Josh Messmer 🐝☀️🇨🇦

Am I blocked by this person or does bluesky protect posts when the poster blocks their quoter?

Especially in market or supply-adequacy contexts where prices / costs can tell you the story more clearly.

Collectivism is so dead that people think giving every individual a veto is the most collectivist you can be

Just seems like local initiative/energy is really compatible and complimentary (non econ meaning) to the social value of pro sports more generally

Doesn’t solve the supply issue you bring up, necessarily.

But you could also say something like a Canada/US league should have 50 states + 10 provinces (3 territories) = 60 (63) spots in every league. Or multiply that by some factor > 1. But then still use relegation to filter quality.

I’ve always wished pro sports teams were socialized in some way. Owned by local government or at least local (recreational) sports orgs. Some sort of quota % of players being from the same state / province. Any city can sponsor its own team, and then use euro soccer style relegation/promotion.

Because that’s basically leaving the “character” up to the local governments, while using a very simple policy lever to ensure local aesthetics aren’t entirely trumping basic regional supply elasticity/ welfare/ needs.

I also think provinces regulating [FAR-maximum]-minimums (“can’t zone lower than 2FAR” for ex.), while giving municipalities the flexibility to set the coverage and setbacks to determine how that density looks / interacts with the surroundings… is a good compromise.

Sounds like the internet.

This is better imo, though, than having Oak St and Renfrew stations be on Broadway, Burrard and Granville station being downtown (on different crossstreets!), and, say, Dunbar being on 41st.

Burrard-Hastings, Burrard-Broadway, Burrard-41st is unambiguous.

You also get the issue of having a dozen+ stations with the same starting noun, running along whichever street axis you name first. Eg, either: Broadway-Main, Broadway-Cambie, Broadway-Oak; or Cambie-Broadway, Cambie-King Ed.

broadway line flips that); and some lines don’t follow the grid (Expo in Vancouver); not so bad for Fraser Hwy line or a hypothetical Kingsway line where the grid intersects clearly despite the diagonal.

Part of me thinks you should order the cross streets to be [Direction of Line] -[Cross street] so the name communicates direction of travel as well as point info. Eg, should be Cambie-Broadway, not Broadway-Cambie.

But then you run into issues at transfers (eg future

lines/stations in the future that might end up with confusing disambiguations.

This might be long in some cases, but it will be entirely clear. “Cambie-41st”. No doubt about where that is, even if it’s not as cool as “Oakridge”. People can learn the damn grid.

imo, stations should default to the cross streets wherever possible, seconding to historic neighborhood or riverway names when crossstreets don’t make sense.

Streetname order should be consistent: NS-EW or vice versa. That way you future proof the name in case of nearby

markdown omnia vincit

Yup. City planners literally printed this in an apartment open house I went to in Vancouver. An apartment as a “shield” for rich homeowners, from arterial noise and pollution. Hundreds of apartment renters used as human shields.

Now do speed cams

Every news story about “San Francisco’s ‘war on cars’” is about drivers who are absolutely furious that they live in a city.

What’s the redesign? I would have thought this was on the better end of things. Raised crossings across 10th? &?

Trying to go back to my reply guy roots on this site, compared to my snarky quote tweet mode-of-late on X

I think their relative rarity compared to here is why the “libraries should have xyz too” posts always get popular. Libraries are many Americans main/sole referent for public, casual, indoor spaces.

Prob varies a lot by local government, tho.

IIRC, the rolling stock qualifies as light rail, but most people use the word to mean the general form/aesthetic of rail transit that’s mostly not-grade-separated, so it’s also kind of wrong to call it LRT

the majority of Canada (say, more than 3 provinces) seems incredibly unlikely to me — far, far from inevitable.

Several independent state/ province clusters in an EU like structure seems more likely, even, as far as unlikely scenarios of an entire NA political body go.

It seems inevitable that sometime in future human history the current Canada / US border changes. A province or two joining the union; a state or two joining confederation; a few border states + provinces going out on their own.

But all 50 US states being in the same country as

I think that intermediate intervention between shelter and social housing (plus low social housing capacity) is where BC has failed / is failing.

We have lots of groups working on these interventions/ aids, so it’s clearly a lot harder than just wanting to do it.

finding/building a purpose and then engaging in it with a team/ peers every week.

Cash transfers are essential for the freedom/flexibility that makes it not feel like you’re being railroaded into a ‘proper’ life just b/c someone else needs employment numbers in excel to go up.

My assumption is programs that help people build a basic, healthy social network (eg group midway/transition meetings) and to start making proactive choices (eg cash transfers) are most important.

Seems like career/education development programs do both those things simultaneously, by

Will be very interesting to see the results of this in ~5 years. I imagine the success/failure will have a lot to do with the social programs between the shelter rung and the social housing rung.

Oversight as well as deescalation and physical restraint techniques, I think. We never got to any of the practical questions.