ryanjkirk

It's certainly not strange to argue in favor of the most efficient system. If something cannot be made to be more profitable compared to its alternatives, assuming they are all priced fairly in order to to cover external costs equally, then it is not the most efficient. What economist would argue in favor of that?

It's quite a consistent argument when I say that I am in favor of taxing gas and automobiles. In fact, I think they should be taxed at much higher rates, to internalize the costs that are currently being externalized. Ideally, the costs of roads and bridges are covered by those taxes. Thus they're usage-based and not subsidized by those not using them.

I'm not sure why you think the best way to internalize the costs of car usage is to subsidize public transportation. That's just backwards thinking.

As car usage becomes more expensive due to taxation, cities will become more dense. This is the point where we can start talking about building infrastructure for public transportation, that will then make economic sense thanks to population density. It makes no sense to have a bus meander around the suburbs for hours to pick up a few riders, all traveling to different parts of town. It's an impossible idea. You have to have density first. Tax cars and gas so that they pay for their own infrastructure and environmental consequences, and density will be a natural outgrowth, at which point public transportation will be more viable.

Yes, the corner market thing you said is true. But, they were limiting. Us Americans are used to our bigger stores, specialty stores, and more choices. It'd be hard for most Americans to adapt to that.

But, it's still not easy handling small children with groceries, whether walking nearby or taking the bus. I know because I've done it. Driving is much, much easier.

Fair point about roads not being break-even, but elsewhere in the thread I did argue for higher taxes on gas and automobiles, to internalize the costs more. I don't know what break-even would look like in America, but the idealist in me says both roads and public transportation should be break-even, if not profitable.

Why would anyone want to vote to spend money on anything that will be a net loss?

Subsidizing public transportation is an economic drain on society. The correct answer is to have self-sustaining, profitable public transportation. This can only happen in cities with sufficient population density, such as NYC.

Car and gas taxes? Tax the hell out of them, since the costs right now are so over-externalized. Eventually, that will start to force more population density, and then we can talk about sustainable public transportation.

It's easy. I love the city, but I currently live in suburban hell because:

- My kids can go to a better school. A much, much better school.

- I can't fit my family in the size apartment I could afford if we lived downtown.

- Letting my kids play in the backyard is infinitely easier than packing up and heading to the park (admit it, there's not a ton of parks downtown), especially when you have a baby.

And that's not even including the benefits of the cul-de-sac, which means they can ride their bikes safely without traffic, lack of noise (and our noise won't bother neighbors), etc.

I can't tell you how much we want to get out of the burbs, but I'll be damned if I'm going to shortchange my kids' future, or make us all miserable by going three to a room. My boys are already sharing a room as it is.

Portland is a poor example. I love Portland, by the way, but we're essentially talking about economics here, and Portland is skewed. In Portland, you have people that want to live this lifestyle. They don't want the burden of the car, they are environmentally conscious, they work in the city, and they don't have kids. Sure, for them, it's doable (and you sound like one of them). This isn't usually the case. Industrial areas, where many people work, aren't dense enough to support frequent bus stops, and most families would have a hard time getting kids places without being able to drive them hither and thither.

I've lived in some of the densest cities in Europe, and families still had a hard time getting around without a car. At one point, I did get a car, and not having to deal with the scheduling hassles of public transportation made my life instantly easier.

You have to have an enormous population density for public transportation to be a break-even affair. Your Portland public transportation isn't self-sufficient, it's a net loss, and it's subsidized by taxes. Sure, it's more efficient than cars, but it still doesn't solve all the problems that cars do, as noted above (primarily for families). By the time you get the density required for public transportation to be self-sustaining, you're looking at a cost of living that is unacceptable for most families (eg, NYC).

Sure, public transportation is great for young single people. Try going to the grocery store with young kids on the bus. It's virtually impossible.

He's generalizing, of course, but it's because in the US, the suburbs incorporate into their own cities, and keep the taxes for themselves. Meanwhile, they commute into a city on a freeway paid for by the urbanites and enjoy all the benefits of city infrastructure, without paying for it.

Not sure how cities incorporate in Canada but that's how it usually is here.

I'm a customer of yours. Out of curiosity, what mailing lists do you participate in?

Agreed. I used to support a java web app and constantly had had issues with the OS X / Safari combo. Sometimes the browser couldn't find the binaries even though it was installed, but you couldn't reinstall or reinitialize it in any way. I never had any problems with Windows / Firefox.

I prefer text email in theory. It's cleaner, simpler. Text for messages, that's how the web was meant to work, right?

I also cringe when I purple text in Comic Sans, as well as other unmentionables.

Yet, when I want to emphasize something, I hate using asterisks. It's not semantically correct, and it looks ugly. And how do you differentiate between underline and italics?

For this reason I support HTML email.

WP does already own it though. With its momentum and swath of plugins, it will continue to own at least the self-hosted blog.

The reason it should branch out into being a fully-fledged CMS is exactly as the author describes: usability. It's so much easier for users than most other CMS's. Despite other deficiencies, that is huge.

Don't get me wrong, I love WordPress. And I can't stand Joomla. But Joomla works completely off relative URL's so it doesn't have to know it's location. The links work no matter what domain you put it on. You can access the CMS through example.com/~myusername/domains/joomladomain/ or myusername.example.com/domains/joomladomain/ or joomladomain.com/ and it will for fine every way. Which means SSL will work without a dedicated IP address. This would be awesome.

I've seen this page before but actually thought it to be fairly basic. What about topics such as moving wp-config.php outside of public_html, renaming the wp-admin folder, and automattic's position on some of the various 3rd-party security plugins?

One thing I don't understand, is why I can't access the admin over SSL if the Wordpress domain isn't the Apache SSL domain? For example, I can't go to https://example.com/domains/mydomain.com/wp-admin/ without getting a failed redirect. This is a major annoyance, as I can't set up another SSL site on the server without leasing another IP.

Has Automattic or wordpress.org published anything like the various guides found across the internet? I know you offered to email, but it would be great to see something published that is tested and comprehensive.

Got it. To me, those terms are more understandable.

Wait, is the term "cloud host" now being used to define shared web hosting as well as everything else it already means?

Check with your local AIGA chapter. The very best designers are usually affiliated with the AIGA.

You could also call up a print shop. They know plenty of print designers, though to be fair they're not always up on web design.

There is one actually, it's called spokt.com.