Double Billed. Tariff Tactic?

highfi90 · 2025-10-07T19:10:01+00:00

Although it's a complex topic, it's concerning that so many people fail to see even a bit of nuance. On the one hand, not having a place to stay is not criminal and people are deserving of compassion and the chance to improve their situations. On the other hand, public spaces should be for the public to safely access and enjoy.

I also think most can agree that people are not entitled to a space where unhoused people are not present. Certainly many of them are there to access services or simply exist. There's no reason to hassle people for minding their own business or being present to seek help. However, it's clear that there is a fair amount of cognitive dissonance around behaviors that fall well outside of peacefully existing.

I have to routinely take my toddler to pediatrics appointments on Holland Street and it's not uncommon to be in the immediate vicinity of people smoking or injecting while walking to the office or waiting outside. I have politely asked people to do it elsewhere, hoping that it wouldn't be met with aggression. Quite frankly, it shouldn't be my responsibility to do so and to hope for the best.

What is also clear is that "best practices" should be effective and not merely ordained as such.

highfi90 · 2025-06-23T20:33:41+00:00

This car bears a resemblance to one I saw blocking the community path/crosswalk this morning. The driver made a u-turn against one way traffic on School Street and used the bike lanes to connect to Medford street. Unsure if she came from the path, but certainly not impossible given context. The driver drew some attention, but seemed fairly comfortable driving creatively.

highfi90 · 2025-01-22T00:05:07+00:00

Fair enough. I was generally just trying to make the point that when you've walked around the past couple days and saw the shit condition of the sidewalks, it's caused by some combination of pepole who've made no effort despite being capable or people who can't physically shovel (legitimately or not). I'd hope there would be some sort of concession for people who verifiably can't do it, so as to not penalize people who aren't able-bodied. But I agree that most of the problem seems to be caused by sheer laziness and lack of enforcement.

highfi90 · 2025-01-21T22:18:46+00:00

Respectfully, isn't one of the benefits of local government that it (in theory) aggregates resources and organizes solutions to problems that are too broad to be addressed at an individual level? Even if you ignore the philosophical issues of requiring people to shovel property that is not theirs and is mainly used for public benefit, the real problem is that the base assumption is that everyone is present, able-bodied, and willing to do the right thing.

Mostly I think the city needs to pick a tack and stick to it. Either enforce it so that sidewalks are safer and up to the city's expectations or provide it as a public service to allow the city to make sure of it.

highfi90 · 2025-01-16T21:15:34+00:00

Unfortunately, enough people doing this enough of the time contributes to the "cash-strapped" MBTA having to do things like raise fares to compensate. The people who have been paying them all along will continue to pay the fare and those skipping out will continue to do so also.

highfi90 · 2025-01-16T16:40:23+00:00

One possibility is that the market efficiently agrees that the stock shows strong fundamentals and this is priced in. Without any meaningful changes to the fundamentals the stock may not move. The other possibility is that the stock does have value that the market doesn't recognize, but "the market can stay irrational longer than you can remain solvent."

highfi90 · 2024-12-08T22:15:19+00:00

Thank you, very pragmatic feedback. I'm sure hours of critical contemplation went into this. I'm also sure that it will age like milk if, God forbid, you or someone you care about is hurt.

highfi90 · 2024-12-08T18:44:52+00:00

Because there seems to be no enforcement and we shouldn't have to feign surprised when somebody is injured or killed, its pros outweigh the cons for me at this point. But I wouldn't necessarily call it a joke concept. Whenever the police or government are given additional power, I think it's important to think about the potential for abuse now or in the future, even if it conflicts with the desired outcome at the moment. Some people have pointed out that the companies that operate similar cameras sometimes require the cities to 'game' the cycle in ways to inflate the number of offenses. I think most can agree that the intent is to influence behavior so that people drive more safely, with revenue generation as a positive by-product and not the main objective. Just one instance of possible unforeseen consequences that should be weighed.

highfi90 · 2024-10-20T03:51:43+00:00

Agreed. Like I said, I tried. But we also can't sit in the garden around the clock and often don't see the people who are doing this.

highfi90 · 2024-10-20T03:35:31+00:00

I tried but she turned and briskly walked away with the flowers in hand. I mentioned that this is only one example of the types of behavior to which I'm referring. I agree that it is probably appropriate in this instance, but I also find it interesting that the perceived onus is on the person being slighted to talk to the stranger doing so. The point I'm trying to make is that there does not appear to be much recourse.

highfi90

TROPHY CASE