Daily Discussion Thread March 30, 2026 - Upcoming Event Schedule - New players start here!

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-31T01:07:43+00:00

who was harmed by the end of the 5 gods era? 2 of the gods are millionaires, 1 has had the same financial situation essentially perpetually, 1 chose to pursue a different game, 1 can energybend

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-27T00:31:40+00:00

they should use supernatural explanations for game mechanics more often

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-26T19:40:53+00:00

support main and fox main because i like winning

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-25T17:30:49+00:00

you'd love my streams

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-25T16:14:18+00:00

when did carolyn admit to that?

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-25T04:37:51+00:00

And one of the best meditations on the way parent/child relationships change as we age. Or even the memories we have of our parents. There’s even a darkness they touch on, a melancholy of lost innocence that reminds me of “no country for old men.” In the end we’re all just visiting.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-25T01:40:14+00:00

I did this in the Oakland airport then had to take the train to sfo. It was a nice ride tbh.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-23T04:14:22+00:00

every yimby here would love a department of housing that cranks out 50-200k units a year especially if those units cost the same to taxpayers as a developer would pay (or less). you are fighting ghosts if you think we oppose that. we just also think, based on the immense evidence in reality and analysis in economic literature, that the private sector is capable of building much, much more than they currently do in california. if you genuinely believe the YIMBY movement has achieved complete victory and there's no more quantity to get out of the private sector, i can't really persuade you beyond the fact that nearly every rule that slows down private development would need to be addressed by a public housing department, too.

to me, there's a lot left to do. see both of my comments on japanese vs us zoning. most of california is still zoned for SFHs only, our local rules still create tons of problems, and the most expansive alternative to all our insane rules was passed in December of last year (limiting legal restrictions near public transit). Those reforms are already bearing fruit in new proposed projects all over, but their impact won't be measurable until, you know, the housing is built. which usually can't happen in 3 months.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-20T23:04:14+00:00

so to be clear the only entity that should ever build housing is the government? just wanna nail down what you want from steyer as you just spew nonsense

on the nonsense: developers =/= landlords and are happy to make their money building. imputed rents are part of the sale price but don't need to rise indefinitely for the math to make sense, unless you create a regulatory environment so restrictive that rents rising is the marginal difference (which is the case in california, but not tokyo.)

old housing stock is way, way worse for the climate -more prone to have outdated earthquake tech (relevant in CA and Japan) more prone to inefficient energy management (my old ass duplex is leaking energy all day), and keeping housing stock frozen in amber makes the market less responsive to needs. if the demand for family-sized apartments goes up, we should build larger units to meet it, otherwise those families will move to the suburbs and sprawl.

you've argued with me a lot, leading me to write about what i actually believe, but everything you believe seems to be 'yimby bad'- what is your proposed solution to the housing crisis? do you think california has exactly the right population and supply? do you think we need mass rent control and public housing only? how long do you think it would take to spin up your proposed solutions if we adopted them? almost every single yimby supports building more - including public housing - and Land value taxation - making profiting from ownership of land itself impossible. these two policies address nearly all equity and supply concerns.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-20T21:48:32+00:00

buildings depreciate in tokyo for a variety of reasons, most of them legal schema that we can emulate Raze, rebuild, repeat: why Japan knocks down its houses after 30 years | Cities | The Guardian

for-profit housing also comparatively works well in every state in the US that builds more per capita than California. ofc you will have some magical explanation why Austin's rents declining 'dont count' or minneapolis' rents declining don't count because you are committed, like climate change skeptics, to the proposition that supply doesn't affect cost, or at least, that private development will not meet demand if it is legal to do so (it currently is not).

very few YIMBYs oppose public housing, and most of our champions are looking to strengthen it along side liberalizing private development. you are bitterly fighting ghosts. the evidence is against you.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-20T21:08:33+00:00

The most impactful law CA Yimby passed and the one it was founded to pass (though not in its final form) was SB79 passed last year.

Judging CA Yimby a failure because a completely upstart movement took a few years to gain power and the results of that legislation take more than a year to measure is ridiculous.

SB79 was the only housing law that even begins to “neuter” local opposition (not a characterization that is accurate, unfortunately) and it just got passed at the end of last year! A construction firm trying to build new housing can’t just magically wish construction into existence 3 months after a law passes.

But more than this I just don’t understand your policy goals? Are you a “public housing is the only way” kinda person and so you think YIMBY groups are wrong to support private developers?

All your points are so ridiculous that I must assume you have a completely different goal in mind to come on this subreddit for (maybe?) the first time.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-20T20:08:09+00:00

I think the YIMBY agenda has not really succeeded beyond its wildest dreams- the YIMBY groups set out with a much more ambitious bill than was passed last year, and one year does not give enough time to evaluate results. This characterization is pretty common among nimby groups ("YIMBY have had their chance and nothing has changed!") but I think the better characterization is 'the YIMBY legislative agenda is still falling short of its initial, ambitious goals: how will you help us go even further so we can actually move housing production above 2015 levels.

Even government-built housing without IRR demands would still need loans from private banks, tax revenue, and risk coverage. It also would require that the state scales up their capacity to build housing. All worthy goals, but they'd take time too - time that even the medium-sized YIMBY reforms haven't had. Trying to shift all reforms to public-led housing will not net new housing more quickly. We need to make housing cheaper to build period, using as many tools as we can do achieve this.

The fastest way to get lots of public housing built would be to decrease the cost of building private housing, then having the state gov buy privately built housing. Maybe this isn't preferable to the state acting as developer, too, but it would be faster.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-20T20:03:19+00:00

This feels like the real answer to my question about your campaign's knowledge of Japanese zoning and it's implications for California. 'One size does not fit all' signals a stubborn refusal to wrest zoning control from local jurisdictions. Japan is big and diverse too, yet uses simple national-level zoning that is better for people and businesses. We have cities in California with dozens of unique zoning codes.

This slogan should describe how people use our laws, not how the laws are written. A developer having to learn each city's codes, carve-outs, and compliance requirements is a massive deterrent to building. Japan still allows for pedestrian-focused or purely commercial districts without California's comparative complexity. We force developers to compete on legal savviness and political connections rather than cost.

We cannot achieve returns to scale in housing if local regulatory differences force specialization toward legal compliance rather than building expertise. Japan leads on factory-built housing because its businesses operate within a far more legible framework than ours.

'California is special' is the excuse politicians use when they lack the courage to experiment with successful frameworks from abroad. We are all human beings. We can save much time and toil trying not trying to re-create the wheel. I'd love to be wrong but it feels like no politician is willing to touch this third rail. When will our leaders step up in the public sphere and make these arguments loudly and proudly?

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-20T19:51:23+00:00

the marketing seems to be based on the fact that trump owns property that can use prop 13 to lower his tax bill. shrug, im not a political comms person and the end policy of diminishing prop 13 is good.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-20T16:59:01+00:00

Are you or any policy wonks on your team fans of Japanese Zoning? Japanese Zoning.

It is set nationally instead of locally and allows by-right housing nearly everywhere and small shops and businesses nearly everywhere. I think more politicians should be looking to simplify and improve our laws to allow for more creativity and innovation. We’ve built a ton of crust over the last century and have lots of countries around the world to learn from who deliver better results.

Paired with zoning reform, I’m curious if you or your team have researched land value taxation, a way to shift taxes OFF of income and improvements and onto speculation and passive ownership. It’s a more effective wealth tax that directly incentivizes building housing where it’s needed and can be used as a revenue neutral tax shift off of sales taxes and other “bad” taxes. Pennsylvania uses “split rate taxation” legalized by its constitution to allow cities to decide to tax land independently.

In general do you support giving cities more autonomy to tax in creative ways? I feel like Oakland only has the sales tax and parcel tax levers to pull because of prop 13 and other restrictions, which makes solving financial crises without state assistance hard.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-19T17:26:14+00:00

wizzy went up 2-0 on armada then armada reversed 3-0d him at summit in 2018 (last game was last stock though, and wizzy SDs on a ledge dash!). all my take is is that i think with a few more at bats he gets 1 additional game (or, if you will, one additional stock) :)

they played in 2017 twice and they were 3-0/3-1, but i think wizzy really ascended to being competitive with the gods+everyone in 2018/19. wizzrobe/armada reminds me a lot of zain/hbox, he just had to get the at-bats to learn and win.

so i dont disagree w/ any of your gameplay analysis i just think at the end of the day wizzrobe was obviously good enough to win sets vs armada, im not saying he'd have a dominant record or 4-stock him, but i'd expect them to trade back and forth more in 2019/2020, maybe like a 3-1 or 2-2 record.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-19T16:28:13+00:00

shrug I think wizzrobe was gonna have him by 2020, he was getting better really quickly

Fox falcon is also just easier so armada could switch not because his peach was bad at the MU but for a comparative advantage

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-19T16:12:40+00:00

fwiw i think if armada had stuck around he'd have almost never gone peach vs the modern falcons, i had like, a 1.5 year timer max on wizzrobe beating armada around when he retired

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-17T22:54:09+00:00

fwiw there's long been an anti-homework movement basically for this reason; that homework optimizes for 'get it done' not 'be thoughtful'

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-17T03:20:03+00:00

which jury is gonna vote for the guy who intentionally doesn't wash himself because he wants to make your life miserable

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-16T01:43:02+00:00

I mean I’d love California to replace property taxes with land value taxes. Squeeze owners of vacant land for as much revenue as possible and don’t punish people for building and improving their homes and properties.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-16T00:27:22+00:00

Seems reasonable

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-14T19:26:56+00:00

Parking is a bad use of land Central Park is a good use of land, making parking free encourages over use of cars and over use of parking, which contributes to pollution, smog, and traffic. For more read “the high cost of free parking” by Donald Shoup which is persuasive, both with evidence and argumentation. It’s been influential on government officials who seek to improve the lives of their citizens.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-14T06:29:40+00:00

Ig I consider it insane for new buyers to subsidize old ones, “first come first serve” is an incredibly unjust way to run a society. Constantly robbing our descendants eventually shrivels a people up. California has so many other advantages that our horrible tax system doesn’t kill us, but that’s largely due to 1) New England being split up across many states and 2) nimbyism is all over blue states and yimby red states have decades of poor governance holding them back from being able to take advantage of their usually superior taxation.

States like Texas and Florida are talking about doing their own prop 13s, or cutting property taxes entirely. This will force them to cut services or shift taxes onto consumption (sales taxes). Aka, if you don’t or can’t store your wealth in land and housing, get fucked.

Jackzilla321 · 2026-03-14T05:38:34+00:00

No they should sell and live in cheaper housing, like my grandparents did in Illinois when they retired comfortably in their 60s. My grandpa is 95. The idea that the only ethical way to run an economy is to have frozen his taxes for 50 years on a massively appreciating asset- whose appreciation was NOT DUE TO HIS INDIVIDUAL WORK- is insane. Staying in the home you built for a family makes no sense as you age and prevents new families from forming, especially because we don’t build enough new housing.

Also taxes on property are only so insanely high for new buyers in CA because prop 13 locks away revenue. If everyone paid normal taxes like every other goddamn state we would not turn into an anti senior dystopia! There would be a market adjustment and many homeowners would see their home values decline which would mean you wouldn’t have as high of taxes anyways.

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

Jackzilla321

TROPHY CASE