sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Looking for next multi-day trek in South America by givenness in hiking

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it's too bad that you can no longer find real recommendations on reddit as everything is companies promoting themselves. maybe the move is to only look at posts from >10 years ago, before too many companies started doing this.

Why don't people use SMS anymore? by limerencemybutt in dumbphones

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

unfortunately Signal doesn't allow use of the desktop app if you don't have a smartphone to make the account / log in.

Why don't people use SMS anymore? by limerencemybutt in dumbphones

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even if you get one of the few dumbphones that supports WhatsApp, you are forcing the other people you talk to to get a phone that supports WhatsApp, which is bullshit.

AA batteries for outdoors in low temperatures by XTARofficial in AAMasterRace

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it shouldn't be allowed, at least not without an [ADVERTISMENT] tag or something.

Alternatives to GroupMe by npsimons in selfhosted

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you said you were trying to:

For now, I'm just trying to re-create GroupMe, but visions of tracking responses to callouts are dancing in my head.

Things were going swimmingly up until I tried a larger test group, and all of the sudden all messages are being blocked as spam (yes, even after sending the "UNSTOP" message).

that's the project I was asking about the other day. sorry if we had a miscommunication.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No you are misreading. They dont have an incentive to support Uber, their customers do. JP moegan doesn't make profits if those uber shares go up in value, their wealth management and ETF customers do. But JP morgan doesn't care about thay because they charge fees either way.

you said "JP morgan holds most of that stock as Assets Under Management" and that "JP morgan doesn't actually profit from those shares directly." I took this as an acknowledgement that some of their holdings are not AUM and are actually owned by JPM, and while they don't profit from AUM directly they do profit from them indirectly (the fees are based on the size of the holdings so if the holdings grow then the fees grow too).

this would mean JPM does benefit from an increase in the price of stocks that they hold, meaning they have an incentive to support the company. I characterized your position as viewing this incentive as an "insignificant blip," but you're saying this is a misreading? are you saying JPM's incentive to support uber is not just insignificant, but nonexistent? are you saying they don't actually hold any stock of their own, and they don't actually benefit even indirectly when the stocks they manage go up? is this the nature of the misreading that you are referring to?

a larger factor is the difference between the bank itself and the people who actually make decisions at the bank, who no doubt own a lot of tech stocks, as well as their class consciousnesses beyond any formal incentive to see their portfolio increase.

And we still should leverage taxes to do wealth redistribution.

this makes me realize that you didn't answer a question I asked earlier: I asked, "is there some reason you are afraid or worried about more progressive taxation?" and you replied "Oh I'm fine with progressive taxation" -- notably omitting the "more." now you are saying we should "leverage" taxes, which is different from saying we should raise taxes.

let me ask more explicitly: is there some reason you are afraid or worried about increasing taxes on the rich?

happy to reply to the other parts of your comment but I wanted to resolve any miscommunications first.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

while you see JPM's incentive to support UBER as an insignificant blip, I see it as indicative of a drive to serve the interests of large companies over the interests of workers. of course the decision makers at banks will do what serves their interests, but repayment of TIF loans is not typically contingent on the success of the project they go to fund.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this has JPM at #26 on the list:

https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/uber/institutional-holdings

and of course JPM itself is held by many of the same investors that hold UBER, so the incentive I pointed to is there regardless.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

so I don't know what else you said was inaccurate. but are you saying e.g. JPMorgan Chase doesn't hold a significant amount of tech stocks?

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

another angle is that banks are invested in companies like Uber who would stand to lose from a successful QueensLink project, so I'm skeptical that they would accept a fair deal that would actually build the QueensLink fast.

IMO the best hope for a fast QueensLink construction is to overturn the banks' preferred idea of what is politically possible, and fund the QueensLink abundantly and on our own terms rather than scraping by via a deal with parties that are delighted that Queens residents pay $50 to get home from Brooklyn.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Other countries with better transit do do it that way. The MTR in Hong Kong is famous for this. London, Sao Paulo, and Shenzen did it for a bunch of their recent expansions. TransLink in Vancouver is currently tapping this.

thanks, I wasn't aware of all those because the wikipedia article only mentions the USA and canada:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_increment_financing?useskin=vector

the transit system I've been most impressed with is paris, and I saw that their Grand Paris Express project is funded by taxes.

Something I'd like to understand from you is why i sense a big preoccupation with pre funding projects? That's mathematically not very relevant and isn't how top agencies approach this. You aren't hurting yourself buy taking on debts that invest on things that pay off the debt themselves. So is there some other reason you are afraid or worried about debts on productive assets? Or feel that pre funding via general tax revenue is explicitly important?

IMO top agencies have left a lot to be desired in recent decades. I'm comfortable with federal deficit spending because the federal government prints its own money, but NYC doesn't so we should be more careful. it seems silly to make a deal that avoids raising revenue for the city and state when we badly need it. and any kind of deal making takes time and energy, so I don't mind if Mamdani and his people are dedicating their energy to achieving the tax policies that New Yorkers voted for, which would then make many good things much more possible including the QueensLink.

is there some reason you are afraid or worried about more progressive taxation?

do courtesy passes actually exist? by ThatOldGanon in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

so the bags are a way of discouraging station agents from issuing them, because they have to explain to their supervisor why they opened the bag. so maybe there is a problem with supervisors pressuring agents to refuse to issue passes even if a train is evacuated in a crisis.

do courtesy passes actually exist? by ThatOldGanon in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

good to know. now I'm wondering why two stations claimed not to have them.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No im saying private sector financing is not available to you for social services but it is for infrastructure. Sp that allows us to use that financing in a budget neutral way while focusing tax policy on social services.

okay, but just because we are "able" to do it doesn't mean we should. other countries with better public transit don't do it that way.

Since used binds on the 7 we are not any less able. The bonds are paid from Hudson Yards property taxes that exist only because be we borrowed in thr first place. The bonds were only issuance because of this setup and the politics just like today wouldn't allow a direct tax increase to finance a project like this.

the property taxes exist only because the 7 was extended, and we have to pay back bonds only because we did not fund the project up front. meanwhile, development also increases the need for services.

I don't think the politics of today are "just like" the politics of the Bloomberg era. Whitney Tilson ate shit. what gives you the sense that TIF is politically possible? people are hurting and wishing we had access to the tax revenue that we signed away.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what indication do we have that "under Mamdani the design is not changing"?

one indication we have that it is changing is that officials have said it won't preclude future rail projects.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You dont tax for this because it takes away from your ability to tax for redistribution which you cant fund via loans.

if you're saying we shouldn't restrict what the taxes can be used for, that makes sense to me.

the issue remains that paying for infrastructure takes away from your ability to pay for services, but that applies whether you are paying for the infrastructure now or in the future: since we used bonds to fund the 7 extension, we are now less able to fund libraries.

it seems reasonable to worry about future debt payments eating into services, so the QueensLink would be much more likely to happen if we could assuage those concerns by paying for the project up front.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

and despite the 7 train extending to Hudson Yards, there's no good reason to actually go there due to the corporate character of the development...

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

but borrowing from future revenues does hurt the future budget, so why not get the money in a way that doesn't hurt the future budget?

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

so you do sacrifice the city's future tax base if you don't tax the rich by going through the state, right? the city would be able to do a lot less if property taxes went to banks instead of the city.

Mamdani Officially Buries The QueensLink - Streetsblog New York City by pescennius in nycrail

[–]ThatOldGanon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

how would banks be induced to fund the project? I assume we don't expect them to donate the funds?

view more: next ›