Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[Agema]

If you think landlords would en masse turn to AirBNBs, which represent a far far less stable source of income, if they were stopped charging inordinately high unaffordable rents, then you're living in the clouds.

AirBnBs are effectively only viable for large-scale industry in tourist hotspots.

Some picturesque towns and villages are almost terrifying when you look at the houses and see pretty much every second one has one of those key-safes indicating a rental. Then bear in mind a load of the others don't have a permanent resident much of the year, just the owners prefer to not have strangers in their house when they aren't there. These places are almost zombie villages in a sense: barely any permanent residents, and the few left gradually driven out by exorbitant prices.

A place like Padstow has a large, ugly, modern housing estate on the outskirts of town. The locals live in the housing estate. What used to be the town, the old building and harbourfront, is just rentals, second homes, and a handful of the affluent. In North Yorkshire, you can see notices that houses (usually still rentals, and usually uglier new builds in less favourable locations) are restricted to the locals, otherwise the town would collapse because no-one would be left to staff the shops, pubs, hotels and other basic functions.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Oh come on, the claim that there was close to 50/50 male and female superheroes pre-2008 is rediculous.

I checked the list of DC and Marvel films prior to that year, the only female-led installments I could find were Supergirl, Catwoman, and Elektra.

How one feels about this is up to them, but it's factually wrong to say there was a 50/50 split.

And how many Marvel films were there (note Spiderman was more Sony pictures & The Incredible Hulk was universal I think and the Fantastic Four was another company)

I'm not saying it was 50:50 I am saying they were common enough that people knew of them existing and female heroes were in the public consciousness and appearing in the cinemas

 

[Hawki]

And how many Marvel films were there (note Spiderman was more Sony pictures & The Incredible Hulk was universal I think and the Fantastic Four was another company)

I'm including those as Marvel films, since they're based on Marvel properties.

Counting feature length films, at least 17, and that gets even longer if you include stuff like direct-to-DVD. Elektra is the only film I could find with a female lead. So of all the Marvel films made pre-2008, that's less than 10%.

The MCU, on the other hand, has had 29 films, and not counting co-leads, has had two female led films. So again, still less than 10%.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I'm including those as Marvel films, since they're based on Marvel properties.

Counting feature length films, at least 17, and that gets even longer if you include stuff like direct-to-DVD. Elektra is the only film I could find with a female lead. So of all the Marvel films made pre-2008, that's less than 10%.

The MCU, on the other hand, has had 29 films, and not counting co-leads, has had two female led films. So again, still less than 10%.

2 films. So less than 10% of the films

Including She Hulk

It's

5 Female superhero shows (6 if you count Hawkeye because the main reason for that was to introduce Kate Bishop the new Hawkeye)
7 Ensemble cast shows
7 or 6 male shows depending on how you want to count Hawkeye.
(I've not included Modark and Hitmonkey in this for obvious reasons)

So depending on how you want to consider it MCU's TV series are either 26% female 37% male the rest ensemble or 32% female lead 32% male leads so exactly balanced

 

[Silvanus]

if you set a price floor above the equilibrium price there will be less of it, and less new people like refugees and immigrants and newcomers will be able to have a chance to buy/rent it.

And yet currently, most urban landlords are happy to set the rent far, far, far, far above the equilibrium price, costing out those people and raking in exorbitant profits from the few who're able to pay it.

Rent control didn’t work in Berlin Germany nor did it work in Cambridge Massachusetts.There is no free lunch.

Rent control failed in Berlin because it was struck down in court. It was extremely popular with renters while it was in effect, and brought costs down.

We're not asking for a "free lunch". We're asking for a reasonably priced lunch. Because currently, lunch is obscenely expensive, and the chef can charge a lot less and still turn a healthy profit.

What we need to do is build more housing across the board but progressives only look at building more rent controlled apartments, and lower income housing.

So you want to.... increase the supply of housing for sectors that don't need it at the same time as increasing it for sectors that do need it? Necessitating gigantic costs, to solve a problem that doesn't exist, purely at the benefit of high earners and landlords?

 

[Silvanus]

Less stable but also by design it's fine being that.

I think landlords will disagree. Why would they take a massive hit to their income and stability by changing their business model entirely, when letting is still massively profitable even with a rent cap?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I think landlords will disagree. Why would they take a massive hit to their income and stability by changing their business model entirely, when letting is still massively profitable even with a rent cap?

Because Air BnB has a far higher potential depending on the rent cap.

 

[Silvanus]

Because Air BnB has a far higher potential depending on the rent cap.

It's also much less stable. That potential would only pay off in exceptionally favourable circumstances. And letting is already extraordinarily profitable.

 

[Terminal Blue]

If you rent control, there will be more AirBnbs, and fewer rented buildings depending on where you live.

How do you imagine that would work?

If there are more AirBnBs in a particular area, then they will end up competing with one another to attract the finite number of tourists. You can't just move into the hospitality sector and expect to succeed and earn money, it requires skills and work which the average landlord probably isn't willing or able to provide.

The laws of supply and demand are essentially ingrained in human nature.

If anything is ingrained in human nature, it is self-interest. People typically want and seek the outcome that benefits them the most. That is the mechanism on which supply and demand operates. If I want to buy something, I generally want to pay the lowest price that I can. If I am selling something, I want to charge the highest price that I can. The level of bargaining power which the person buying and the person selling possess thus determines the overall value.

In short, it's not supply and demand. Supply and demand doesn't actually matter. It's bargaining power. If something is extremely plentiful and yet one person has a monopoly on it, then that person has complete control of the price. The price of the PS5 is not determined by the number of PS5s in existence, in fact it's kind of the other way around. Sony decides the price it wants to sell and then produces the number of PS5s it believes it can sell at that price.

And this is how you end up with market failure, a situation where individuals acting in a rationally self-interested way produces a socially destructive outcome. In a healthy, competitive market, a surplus of rental properties would drive down the price of renting, but the rental market isn't a competitive market. Landlords are not particularly motivated to compete with each other and lower prices, they are motivated to cooperate in driving up house prices even if it hurts the economy as a whole.

You can build new houses. But who is going to buy them? It will be the same people and rental corporations that already own most of the rental market, and they will not have any reason to lower their prices. At the end of the day, if you can't buy a property yourself, you either rent or become homeless. People don't have a choice, and landlords know it. People will accept paying rent because they don't want to sleep in a cardboard box, not because they're being offered a good deal.

To bring rent prices down, you can't just throw money into subsidizing property developers and hope it pays off, you need to reduce the bargaining power of landlords relative to tenants. Increasing access to affordable housing is one way to do that. It's not the only way, but it's one that would actually work.

 

[Gergar12]

And yet currently, most urban landlords are happy to set the rent far, far, far, far above the equilibrium price, costing out those people and raking in exorbitant profits from the few who're able to pay it.



Rent control failed in Berlin because it was struck down in court. It was extremely popular with renters while it was in effect, and brought costs down.

We're not asking for a "free lunch". We're asking for a reasonably priced lunch. Because currently, lunch is obscenely expensive, and the chef can charge a lot less and still turn a healthy profit.



So you want to.... increase the supply of housing for sectors that don't need it at the same time as increasing it for sectors that do need it? Necessitating gigantic costs, to solve a problem that doesn't exist, purely at the benefit of high earners and landlords?

I just don't want more San Franciscos where no housing gets built. Also if you are in a high-demand area like NYC, your costs will increase in areas such as building material, and labor costs. High-demand areas demand higher prices. My house costs less than downtown Columbus which costs less than NYC and San Francisco.

 

[Trunkage]

2 films. So less than 10% of the films

Including She Hulk

It's

5 Female superhero shows (6 if you count Hawkeye because the main reason for that was to introduce Kate Bishop the new Hawkeye)
7 Ensemble cast shows
7 or 6 male shows depending on how you want to count Hawkeye.
(I've not included Modark and Hitmonkey in this for obvious reasons)

So depending on how you want to consider it MCU's TV series are either 26% female 37% male the rest ensemble or 32% female lead 32% male leads so exactly balanced

How is this proving your point?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

How is this proving your point?

She-Hulk a series being pushed as normalising female superheros in a market and area with shows that either are equal in number to or only slightly less than (1 less than) male counterparts..........

 

[Gergar12]

I am sick of people saying because we had high taxes in the 1950s, or white men were in charge that is why the 1950s were so great for the United States. The US left the war mostly unscathed vs the USSR, Europe, and Asia. Other than South America which was under the Monroe Doctrine, the US had no economic competitors for a long time. Therefore other countries were forced to buy its goods spurring their economy. It wasn't because of high taxes, if that were the case every country would just raise their taxes to 100% and enjoy super economic growth forever. Also, the money from WW2 led to many GIs going to college, getting a house, etc.

High taxes when done for future goods can be effective, but there is a thing as too much future goods production. EG USSR, and their engineering, and military spending which at one point had a nuclear weapons stockpile that was a lot bigger than the US.

The 1950s

The 1950s were a decade marked by the post-World War II boom, the dawn of the Cold War and the civil rights movement in the United States. “America at this

www.history.com

.

" The United States was the world’s strongest military power. Its economy was booming, and the fruits of this prosperity–new cars, suburban houses, and other consumer goods–were available to more people than ever "

So unless you want to start World War 3 without nukes(A possible future occurrence), AND come out unscathed from it. Good luck getting 1950s-style growth.

Also, I put this here because the high taxes argument is more prevalent.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

And those surgeries are still medically necessary, same as facial reconstruction

If a doctor says they are medically necessary... I really don't understand what else you want from me.

Indulging this stupid hypothetical for a moment.

Why not?

What is actually wrong with people having elective surgery if it will demonstrably make them happier or improve their quality of life?

It doesn't treat the core issue they have most of the time.

I am sick of people saying because we had high taxes in the 1950s, or white men were in charge that is why the 1950s were so great for the United States. The US left the war mostly unscathed vs the USSR, Europe, and Asia. Other than South America which was under the Monroe Doctrine, the US had no economic competitors for a long time. Therefore other countries were forced to buy its goods spurring their economy. It wasn't because of high taxes, if that were the case every country would just raise their taxes to 100% and enjoy super economic growth forever. Also, the money from WW2 led to many GIs going to college, getting a house, etc.

High taxes when done for future goods can be effective, but there is a thing as too much future goods production. EG USSR, and their engineering, and military spending which at one point had a nuclear weapons stockpile that was a lot bigger than the US.

The 1950s

The 1950s were a decade marked by the post-World War II boom, the dawn of the Cold War and the civil rights movement in the United States. “America at this

www.history.com

.

" The United States was the world’s strongest military power. Its economy was booming, and the fruits of this prosperity–new cars, suburban houses, and other consumer goods–were available to more people than ever "

So unless you want to start World War 3 without nukes(A possible future occurrence), AND come out unscathed from it. Good luck getting 1950s-style growth.

Also, I put this here because the high taxes argument is more prevalent.

Pretty much every time the US was great was because of some massive advantage.

 

[Terminal Blue]

It doesn't treat the core issue they have most of the time.

"Most of the time" is doing a hell of a lot of work there, and even then it's simply not true.

What are the "core issues" you imagine drive such cases, and how do you think they should be treated?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

So no-one else has brought up DC's Hispanic Heritage cover art


You know where they insisted on changes to an artists work to make it more reflective of diversity and inclusion goals. Proving once again that Woke and Racist are just the same thing these days only one is pretending to be the good guys lol

 

[Trunkage]

She-Hulk a series being pushed as normalising female superheros in a market and area with shows that either are equal in number to or only slightly less than (1 less than) male counterparts..........

More female superheroes shows are only happening because Disney is too chicken shit to give women a movie but want to pander to the segment of the audience. So they give them a cheaper TV show instead

I.e. its that wokism thing you go on about

Now, can you please point out Gao was ONLY talking about TV shows? Because I only ever saw her comment in relation to TV and movies together. Because, if you combine these, female superheroes are uncommon. Its only when you place a bunch of assumption on the data you get the skewed result you've cited

 

[Trunkage]

It doesn't treat the core issue they have most of the time.

This is like banning someone from having an appendectomy when they have appendicitis if they were also depressed

 

[Terminal Blue]

You know where they insisted on changes to an artists work to make it more reflective of diversity and inclusion goals.

Didn't happen though did it.

Proving once again that Woke and Racist are just the same thing these days only one is pretending to be the good guys lol

No, this is just old style racist.

It's sad that you don't even see that the side you're arguing in support of is the one pushing for diversity and inclusion against a management structure that is worried it won't play with what they imagine is their predominantly white audience.

Given how explicit the backlash has been in describing this as what it is (racism) I'm surprised you aren't heroically championing DC's position against the threat of cancellation by woke twitter mobs who see racism everywhere..

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Didn't happen though did it.

I dunno why don't you be the judge, lets see if you can put the clues together with this one

No, this is just old style racist.

Based on what happened with Alex Rider and other properties......... there is no difference, same thing different name and coat of paint and attempted PR like with Latinx and all the other weird nonsense that's been pushed. Still just old school racism just with better PR now because some gullible fools think they're saving the world.

It's sad that you don't even see that the side you're arguing in support of is the one pushing for diversity and inclusion against a management structure that is worried it won't play with what they imagine is their predominantly white audience.

I'm sorry did we go back in time 10 years or more and I didn't notice because a lot of modern corporations have been pushing the diversity message in hopes of getting a bigger audience

Given how explicit the backlash has been in describing this as what it is (racism) I'm surprised you aren't heroically championing DC's position against the threat of cancellation by woke twitter mobs who see racism everywhere..

I thought you said it didn't happen, there was no changes?

But Nah I'll leave the corpo love to the woke lot who keep rushing to various companies aid and running interference and generally being useful idiots for them