elon said stuff was in it. and bondi said it existed. ~a
[2025-07-16 11:37:41] - a: I think its more likely there’s really nothing there and this is all a sad face saving exercise. If there really was some involvement with Trump in the epstein stuff we would have known about it by now. There’s just no way it wouldn’t have leaked. - mig
[2025-07-15 21:29:44] - "even republicans who have been particularly vocal about the epstein files, like marjorie taylor greene, voted against allowing debate on the amendment" ~a
[2025-07-15 21:28:24] - paul: jfc this just happened. i don't get it? ~a
[2025-07-15 17:25:36] - paul: love the "sitting on my desk right now" quote. jet fuel on the fire. ~a
[2025-07-15 17:22:17] - paul: this wikipedia article was created four days ago. it's very well sourced. dozens of contributors have created this in four days. 29k page views (on wikipedia) yesterday. that's on par with the "Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations" article, and isn't that far off from the main "Donald Trump" article. ~a
[2025-07-14 22:28:58] - a: I have absolutely no idea regarding Epstein. Everything around him seemed like conspiracy theory so I never learned much about it and now.... well.... it's strange enough that maybe there is some weird conspiracy? -Paul
[2025-07-14 17:12:39] - maybe he's trying to wait it out until midterms to use it to change who wins? ~a
[2025-07-14 17:10:59] - this is jfk level conspiracy-theory fuel. ~a
[2025-07-14 17:09:48] - honestly i assume at this point trump is really trying to drum up interest in the epstein list, right? he's trying so hard for us (all sides?) to be chomping at the bit to see it? is it all a play? it has to be. even if he does release it though, i still would be interested in knowing why he decided to push so hard to keep it from being released: be it a play or some genuine problem. is the evidence easy to change/redact i wonder? ~a
[2025-07-12 20:45:03] - a: "does he have his own app or something?" I've no idea. I imagine Tesla already has an app for car owners? Maybe it's included in that? -Paul
[2025-07-12 05:36:35] - paul: "are you surprised TSLA hasn't taken a bigger hit" nah I imagine it's similar to a meme stock, at this point. the whole stock market can be irrational, but that's uncommon. having a single stock be irrational? that is common. maybe if he cut his losses on the cyber truck (and took a haircut) i'd consider investing again. ~a
[2025-07-12 05:30:36] - paul: fuck. ok, well, you've convinced me. i think you could maybe make money renting a tesla robotaxi. does he have his own app or something? I imagine Uber or Lyft are considering this as an option? ~a
[2025-07-12 04:03:32] - a: Somewhat combining our talk about the market and Tesla.... are you surprised TSLA hasn't taken a bigger hit over the past year or so given the slowdown in sales and things like the EV credit going away? -Paul
[2025-07-12 04:02:17] - a: Especially since, unlike with Lyft and Uber, you don't have to drive the car yourself. -Paul
[2025-07-12 04:01:47] - a: But EVs also are generally cheaper to maintain (no oil changes or timing belt replacements, less wear on brakes, etc) and cheaper to fuel up. Yeah, the margins might be better with a Corolla vs a Model Y, but I don't think the entire business model goes out the window with more expensive cars. -Paul
[2025-07-12 03:59:46] - a: Are they driving cheaper cars? Yeah, probably (although I've ridden in some Lyfts / Ubers where it was a decently nice SUV whose cost might be closer to a Model Y than you might think). -Paul
[2025-07-09 16:14:48] - "after president donald trump paused his “liberation day” tariffs in april, his trade adviser peter navarro promised that the administration would deliver “90 deals in 90 days.” but that deadline came and went wednesday with the white house 88 trade deals short." ha. wp link with paywall ~a
[2025-07-09 13:23:42] - paul: "depreciation per mile were like 10x what I thought it was" is "depreciation per mile" your shorthand for total cost? how are you calculating depreciation per mile? how did you calculate 10x? ~a
[2025-07-09 13:01:40] - paul: "I really doubt it's like $2 per mile (roughly what Waymo is charging)" yes i also doubt depreciation is $2 per mile. on a cheap car, i'd expect something closer to 1/12th of that. on a model y with fsd, i'd expect closer to 1/7th or 1/8th of that, but there are other costs. ~a
[2025-07-08 19:08:54] - paul: ... tolls $6 (included in the cost; so the $45 ride might be more or less for a toll). $0 for parking. $.50 for sales-tax/property-tax/dmv/inspection. probably a few cents for cleaning/misc. (since we're not counting "total" costs, i'll leave out societal costs and the portion of the income taxes that go to roads). 45*.50+9.45+2.50+1.80+2.25+6+0+.50=45. ~a
[2025-07-08 19:08:48] - paul: my example of someone driving a $28k car to the airport for $45. assuming a gas car because i don't know how much new batteries cost or last. uber takes 50%, but that probably includes car insurance. $9.45 payment for time, $2.50 depreciation (($28k-$8k for resale)/(120k miles)*15 miles), $1.80 gas ($.12/mile*15 miles; electricity will be cheaper), $2.25 maintenance ($.15/mile*15 miles), car insurance is included already, ... ~a
[2025-07-08 15:01:06] - paul: "Tons of people use their cars for Uber or Lyft because they think it's worth the money" what? 1. they're driving different cars. they're driving cheaper cars. 2. they're charging more than $0.20/mi: much closer to $40-50 for a ride to the airport. there is a huge giant gulf between $0.20/mi and $40-50 for a ride to the airport. there's a huge gulf between a $45k+$8k model y, and whatever car lyft drivers use. ~a
[2025-07-08 14:33:20] - paul: "it's hard to ignore that I have been pretty wrong for 3+ months now" same. ~a
[2025-07-08 06:32:59] - a: And same thing with Tesla and Tesla owners. Yeah, cars depreciate, and they depreciate faster if you drive them more, but I really doubt it's like $2 per mile (roughly what Waymo is charging). It looks like Musk is claiming that costs might get down to $0.20 a mile for Tesla robotaxis eventually, which DOES seem like it would push up against depreciation costs some, but Musk tends to be overly optimistic. -Paul
[2025-07-08 06:28:53] - a: "i assume this debate has bored you?" Not necessarily, although this does seem like a rehash of our previous discussion where your estimates of depreciation per mile were like 10x what I thought it was. Can you at least admit that real life evidence seems to be against you? Tons of people use their cars for Uber or Lyft because they think it's worth the money. Google is betting huge amounts of money that this can be profitable... -Paul
[2025-07-08 06:26:33] - a: I think we're mostly in agreement about the near term future of the market.... but it's hard to ignore that I have been pretty wrong for 3+ months now. -Paul
[2025-07-08 06:25:09] - a: "i mean it's not literally deciding what kind of consensual interactions people engage in" It kind of is? It's literally saying that if I want to pay somebody to cut hair for $15 an hour I cannot do that. To answer your other questions... yeah, I kind of think that consensual interactions between people that don't harm anybody should generally be allowed. -Paul
[2025-07-07 15:45:37] - paul: i think it’s mostly due to the deficit is a lost cause at this point. I think markets are riding on the next best thing - more people keeping more of their money. - mig
[2025-07-07 14:46:39] - paul: if it hasn't bored you, i'll always keep using this link as my one true source. it has changed my life paul. ~a
[2025-07-07 14:42:53] - paul: in that case aren't you ignoring all of the other costs? you at least agree depreciation per mile of a cheaper car will be lower than depreciation per mile on a more expensive car? i assume this debate has bored you?
~a[2025-07-07 14:40:32] - paul: "Any thoughts as to why?" i am constantly asking myself this question. i have not been timing the market, of course, but i am constantly worried that we at a very long term peak. i don't know why, i don't know when, but my personal confidence in future s&p500 prices is very low. ~a
[2025-07-07 14:37:54] - paul: "why should the government get to dictate what kind of consensual interactions people engage in" i mean it's not literally deciding what kind of consensual interactions people engage in. or, if you think they are literally doing that, i assume you don't want there to be no taxes period. or no laws (past theft and battery), period. all drugs should be legal? no traffic laws? how far should we go? ~a
[2025-07-07 14:32:26] - paul: nyc has a higher cost of living. much, much, much, higher ~a
[2025-07-07 14:31:45] - a: "not all businesses are meant to survive a minimum wage change" But why should the government get to dictate what kind of consensual interactions people engage in? -Paul
[2025-07-07 14:30:53] - a: What's the big difference between DC and NYC? Both seem to be pretty high cost of living cities. -Paul
[2025-07-07 14:30:36] - paul: also, even just at its core, not all businesses are meant to survive a minimum wage change. ~a
[2025-07-07 14:28:28] - Question for the board: With the tariff chaos and deficit exploding BBB, I would expect the economy (and the market?) to have taken a bit of a hit. That hasn't seemed to happen yet. Any thoughts as to why? -Paul
[2025-07-07 14:28:24] - paul: i don't think you have any shops in nyc. i know i followed you through this hypothetical, but no, i don't want, $30 minimum wage. no i don't want a $30 minimum wage in nyc. and dc is not nyc. ~a
[2025-07-07 14:26:54] - a: Which would turn a modestly profitable business into an extremely unprofitable one overnight. -Paul
[2025-07-07 14:26:18] - a: "i didn't have any clue how many people at your workplace worked for the tipped minimum wage" None work for the tipped minimum wage, but a $30 flat minimum wage across the board would roughly double our labor costs. Very rough estimate is that it would cost us an extra maybe half a million a year? -Paul
[2025-07-04 20:34:05] - a: The stat I read was that the ICE budget is now bigger than Russia’s military budget. — Xpovos
[2025-07-04 06:56:24] - a: "can we finally put to bed the whole thing about republicans being better for the debt and deficit spending compared to democrats and independents?" Why are you asking me? I've done nothing but agree with you that Republicans are awful with the debt and spending when they have the presidency and congress. -Paul
[2025-07-03 21:43:02] - lol, is this right? ice is now bigger than the fbi, the us beureu of prisons, the dea, combined? combined?! ice now has a bigger budget than the marine corp? ~a
[2025-07-02 14:41:15] - paul: djt just got 46b for more wall. 170b total for detention beds and border security. that is $1,300 in new us border spending per american household. ~a
[2025-07-02 14:38:58] - paul: welp. the the obbba passed the senate now too? chances are pretty high it'll make it back through the house. can we finally put to bed the whole thing about republicans being better for the debt and deficit spending compared to democrats and independents? it seems vance is now on the record as pro-deficit spending too. according to pew (pew pew pew), 29% of americans are in favor of the bill. ~a
[2025-07-01 19:32:08] - paul: "You don't think doubling or tripling labor costs" tripling? i didn't have any clue how many people at your workplace worked for the tipped minimum wage, i'm not sure how nyc deals with tipped minimum wages, or the proposal to change the nyc *tipped* minimum wage, and i didn't know the dc minimum wage. sorry. ~a
[2025-07-01 19:25:26] - paul: "I'm very confused by your 'if your car costs 1/3' comments as well". you typically get lyft rides to the airport in a $22k corolla, not a $53k model y with fsd. you at least agree depreciation per mile of a cheaper car will be lower than depreciation per mile on a more expensive car? ~a
[2025-07-01 19:21:55] - paul: "It seems very unlikely that it's going to have depreciated by hundreds of dollars as a result of those miles driven" oh, i get it now. yes, i agree if you rent your tesla out for a two hours, and it makes $200, the car won't depreciate $200. (($200)*(175k miles)/($45k+$8k for fsd-$5k for resale)/(2 hours) = it would have to move at 360 mph). but, in that case aren't you ignoring all of the other costs? ~a
[2025-07-01 19:13:53] - a: "maybe even 25 in unrealistic for city-wide" The one-size-fits-all aspect is one of the big problems with minimum wages. Not all areas of a city can support that, not all jobs are worth paying that much... -Paul
[2025-07-01 19:12:26] - a: "that's surprising to me" Really? Current DC minimum wage is ~$17 an hour (~$10 an hour for tipped employees). You don't think doubling or tripling labor costs (which represents roughly half of our expenses) would put us out of business? -Paul
[2025-07-01 19:10:15] - a: It seems very unlikely that it's going to have depreciated by hundreds of dollars as a result of those miles driven. So I don't see how it isn't even close to possible to make money that way. -Paul
[2025-07-01 19:09:09] - a: "i don't follow, can you make an example please?" I'm very confused by your "if your car costs 1/3" comments as well.
I'm just saying that if you can rent your Tesla out for a few hours and make a couple hundred dollars while it serves as a robotaxi... -Paul[2025-07-01 15:58:00] - paul: "We have public transportation and people still (often) choose Uber or taxis or driving their own car" you're 100% right about the what, but not the why. people don't use cars because they want to. they use cars because the alternatives aren't given a fair shake. federal/state/local money (almost) all goes to highways and road maintenance, and road expansion. they use cars because of zoning. they use cars because of parking. ~a
[2025-07-01 15:51:47] - paul: "for our DC salon a $30 minimum wage would pretty immediately put us out of business" interesting. that's surprising to me. but, again, i focused on 25/hour. and i mentioned manhattan. dc is not manhattan. you raise a good point: that the minimum wage would probably become city-wide (manhattan is just one of the boroughs, so, with that in mind, maybe even 25 in unrealistic for city-wide). ~a
[2025-07-01 15:48:37] - paul: "I say that because I've paid ~$50 for a Lyft to an airport" $50 for a ride to the airport seems reasonable to me. was the driver driving a fsd model y? if your car costs 1/3, your depreciation will be 1/3 per mile, right? "So in order to not make money on a trip like that you would need the car to depreciate that fast solely due to the use involved" i don't follow, can you make an example please? ~a
[2025-07-01 15:39:45] - a: Like, if more people ditch Metro for robotaxis.... That's okay? It's probably for a reason (better experience, cheaper, etc). If for some reason robotaxis cause more people to take public transit... that's also okay? -Paul
[2025-07-01 15:39:41] - mig: if you're asking a different question (how do you assess whether 30 is ok?). i actually want 25/hour. i do not want 30/hour. the median individual income for manhattan was ~31/hour. ($61,439/year in 2023). ~a
[2025-07-01 15:38:45] - a: I'm not sure I understand your point about public transportation. We have public transportation and people still (often) choose Uber or taxis or driving their own car. Robotaxis wouldn't necessarily drastically change that. -Paul
[2025-07-01 15:36:06] - a: "no not in manhattan, probably not" Not all of NYC is Manhattan, though, right? I can't speak to Manhattan, and I know there are often differences for tipped employees, but for our DC salon a $30 minimum wage would pretty immediately put us out of business. -Paul
[2025-07-01 15:35:00] - a: So in order to not make money on a trip like that you would need the car to depreciate that fast solely due to the use involved. -Paul
[2025-07-01 15:33:12] - a: "you say "depreciate $50" as a straw man?" No, I say that because I've paid ~$50 for a Lyft to an airport and you said "you can't possibly make money and it isn't even close" for robotaxis. -Paul
[2025-07-01 15:23:52] - mig: 1000/hour seems a bit high. nyc's minimum wage is currently 16.50. (ny state is 15.50 and set to be 16 in 2026). ~a
[2025-07-01 15:21:35] - xpovos: oops yeah, sorry. "bag" was referring to "roller bag", my mistake. most people don't bring a roller bag to work (but yeah, i imagine some do). when i'm on blue, and i go by the ronald reagan national airport metro stop, i do see them getting on and off with their roller bags headed to or from the airport. ~a
[2025-07-01 14:06:28] - a: why stop at $30/hr why not $1000/hr? - mig
[2025-07-01 11:10:38] - If I lived on Metro, I might consider it, but it would be miserable if my kids were younger still. As I have to drive to get to a Metro in the first, it’s moot. — Xpovos
[2025-07-01 11:09:35] - Though, that is of course a bag for my work stuff. I think Paul’s point is much more to a tourist (probably more than a backpack, but likely still manageable on Metro), or more seriously a family of tourists. The extra luggage a family brings, added to the need to corral the children is a significant hardship. — Xpovos
[2025-07-01 11:07:17] - I take a bag on the blue/yellow and red line several times a week. — Xpovos
[2025-07-01 04:51:16] - paul: "The alternatives aren't biking and walking, though" i said "public transit or pedestrians etc". i didn't mention biking. why are they not alternatives? i take the silver line to iad. and i take the blue line to dca. i'm not the only one: the number of people i see with bags on the blue and the silver line is crazy high. ~a
[2025-07-01 04:50:43] - paul: "Do you not think it will increase unemployment and/or prices?" no not in manhattan, probably not. i'd make the change very gradually, though. and i'd probably argue for $30/h so i could actually get $25/h. ~a
[2025-07-01 04:50:05] - paul: "Based on time or usage?" i obviously don't think a car will depreciate $50 driving to the airport. unless the airport is 182 miles away? (hell, say, 175,000 miles)/($45k + $8k for fsd - $5k resale)*(a $50 trip) = 182 miles. in our "$50" conversation, i predicted $17 of that was depreciation and you know that? you say "depreciate $50" as a straw man? ~a
prev <-> next