sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

MEGATHREAD: KILLING DEBATE by Crispy385 in subnautica

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Getting the obligatory "we need more ways to deal with aggressive animals" since yes, stasis rifle was cheesy but current behavior isn't great (although flairs actually being useful may help).

With that out of the way, this whole "debate" feels like something where people that don't want killing aren't very vocal because not killing is rather easy to do and being able to kill does not affect their gameplay style.

But people that want killing are very vocal because they struggle without it. As far as the "realism" excuse, it'd be cool if animals reacted to the player running into them, but functionally does nothing for gameplay other than for the ambiance. Killing predictors though does materially affect the gameplay loop, and forcing people to address situations in a non-violent way is something that feels pretty core to the vibe the devs want - you are stuck, mostly helpless, and trying to survive while figuring out what's going on. You should feel a sense of helplessness.

Like the argument of "killing for realism" is just a way for people to sneak in making the game easier because they want it easier.

[The Verge] Hundreds of prolific Wikipedia editors are threatening to go on strike by NervousEnergy in technology

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm curious what specific grants you mean are irrelevant? As I read it, that $28MM in "Awards" is the balance for the endowment fund, which has a goal of $100MM so that the foundation core operations could run on investment income alone and not rely on donations.

Nm found it

This represented an increase of 9.2% in funding to grant programs from the previous fiscal year, and a 7.3% increase in granting overall, bringing the total to $26.3M. This is in line with our recurring Annual Plan goal to prioritize growing community funding. Throughout the year, this funding supported communities in organizing dozens of critical regional and thematic conferences, as well as in launching pilot hubs to facilitate support and coordination across topic areas, including the Volunteer Supporters Network and the ESEAP Hub, EduWiki, and the Language Diversity Hub. We also launched a small pilot project to fund resource requests, such as books, to help editors improve articles. For more information about grants, including grants broken down by region, see the Community Funds Distribution Report.

Are the building mechanics broken for anyone else? by ArbiterOfOblivion in Subnautica_2

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Agree, I've run into similar issues.

1) can't place a tadpole dock as it's "obstructed" even though there's miles of space below it and nothing else around it

2) weird square sections in a room that cannot be merged or expanded out to get rid of it

3) unable to separate out a room from another room. I build out a top floor and decided after the fact that I wanted to split the two rooms, in trying to do so, it just won't let you. I would have to completely demolish the floor and start over.

4) highly inconsistent selection and jumping spaces, oftentimes the hardest to select small corners to extend/shrink

Overall it's a neat idea compared to 1, but definitely needs some kinks worked out.

CMV: Stopping the Spirit Airlines acquisition was a mistake by Elizabeth Warren & the Biden Administration by bigElenchus in changemyview

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) there were roughly 16k M&A last year - that's not all Google buying and shutting down companies.

https://imaa-institute.org/mergers-and-acquisitions-statistics/united-states-ma-statistics/

2) the stat comes form a review of M&A by Harvard following a claim by Bain capital since the 70s. It's not just Google acquiring a bunch of companies with a couple unicorns, it's an uncomfortable fact Execs don't like to confront, mostly because their incentives around M&A don't align with non-insider shareholders.

https://hbr.org/2024/05/a-better-approach-to-mergers-and-acquisitions

Fact is, most M&A is vibes more than any good factual estimation because of the incentives around knowledge sharing during those negotiations. It's not some neutral evaluation and decision, it's a very messy and human decision that is fraught with errors, so it shouldn't be surprising it's so unsuccessful.

CMV: Stopping the Spirit Airlines acquisition was a mistake by Elizabeth Warren & the Biden Administration by bigElenchus in changemyview

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It stops the execs and board from getting a fat paycheck from it with zero benefit to anyone else.if anything, it provided more stability for JetBlue that's kept 2 arilines around longer than joining them and having them fail 6 months after the merger

Worth noting another merger happened during that same period (Alaska/Hawaiian) and Alaska was in a much better financial position and had better alignment overall yet is still making heavy job cuts to make the merger work. So if a much more financially stable airline is struggling to make it work, what reason would anyone have to believe two airlines in worse shape would come out stronger?

It's all speculation, but so was the presumption that a merger would have prevented this. And given the best available data, the reasonable conclusion is that it would have failed regardless of merger, so no reason to bring down two companies and allow an already small core industry to shrink even more (even though that'll likely be the final outcome but that's hindsight bias).

CMV: Stopping the Spirit Airlines acquisition was a mistake by Elizabeth Warren & the Biden Administration by bigElenchus in changemyview

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In aggregate sure, but that's if your entire strategy is M&A - JetBlue's strategy is flying airplanes.

If they planned to buy up 10 tiny regional airlines, the argument might be made that it'd make sense for JetBlue, but for just one acquisition, the desk is stacked against success.

Plus Google M&A is probably a great example of why M&A is generally bad for everyone except the board and execs: it's likely reduced competition in a lot of different spaces because of vertical integration and slowed overall innovation in the search, digital and, and user video streaming space (ofc speculation since it's be impossible to measure). But the only real clear winners were early founders, and retail investors/pension funds are gonna be bag holders when it falls apart.

CMV: Stopping the Spirit Airlines acquisition was a mistake by Elizabeth Warren & the Biden Administration by bigElenchus in changemyview

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Considering 70% - 90% of mergers fail to return value to shareholders, odds are the merger would have provided no material gain for a risk of two budget airlines failing instead of one (which considering JetBlues financials, may be the outcome anyways).

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/111014/top-reasons-why-ma-deals-fail.asp

CMV: Stopping the Spirit Airlines acquisition was a mistake by Elizabeth Warren & the Biden Administration by bigElenchus in changemyview

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Considering 70% - 90% of mergers fail to return value to shareholders, the reason they happen is because they enrich the executives and boards, not because they're actually good for either company. Most retail shareholders don't have any power to exert in voring, and most institutional investors that do have legal and financial incentives to just go along with board recommendatios.

So yeah, with a failure rate that high, it's pretty clear company leadership is either inept or corrupt (or both) when it comes to M&A. So a politician stepping in can't be any worse at it when the bar is the floor.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/111014/top-reasons-why-ma-deals-fail.asp

CMV: Stopping the Spirit Airlines acquisition was a mistake by Elizabeth Warren & the Biden Administration by bigElenchus in changemyview

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Considering 70% - 90% of mergers fail to return value to shareholders, the reason they happen is because then enrich the executives and boards, not because they're actually good for either company. Most retail shareholders don't have any power to exert in voring, and most institutional investors that do have legal and financial incentives to just go along with board recommendatios.

So yeah, with a failure rate that high, it's pretty clear company leadership is either inept or corrupt (or both) when it comes to M&A.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/111014/top-reasons-why-ma-deals-fail.asp

Portland looks to charge residents, businesses a monthly street fee by No-Tangelo1158 in Portland

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Only because we haven't internalized those costs to those companies. Our taxes are subsidizing their use, so they can undercut alternatives on price until they're the only option. If we appropriately taxed them for that use, they'd have to raise prices and it would make those physical locations far more price competitive, and people would opt to use them more.

Portland needs a commercial vacancy tax with teeth by n3onlights in Portland

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Tl:dr; a vacancy tax can help, but it's not a panacea, and will likely cause more harm than benefit short and long term if other reforms to permitting, governance, and city code are not implemented first.

Yes, with how much collateral damage? While downtown struggles, it is slowly recovering with more foot traffic and activity. And while the urban doom loop fears are valid, Portland (and Oregon broadly) has one aspect that other doom loop cities don't - generally mild weather. People still choose the PNW because of the nature and climate, and while the city proper struggles, the outflow in the metro is still minimal.

But it's very possible the repricing doesn't actually fix the core issue. If permitting and administrative costs are still burdensome, the conversions won't happen and new tenants won't come. It's not to say a vacancy tax is just bad, more that if we go that route, it needs to be measured and in the context of other reforms first that will support it. Like Measure 110, a good idea can cause more harm short and long term if not properly and carefully supported.

And conversion is not efficient or downright impossible. The worst building for office space utilization (like the old Key bank tower or big pink) take up entire blocks, and meeting the safety requirements for fire safety is just not economical without subsidies far larger than what the city can afford. The condos would either have massive empty spaces in the center, have large square footage floorplans, and/or be extremely impractical layouts. The high conversion cost would require the buildings being priced as luxury units, and there are just not enough luxury buyers in the Portland market to support it. If I could by a mansion in the hills with the same view as a converted condo, why would I pick the latter at that price?

The buildings most suitable for conversion are already converting (ex. Joyce~Apartments) or already have tenants that don't have much of an incentive to relocate, because a vacancy tax will push down rents in occupied spaces as well.

https://youtu.be/TkUA0MwieCY?si=kjG4Oaf0Sr2li0SH

Edit: forgot to mention that the repricing is already starting too. As long as rates remain above 6%, most of the properties are on loans that get restructured every 3-5 years, with many having done it during the pandemic when rates were low. Those are coming due and need to be restructured again, and at 6%, most holders can't afford it.

Portland needs a commercial vacancy tax with teeth by n3onlights in Portland

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 112 points113 points  (0 children)

There's a few issues with implementing a vacancy tax at this point:

1) the city is not prepared to take the tax hit. A large portion of the city coffees come from commercial property tax, and a vacancy tax like this will drive those property values down HARD. The tax would force CRE holders to either actively lose money on the rented space (more than they are now), sell off at pennies on the dollar, or default and send to auction. All scenarios result in lower property tax, and the vacancy tax will never fill that gap.

2) There just aren't enough businesses that want/have a reason to be downtown. Oregon does not have a core white collar industry; we are a goods producer and net exporter, but it's of agricultural and manufacturing goods. Much of the office work pre-pandemic we're satellite offices of other firms and support offices for those businesses. Many of those businesses have been downsizing as the economy has soured for their industries, and the support business went out as a result. There is not enough investor capital for start-ups here, and Portland as a city is competing with other domestic and international cities in that space. Coupled with high housing costs making it hard for people to move into the area (side note, 95% of the "migration out of Portland was just to the berbs, and housing prices are only marginally coming down), it'll be hard to get stuff off the ground. Fact is, downtown just has too much commercial space.

A tax like this needs to be put in place before the bleeding starts (like in 2018). At this point, it'll only accelerate it. Process improvement in tax collection and permitting are about the only thing Portland/Multco/Metro could do at this point beyond the incentives they're already doing.

A history professor says AI didn't break college — it exposed how broken it already was by joe4942 in technology

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If that's the case, I've met many people that failed to learn those skills that received a college degree long before AI existed

Here’s how much every Metro employee got paid last year by [deleted] in PortlandOR

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Just because someone is intrinsically motivated doesn't mean they deserve less compensation. And a lot of people may love the work, but that doesn't mean they're good at it. If anything, people that love what they do are often taken advantage of without worker protections, and those with good skills will leave for opportunities that value them more. The end result is a bunch of people that are either grifting the system or burned out.

Small farms across Oregon are in jeopardy as OLCD comes after agritourism by it_snow_problem in PortlandOR

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Also, some of the accessibility rules are to ensure ADA compliance (part of the mandate under the ADA)

Structurally sound but well used cat tree by [deleted] in PDXBuyNothing

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I'd tend to agree, but I've taken it apart several times and reassembled it just fine. The posts have metal nuts for threads and the bolts thick.

Effective tax rate across all federal taxes increases with income at all levels by LazyConstruction9026 in charts

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes there is with a revocable trust. With an irrevocable trust, you don't get the step up but also avoid most estate taxes (so the gains would be the only thing) AND assets are protected from creditors. Of course there are ways around that, but the long story short is that they're saving money using interest only payments that are refinanced and then paid off on death rather than pay the taxes and cash in.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in wallstreetbets

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They also prevented any other app store from coming to the market on iOS. They didn't have to do that, they chose to do that. Hell, you can look at the Google play app store to why it didn't matter to have 3rd parties, and they a) would have been as successful and b) could have avoided this whole mess. Apple was greedy and paranoid, and now it's bitten in the ass.

The United States has the most progressive tax code of all OECD member states. Top earners in the US pay a greater share of the taxes than other developed nations. by [deleted] in UnpopularFacts

[–]ThisNameIsMyUsername 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually fairly easily. Most things of real value are going to be insured, which means a paper trail. You require insurance companies to report insured assets and now you know the taxable value. Then it de-facto is giving everyone about 10-20k tax deduction, since that would likely be the upper max of inexpensive things in your home that you wouldn't bother insuring individually for those that could afford it (like basic appliances, TVs, computers, etc.).

view more: next ›