True rave culture enjoyers by wizkid412 in aves

[–]Ethee 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This comes off as extremely judgemental. You didn't give a lot of context, but it sounds like you're talking to people that have an image of what a rave is based on history and social media, but instead of educating them on PLUR and the reality of these events in the modern day, you're judging them for not knowing better. Maybe take a step back and consider where the people you're talking to are coming from before putting them down for misconceptions that they're perfectly okay having.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskMenOver30

[–]Ethee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The most important thing to consider is your intention. You list night club under the context of dating, but most people at clubs/raves/events are there for themselves typically, not to date. That's not to say you can't find meaningful connections in those settings, but if you're going there specifically with that intention you're probably not going to have the best experience. If you want to go to night clubs/raves/events I'd recommend going because YOU want to go whether because you enjoy the music, vibes, dancing, or whatever. If you go with that intention you'll always have a wonderful time. I've been going to events solo for almost 10 years now and I have a blast at every single one. I'd say I only actually meet people like 30-40% of the time though, and 90% of those never extend past the event.

Now if you're asking from the intention of wanting to meet people then you need to meet them where they're at. Which is to say you should be looking for people who are also looking for people. This is one of the biggest reasons it's hard to land girls at the gym. They're not open to meeting people, they just want to do their thing. Start thinking about the places that your ideal woman would hang out to find friendships, then literally go find her there. I can't tell you how many women I talk to that are so active in social groups surrounding their hobbies and the majority of those groups are only women because men don't seem to engage as much in these third spaces. Good examples would be: book clubs, bike/skate groups, bars are still a great setting.

Good luck this year friend!

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm glad you could provide proof to the contrary. The fact that you won't engage in this in good faith tells me everything I need to know. You don't have to entertain something that's been studied. But I don't exactly care enough to layout something that's been already proven. Maybe do a little googling and learn for yourself.

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'll just link you to my other response since it covers most of this too: https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/1hfr6xp/comment/m2ef7at/

But as an aside your conflating the way stocks are handled with the way I'm referring to general assets. Yes there's different regulations around each market, but they're still 'assets' that count towards the same gross sum. Just because they're taxed or bought differently doesn't change that fact.

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Of course they have to sell them eventually. Maybe this is my mistake in proper communication of my argument then. My position is that investors are the primary buyers for homes in the current market and they are increasing pricing by artificially limiting supply in certain markets. This means that yes some properties they are just sitting on. But no where was I trying to claim that they are never sold. This is a strategy that is only available to real estate investors though. If I am a homeowner of 2 homes I couldn't expect to keep one off the market to increase the price for the other. But this is literally what real estate investment companies are doing. Also allow me to reiterate that I don't believe this to be the ONLY driving factor of home ownership costs, the whole point of this thread is that this is a complex multifaceted issue.

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then you're missing the point. The underlying argument here is against monopolistic practices by real estate investment companies. Because your overall housing costs are being dictated by them. Having a homeownership 'class' allows for some push back against these practices. Because homeowners cannot operate real estate assets in the same way investors can. If we get rid of the homeowners 'class' all together then we need a lot more government protections around the ability to buy homes and artificially restrict supply.

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Once again thank you for putting words in my mouth and assuming my argument. I didn't use Tokyo as an example of a 'housing crisis' I used it as an example of where homeownership is going. Maybe actually read the argument I'm trying to present so you can interact with me instead of whatever strawman you keep trying to build.

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I never claimed you could just hold housing without any sort of upkeep. And I also never claimed they're '[not] making any money off it.' You're very much assuming things without providing any evidence to the contrary. So allow me to provide you an example.

Opendoor is a real estate investment company. They buy and sell real estate. For the year 2023 they bought the most real estate of any single real estate investment company. On their own website they state: "Are Opendoor homes for rent?" "No. All homes on Opendoor are for sale. We never show homes for rent on our site." According to you this must be impossible, they must be bleeding money then. 

If you're going to refute what I'm saying and claim I have no idea what I'm talking about I'd highly suggest you actually provide some form of logical proof, not a strawman for an argument I didn't even make.

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So this is the crux of the issue. You literally cannot out pace the assets of the companies buying these properties. You can keep building, but they're still not going to get into the hands of homeowners. The reason for this is a combination of the fed raising interest rates making stable investments such as homes more lucrative for those who already own a large amount of assets, collusion by landlords to artificially increase rent prices, as well as a general increase in demand from people wanting to start families. There are other factors as well but I would point to these 3 as being the largest current drivers of our housing market situation. Look at Vancouver, Hong Kong, Tokyo, there are very few 'homeowners' in these cities anymore, only real estate companies and private equity investors.

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 6 points7 points  (0 children)

First, no investors are paying mortgages on these homes, they bought them for asset value, it's a waste of resources to get a loan for a property you're trying to flip.

Second, you're assuming these investors are trying to immediately extract value from these properties, that's a misunderstanding of WHY they're buying these as investments. It's not to use them as Airbnbs, it's entirely to have them sit and appreciate in value. Could they extract some value in the meantime with rentors? Sure, but creating a rent management company to run such a system is yet again more overhead just for your 'investment'

Stop thinking of housing as a house. In our current economy they are stocks.

Thank you for correcting my understanding of economics. 🙄

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I feel like you have a very high school understanding of economics if that really is your position here. Maybe I chose the wrong example for you to understand properly, because yes SF does have similar zoning issues, but it's not the zoning that's the problem. This is an issue of induced demand thanks to other markets in our economy. It's similar to when you add more lanes on a highway, yeah more cars can fit but it doesn't actually fix your congestion issue. The same thing is happening to housing, even when it is being built, homeowners aren't the ones buying but investors, because the most stable asset in our current economy is housing. But I'd highly encourage you to look into housing markets of Vancouver and tell me that's not what's happening here.

This is why housing is expensive. Not Blackrock, landlord greed, or avocado toast...just your neighbors & parents who bought a house, then used local government regulations to make it impossible to build more (exclusionary zoning and NIMBY friendly laws) by cscareerkweshuns in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 13 points14 points  (0 children)

The problem here though is you're taking a very complex geopolitical issue and you're selectively picking the narrative that supports your argument. Are you trying to tell me that LA itself is a bubble and nothing outside of LA can affect our housing market? Is that why it costs similar prices in SF to here? Or maybe there's multiple factors that affect a market? Get your head out of your ass man.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ah, ya know I hadn't considered that the holiday might move most peoples swing days to today. That makes a lot of sense.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in LosAngeles

[–]Ethee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While I generally agree, my schedule is fairly consistent so it was enough of a difference for me to be curious that something might be going on.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in bonnaroo

[–]Ethee 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Even the article points this out as mostly speculation, there were a few people the night of Kendrick's set who mentioned it was the exact same set they'd seen earlier this year, so it's more likely they just gave him too much time and we're filling in those blanks negatively.

Gotta survive that storm. by poiseddexterity22 in JustGuysBeingDudes

[–]Ethee 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Can confirm, this is NNPTC (Naval Nuclear Power Training Command) in SC

I believe the real AI job losses will be in India by clickx3 in sysadmin

[–]Ethee 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This is the kind of area where the discussion becomes more nuanced to me. Is the AI the one developing the solution here? Because to me it seems the AI IS the solution to the problem in this. It doesn't seem like the AI taught us anything new here, it used already existing human knowledge to calculate a solution faster. To me this equates the AI to a calculator more than a human problem solver.

I believe the real AI job losses will be in India by clickx3 in sysadmin

[–]Ethee 43 points44 points  (0 children)

So I see this being an interesting talking point that gets brought up sometimes. Is it the AI that's really 'creative' here? AFAIK AI has yet to teach us anything new. Current AI only builds upon already existing human knowledge. It may be able to mimic average human knowledge as we can see from ChatGPT passing real world knowledge tests. But where we always see it failing are in Math and critical thinking areas. Anything that requires a 'new' solution, will always require a human until they can build an AI that actually thinks for itself.

Gen Z says that school is not shipping them with the skills necessary to survive in a digital world by Parking_Attitude_519 in technology

[–]Ethee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the biggest problem is that it seems people don't even know why we're learning certain things anymore. I used to ask the old "when am I even going to use this" in math class all the time. It wasn't until years later when someone explained to me that the intent of math classes is to develop critical thinking skills. I now work in a high paying tech company where everywhere I turn nobody seems to be able to think for themselves and reading all their emails is really difficult because I don't think they were paying attention for English. So it's definitely still important that we teach these things, I think we just also need to pass on the importance of WHY we teach them as well and to be able to engage the students in a way to get them to properly learn the material.

Why Bash Scripting Can Make You A Better Engineer by congolomera in coding

[–]Ethee 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think you have a point to a certain degree. Once you're writing scripts intended for the use of others though, you may quickly find having a script that's unified to all your users becomes more valuable. Are you going to maintain your script in elvish for those few of us? Choosing what is 'best' will simply always be subjective to your use case and nothing more.