CountSessine

I can't do it because it's illegal, that's why. And I would have to go to city council to have them change the law (rezone the land). And the neighbors will campaign against me and argue against density. I own the land - I paid good money for it and it's mine in every sense of the word, but the neighbors will argue that their preferences and whims outweigh both my property rights and the rights of other Canadians to have a home.

That is not an accurate summary. Earlier...

Either we limit Canada's crazy-high immigration rate (1% of population every year) or we build more homes which is mostly gated by illiberal zoning laws passed by municipalities. But both of these policies are very popular so you'll be swimming upstream, politically

Perhaps you and I should get together and we can explain to a group of detached-house-owning baby-boomers/empty-nesters why liberalizing or eliminating zoning laws would lead to optimal land utility and that they should be ok with allowing row-houses in their neighborhood. And that would be an interesting conversation.

I completely agree with you - housing prices are high, mechanically, because of scarcity. But scarcity exists because voters like high housing prices. The truth is that most Canadians own property and are perfectly happy with their $1-3 million in equity. And regardless of their stated preferences for affordable housing, the revealed preference for scarcity and expensive housing is clear.

All I want is to shut down people looking for someone to validate their cognitive dissonance.

<sigh>

As long as we have folks buying with the intention of parking money or using homes as an "investment" you're going to have competition with much deeper pockets

Why do you think foreign investors want to overpay for a Vancouver Special? And what do they do with it once they buy it?

Do they live in it? If so, what you're upset about is population growth. Sounds like scarcity!

Do they rent it out? If so, that's a social good in a city with a 1% rental vacancy rate and sky-high rents are as bad as high housing prices. Sacrificing the rental market to save home-buyers sounds like scarcity!

Do those foreign investors leave the house empty? Who cares if we can just build more? And we know (https://doodles.mountainmath.ca/blog/2022/02/14/unoccupied-c...) that Vancouver doesn't seem to have more empty homes than most cities it's size. But of course we can't "just build more". Scarcity!

The truth is that we've seen developers market condo pre-sales in China playing-up the region's dysfunctions - pointing out our 2% population growth rate and the difficulty in building new housing. Investors come to Vancouver because they know the game is rigged - they know that housing prices are mostly one-sided and hedged by political interference. Canada's real estate is "too-big-to-fail" and is mostly up-side.

Don't talk to me about housing prices unless you deal with scarcity.

Of course not, and I didn't say that I'm completely against reforming the real estate industry and the bidding process. But it won't fix expensive housing.

It's all bullsh*t if it doesn't address scarcity. In 2016 we had had 10 years of 2% population growth in Vancouver and 1.2% housing stock growth and we wanted to blame foreign investors, so we enacted the foreign-buyers tax. That was going to fix high housing prices.

In 2017 we all got angry about dirty money and our casinos being used as money-laundromats so we commissioned the German report to detail what was going on and surely that would show that real estate was expensive because of money-laundering. It said prices might have gone up by 6% because of money-laundering. So that's 6% of 400%.

In 2021 we started talking about investors driving up the cost of housing, ignoring the fact that investors typically become landlords and in cities with rental vacancy rates hovering around 1% (Vancouver's was 0.4% in 2017!!!), that sounds like a good thing.

It's all bullsh*t and it's all a distraction that let's us ignore scarcity. I've decided that no matter how justified that housing reform is (ie open-bidding), I refuse to support it before we deal with scarcity because we'll deal with open-bidding and then say, "Ok ... let's see where we are in 3 years time now that we've fixed that!"

Deal with scarcity or f*ck off with talk about housing prices. Don't expect me to validate your cognitive dissonance.

Stop championing scarcity by blaming scapegoats. Either we limit Canada's crazy-high immigration rate (1% of population every year) or we build more homes which is mostly gated by illiberal zoning laws passed by municipalities. But both of these policies are very popular so you'll be swimming upstream, politically.

While you're at it, you could go after other wildly popular policies that lead to high housing prices, like the primary homeowner capital gains tax exemption (probably, by value, the biggest tax dodge in the industrialized world), and Canadian cities' extremely low property tax rates (0.3% of assessed value in Vancouver, for example).

“Isn’t ruled by Vladimir Putin” is highly predictive of GDP, but “has a warm-water port” is far more predictive.

Who is doing well? Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Georgia, Azerbaijan.

Who isn’t doing well? Kazakhstan, Kirghizistan, Tajikistan…

There are other variables. “Who has oil”, for example. But “who has unencumbered access to world trade through the sea” is the best.

The reason landlocked countries have lower GDP is that they have to negotiate trade agreements at a disadvantage with small numbers of neighbours rather than just shipping goods to the whole world over the seas.

Switzerland has always been able to/had to find a niche like banking or secrecy or regulatory arbitrage to prosper. But in theory they suffer from the same problem - limited trading partners and limited leverage.

Something to keep in mind is that land-locked countries experience slower economic growth and have lower GDPs than countries with access to ports. Russia is mostly restricted to their Black Sea ports but they still have something. Break Russia up and you’ll be condemning a lot of people to a lower standard of living long-term.

It's just that you're just doing it through a buyback rather than a dividend because dividends in the US are taxed like plain-old income and buybacks turn into capital gains and are taxed less.

Every time I've heard a militant Chinese unification advocate talk about Taiwanese unification, they scoff at the idea that the Taiwanese would actually resist a PLA invasion. Now that possibility can't be ignored.

"You may not be interested in war, but war is very interested in you."

If you weren’t forced to join then, in theory, management could subvert and then break the union by hiring lots of new employees who are compensated to “opt-out”.

I agree completely. But if you're in the CCP, and a Chinese patriot, you understand that that makes peaceful Taiwanese reunification even less likely. Also, as long as Taiwan is defacto-independent, there's a terrible risk that they will declare themselves officially-independent. That would be a humiliating loss of face for the CCP and at the very least would probably precipitate a power struggle within the party.

There is deep history between Taiwan and China, and it is this history that is the main reason why China eyes Taiwan. Think of it like if California rebelled and became a separate country from the US 50 years ago. How would the rest of the US think about California?

Again, I completely agree.

The CCP understands (or at least was predicting back with Jiang and Hu) that eventually China will democratize. Taiwan is a democracy right now. Democratic countries almost never re-unite into a single country. I can only name one instance of this happening in the last 70 years, and in some ways East Germany wasn't really a democracy yet.

The CCP knows that Taiwanese reunification will never really happen peacefully. Leaders will talk about it, they'll negotiate a bit, but then it won't happen because the status-quo is always more attractive. They know that their only chance at national reunification is now or in the next 10 years or so.

It's now or never. It has to happen by force or it will never happen. If China swallows Taiwan and then democratizes, that can be managed - a restive province can be placated and bought-off. But if China democratizes before reunification, then Taiwan is separate forever.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ovD0aLdRUs0

The Kansai region has an increasing population and real estate prices are still in decline or stable.

Also Japan did not have a lot of nimby mentality blocking new housing, to my knowledge

Yes, they did - prior to 2001 when the national government took zoning authority away from municipalities.

At the time they were talking about integrated compute units between CPU and GPU, mapping GPU register space into CPU address space, linking/unlinking CPU and GPU pipelines, etc etc. And the CPU and GPU teams would be working on this while also having to produce top-shelf stand-alone CPUs and GPUs to fight on 2 separate fronts against entrenched and capable competitors. It didn't really seem possible or even desirable at the time.

I also don't understand why having a GPU would improve their chances with console vendors. Those vendors could have still selected AMD CPUs but cut separate deals for the GPU with other companies. This is a business AMD is already and was already in. They do this in all sorts of markets like network switches.

Has Intel done anything with Altera? I’m curious.

AMD’s acquisition of ATI is generally viewed as a strategic error. Does this make more sense?

Interesting - in the talk.origins days this was called the "Gish Gallop".

In practice, everyone who debates you is sealioning you because they don't see what is so clearly obvious to you. And they just never stop being wrong! And if they weren't wrong, wouldn't they be able to change your mind? Ergo, they're wrong!

The awful truth is that there is such a beast. UTF-8 wrapper with UTF-16 surrogate pairs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CESU-8

Oh goodness.

I don't support the protests or their aims, but remember that there were a hell of a lot of protesters in CHOP and BLM in general carrying and displaying Marxist and Soviet iconongraphy. Making the whole BLM movement answer for the 80 million dead Chinese peasants and Kulaks would be pretty stupid. Do you really expect BLM to be policing their ranks like that? If you cut them a break for a few ignorant fools in their protests, why is this any different?

Don't be crazy. This whole situation is bad enough what with the break-down in law and order without hysterically shouting about Nazism.

I've always thought that this was because NA has air pollution laws that are strictly and honestly enforced and that that would make diesel cars difficult to offer.

Ironic, because back in the 70's when there were more CoE designs driving around in the US, it was generally known through crash tests that CoE cab trucks were a lot less safe than conventional cab trucks in front-end collisions because of the driver's distance to the collision.

If CoE trucks have gotten safer in front-end collisions, it's because a lot of engineering work has been done to mitigate this old problem.

I've known several owner-operators, friends of family mostly, and yes, they routinely strip and repair their own kit. It's a lot cheaper and very often faster than taking it into a shop.

I'm always astonished how US Americans try to justify poor engineering with...

O_o