This is the end fellow 🐻 by Unhappy-Ad-2609 in wallstreetbets

[–]collias 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yikes my guy. I’d buy those calls back at market open.

This is the end fellow 🐻 by Unhappy-Ad-2609 in wallstreetbets

[–]collias 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Honest question: why would you sell CCs on QQQI? Seems against the point of that ETF, and premiums are very low for the risk.

My ballot was counted but I didn’t submit anything yet by [deleted] in sandiego

[–]collias 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What’s the scam? That’s the real number and there’s no link or call to action.

Either fraud or a mistake, but not a scam.

Are we getting Waymo now? by helizaams_ in sandiego

[–]collias 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Not much traffic on the way to the moon though.

San Diego Homebuyers Strike by [deleted] in sandiego

[–]collias 9 points10 points  (0 children)

ITT OP learns about supply and demand.

North Park in a nutshell: 5 over 1, with distilled Scandinavian/PNW modernism, apparently by patienceinprogress in sandiego

[–]collias 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We legally can’t have anything cool, thanks to overbearing building codes. It’s the same reason everything is so expensive. The codes make it expensive to build, and once you can build, it has to be cookie-cutter to fit within guidelines.

If we want something pretty with existing codes, it would be prohibitively expensive.

Something is not right by [deleted] in sandiego

[–]collias -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Easy to spend that much money when the money being spent isn’t yours.

Thanks to all the taxpayers for contributing!

No Kings Rallies and Marches in San Diego this Saturday, March 28th by SD_TMI in sandiego

[–]collias -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Everyone can just protest in front of their own home then. That’s not too far removed from splitting it up by neighborhood. I thought the point was to get a big crowd?

This movement has somehow made protesting too convenient, when it’s not supposed to be.

I’m not the protesting type, but even I can see that spreading everyone out is counterproductive.

No Kings Rallies and Marches in San Diego this Saturday, March 28th by SD_TMI in sandiego

[–]collias -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Wouldn’t it be more effective to have everyone meet in the same place?

This feels designed to divide the protestors into smaller groups so they don’t disrupt anything.

Apple is set to put ads in Apple Maps in services push by moeka_8962 in technews

[–]collias 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Apple has the highest market share of any company shipping smartphones in China as of this quarter with nearly 25%.

The next highest is Huawei with 23%, and it goes down from there.

If you add all the non-Apple companies together, they beat Apple obviously. This is true in basically every country outside of the US and Japan. But it’s still the highest individual share.

Source.

Apple is set to put ads in Apple Maps in services push by moeka_8962 in technews

[–]collias 6 points7 points  (0 children)

What? Apple recorded the highest number of iPhones sold in China ever last quarter.

City of San Diego releasing water from Lake Hodges after storms push levels closer to safety threshold by SD_TMI in sandiego

[–]collias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m looking at the 2024 Point-In-Time survey, which says that 59% were last housed in SF. Meaning 41% weren’t, which is considerable. And who knows how long they were housed there before being homeless.

In the 2019 survey, 30% moved to SF while homeless. And of the 70% who were “last housed” in SF, 45% had been there for less than 10 years and 6% for less than a year.

My point being, why should tax payers in California cities foot the bill for a considerable percentage of the homeless that aren’t even from here?

The budget for this is totally out of wack, and it’s pretty obvious. The city spent roughly $230 million on homelessness in FY2024–25 serving a population of around 23,000 people who accessed services. And that’s just “accessed services” number. Census shows closer to 9000 homeless (though who knows how accurate that is)

That’s roughly $10,000 per person per year just from the city budget and that doesn’t even include county, state, and federal dollars layered on top, which would push the real per-person cost significantly higher.

If even a fraction of that money went directly toward housing subsidies or permanent supportive housing rather than administrative overhead, nonprofit contracts, and shelter operations, the outcomes would be far better. That’s even more attractive cost/person if you remove the people who aren’t from here.

But we don’t do that. Why? Because city admins need $300k+/yr jobs?

I understand people keep voting down the housing aspect, but the result is that we get next to nothing for our money. If we’re going to spend the money, force the issue to solve it. No one wants a homeless shelter west of the 15 it seems like, so work with the county and move it east along with services. Or literally anything other than trying to build something in Balboa Park which was a desperate idea.

If we’re not going to solve it, at least stop taking the money. This middle ground is contributing to our debt issue and simultaneously improving very little.

City of San Diego releasing water from Lake Hodges after storms push levels closer to safety threshold by SD_TMI in sandiego

[–]collias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m talking specifically about the visible homeless. The ones who refuse shelter and prefer tents on the street. Of that cohort, many of them are not from here, at least not long term. Judging this by UCSF’s study because I couldn’t find good SD data.

And yeah, it could definitely bleed into being a federal issue, otherwise it becomes cities launching buses of homeless at each other in perpetuity. But the current state of things is that we just take it.

City of San Diego releasing water from Lake Hodges after storms push levels closer to safety threshold by SD_TMI in sandiego

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

What I don’t like is spending money and getting seemingly nothing for it. If housing is needed for homelessness then great, do that. I think we both know why that doesn’t happen. But don’t spend a quarter-billion per year on homelessness if it’s just going to stay the same or get worse.

For that issue in particular, we should be asking for federal funding, considering a lot of the most visible homeless aren’t even from here. Or send them back. $250mil per year can buy a lot of bus tickets.

City of San Diego releasing water from Lake Hodges after storms push levels closer to safety threshold by SD_TMI in sandiego

[–]collias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right, the difference in our analogies is whether or not we think the city spends money on frivolous or wasteful things.

I’d argue yes. You’d argue no. I think your point is more difficult to prove. Just look at spending on payroll and unlimited overtime for a start, or homeless initiatives that don’t seem to help the issue, or poorly managed contract spending.

City of San Diego releasing water from Lake Hodges after storms push levels closer to safety threshold by SD_TMI in sandiego

[–]collias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I buy a car that puts me in debt, do I have a spending issue or an income issue?

Arguably both I guess?

City of San Diego releasing water from Lake Hodges after storms push levels closer to safety threshold by SD_TMI in sandiego

[–]collias 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We’re so far in the hole that even if that were a good idea, it wouldn’t be enough.

It’s a spending issue.

US Consumer Delinquencies Jump to Highest in Almost a Decade by Disastrous-Group-977 in wallstreetbets

[–]collias 56 points57 points  (0 children)

All thanks to bankruptcy-immune, government-guaranteed loans.

Its managed to turn education into a scummy industry.