MyBrainHurts

@ MyBrainHurts @lemmy.ca

Posts

40
Comments

541
Joined

1 yr. ago

memes @lemmy.world
MyBrainHurts @lemmy.ca
6d ago

We all have emails damnit!

18
7mo ago

Deleted

Permanently Deleted
Jump
MyBrainHurts @lemmy.ca 7mo ago
Think this through with your own numbers but without time swapping the fertility rates across generations. (Suddenly having a house means we're going to pump out 4 kids? Holy bold assumptions Batman!)
Say a condo at 800 feet, 800 / 3 = 266.
Even a small house, 1500 / 3 = 500.
Heck, even if we double the fertility rate for folks in a small detached home, you're still ahead:
1500 / 4 = 350.
I did the math on a condo project in Vancouver (not even in downtown, just in the City across the bridge) the land cost for each unit they were building was $300,000. That number alone makes them unaffordable, before even talking about the construction costs.
Yeah, so essentially some of the most expensive real estate in the country, no doubt it's going to be more expensive. That's why you have to build condos there not detached homes. Try putting a detached home there. Do that and the house is suddenly what, tens of millions?
In this case, you're effectively saying that because we build condos where it is too expensive to put detached homes, condos are more expensive? That's some pretty silly logic there.

7mo ago

Permanently Deleted

but that type of development isn’t possible anymore.

There simply isn’t the available land

You should read about that history again. Land costs weren't the prohibitive factor, it was that there just wasn't enough housing being built.

Not to mention building condos cost a lot more per square foot than detached houses.

This one is A) doubtful but B) more than a little misleading, condos are much smaller than detached homes, so the people per square foot works out cheaper.

But yeah, this won't get everyone detached homes in the middle of a big city like Vancouver, like I already said. What it does do is allow us to do is build more multi unit places (hardly a factor in the post war efforts) as well as more detached homes in less populated areas (in BC, my goodness, we have some dirt cheap land a few hours away from Vancouver.)

I dunno, you've just made a lot of assertions about what will happen but none of it seemed particularly based on facts. I'm not going to say I'm confident in the government but I certainly like our odds more than I did a year ago.

Why else would they also seek a blanket revocation of our right to bear arms?

Is this an actual serious proposal by the administration, or more "well, a couple of the lunatic fringe in Congress have put it forward" or "well, I could seeeee this happening."

who are currently pushing for the FBI to define all transgender people as terrorists and lock us all up.

So, when you wrote this, did you actually mean "okay, they aren't doing it now but they might in future!" or did you not know what was actually being proposed?

Because this is the key. There is a huge difference between the worst case scenario I can imagine and what is happening.

Consider the flip side. When the Right says that the Democrats are just one step away from communism because folks like AOC say there shouldn't be billionaires or Mamdami wants to run government grocery stores, I would imagine you see those as pretty nonsensical claims. But, they're doing the exact thing you are, where they're taking a handful of proposals, grossly misrepresenting the content and saying it's a path to ruin. So, we tend to tune them out.

Or, you could look at trump 2016. There were some worrying parallels between him and fascist beginnings but at the end of the day, an election was held and, despite his best efforts he left. And now, the mainstream is pretty suspicious of us when we scream fascist at the actual scary stuff.

By the way, by admitting that what I see happening looks a lot like historical examples of the steps towards genocide, it is possible to paint me as a terrorist under the proposed TIVE categorization.

Read the section I quoted again and you'll see this isn't the case unless you ignore a large swathe of it. Again, being able to imagine something is not the same as it being true.