The Swamp

mister d wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 2:47 pm Interesting. Maybe the same thing always happens for migrant vessels but the attention/framing is different.

Not irony, just proof that many, many people in the world are utter cunts.

On Wednesday, a guy drowned swimming the channel between England and France to raise money for charity, first reported on the BBC today...

BBC reporting that the "debris" includes the landing frame and a piece of the rear cover of the sub.

Presser at 3p.

The guy on BBC is in firsthand contact with members of the crew that have seen the images themselves. He was friends with 2 of the passengers.

The one thing I will say of the coverage: I've read enough and seen enough of the experts to come to the conclusion that this was a hull breach (or something structural) and all of this countdown to their air supply being depleted was just... Look, I get it, they don't want to be negative or morbid.

But you've got millions of ppl wringing their hands over oxygen when the probability that they died fairly quickly the day they went down is extremely high.

brian wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:13 pm

Livvy should really rizz that kid up and beg him to go to LSU.

That is one of the greatest headlines I have ever seen.

And now that it's clear that the passengers are all mingling with Titanic victims in heaven, I just have to ask - even if you are filthy rich, shouldn't you do some due diligence before dropping $250 k to travel to the bottom of the ocean?

Johnnie wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 3:11 pmLivvy should really rizz that kid up and beg him to go to LSU.

He’s 36 and has been arrested (maybe imprisoned?) for threats against female DJs.

Odds on it imploding at the wreck site and. Now they’ve fucked that up worse than breaking in half did?

Pruitt IV wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 3:34 pm
And now that it's clear that the passengers are all mingling with Titanic victims in heaven

You know, I was thinking about this the other day; if you suffocated in a submersible two miles under water, can your soul escape to get to heaven?

The Sybian wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:23 pm

Pruitt IV wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 3:34 pm
And now that it's clear that the passengers are all mingling with Titanic victims in heaven

You know, I was thinking about this the other day; if you suffocated in a submersible two miles under water, can your soul escape to get to heaven?

I don’t think they suffocated in the traditional sense. As in, their bodies collapsed immediately depending on depth. But I suppose that detail may never be surmised outside of finding something substantial that was intact.

ETA: your hypothetical scenario is certainly possible. But heaven or hell I reckon once I leave this body it won’t matter all that much.

They're awake now and there's nothing you can do about it. Coming for Jersey first. Not to be an asshole to Syb that just where theyre going.

I’m never gonna not think this is funny and not gonna apologize for it. Only thing funnier would have been Bezos blowing himself up going to space but only because that was on live TV

Dan Crenshaw knows who is really responsible...

Looking good, Long John Forehead.

Between this and the crypto bro crashing out on Jeopardy!, this has been a good week for the proletariat.

HaulCitgo wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:39 pm They're awake now and there's nothing you can do about it. Coming for Jersey first. Not to be an asshole to Syb that just where theyre going.

Orcas have been in Jersey for years. Someone didn't watch Jersey Shore.

A_B wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:17 pm

The Sybian wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:23 pm

Pruitt IV wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 3:34 pm
And now that it's clear that the passengers are all mingling with Titanic victims in heaven

You know, I was thinking about this the other day; if you suffocated in a submersible two miles under water, can your soul escape to get to heaven?

I don’t think they suffocated in the traditional sense. As in, their bodies collapsed immediately depending on depth. But I suppose that detail may never be surmised outside of finding something substantial that was intact.

ETA: your hypothetical scenario is certainly possible. But heaven or hell I reckon once I leave this body it won’t matter all that much.

Everyone knows souls go to heaven when a submarine collapses and the people are crushed, and I know that’s likely how they died. (Although I think the Bible said something about it being easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven, so they may be fucked). But if people ran out of air in a sub, can their souls escape an air locked, pressurized sub? The Bible doesn’t provide answers! Not that I’ve ever read it, but safe assumption.

Put it down after the first few chapters, I guess?

DSafetyGuy wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 8:46 am Looking good, Long John Forehead.

I'm old enough to remember when liberals were insisting that the government pay employers to keep their employees on during the pandemic.

Giff wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 9:32 am

HaulCitgo wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:39 pm They're awake now and there's nothing you can do about it. Coming for Jersey first. Not to be an asshole to Syb that just where theyre going.

Orcas have been in Jersey for years. Someone didn't watch Jersey Shore.

Don’t make me go down there, kidnap you, and bring you to the mean streets of North Orange.

L-Jam3 wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 11:05 am

Giff wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 9:32 am

HaulCitgo wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:39 pm They're awake now and there's nothing you can do about it. Coming for Jersey first. Not to be an asshole to Syb that just where theyre going.

Orcas have been in Jersey for years. Someone didn't watch Jersey Shore.

Don’t make me go down there, kidnap you, and bring you to the mean streets of North Orange.

You can just buy the plane ticket!

Steve of phpBB wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 10:42 amI'm old enough to remember when liberals were insisting that the government pay employers to keep their employees on during the pandemic.

As someone who came from multi-generational wealth with a reported net worth in eight figures, he A.) probably didn't need the loan or B.) could have paid it back.

DSafetyGuy wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 11:41 am

Steve of phpBB wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 10:42 amI'm old enough to remember when liberals were insisting that the government pay employers to keep their employees on during the pandemic.

As someone who came from multi-generational wealth with a reported net worth in eight figures, he A.) probably didn't need the loan or B.) could have paid it back.

Sure, and I supposed I could have "afforded" to pay out of pocket to keep my receptionist and secretary employed. But if I had to do it out of my pocket, I wouldn't have done it. I'm glad to give to charity, but not to that extent.

The point of PPP was that the government was going to pay employers to keep people employed. The loans were offered and accepted with the expectation that they would be forgiven. In other words, they weren't loans. They were subsidies. There was no expectation that anyone would pay the loans back unless they failed to do what the program required. Because we all wanted employers to keep people employed at a time when the entire society was undergoing major upheaval and there was a legitimate fear that the economy would collapse.

Steve, I think his point is that a lot of people got loans who didn’t need them or deserve them.

Steve of phpBB wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:25 pm

DSafetyGuy wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 11:41 am

Steve of phpBB wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 10:42 amI'm old enough to remember when liberals were insisting that the government pay employers to keep their employees on during the pandemic.

As someone who came from multi-generational wealth with a reported net worth in eight figures, he A.) probably didn't need the loan or B.) could have paid it back.

Sure, and I supposed I could have "afforded" to pay out of pocket to keep my receptionist and secretary employed. But if I had to do it out of my pocket, I wouldn't have done it. I'm glad to give to charity, but not to that extent.

The point of PPP was that the government was going to pay employers to keep people employed. The loans were offered and accepted with the expectation that they would be forgiven. In other words, they weren't loans. They were subsidies. There was no expectation that anyone would pay the loans back unless they failed to do what the program required. Because we all wanted employers to keep people employed at a time when the entire society was undergoing major upheaval and there was a legitimate fear that the economy would collapse.

And I guarantee you they were against the stimulus checks to those who needed them as well.

I don't have a problem with those PPP loans because I think they helped a lot of companies. But I do have a problem with getting a PPP loan and then acting like people that need assistance more regularly are a blight on society.

Steve of phpBB wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:25 pmSure, and I supposed I could have "afforded" to pay out of pocket to keep my receptionist and secretary employed. But if I had to do it out of my pocket, I wouldn't have done it.

I'm sure they'd love to read this.

sancarlos wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:26 pm

mister d wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:37 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:25 pmSure, and I supposed I could have "afforded" to pay out of pocket to keep my receptionist and secretary employed. But if I had to do it out of my pocket, I wouldn't have done it.

I'm sure they'd love to read this.

Our receptionist knows that she was able to keep getting paychecks even though she wasn't coming into the office and she wasn't receiving anyone.

Our secretaries also know that they kept receiving full checks even though their workloads dropped by about half for several months.

mister d wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:37 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:25 pmSure, and I supposed I could have "afforded" to pay out of pocket to keep my receptionist and secretary employed. But if I had to do it out of my pocket, I wouldn't have done it.

I'm sure they'd love to read this.

Our receptionist knows that she was able to keep getting paychecks even though she didn't come into the office for several months (and so she wasn't receiving anyone).

Our secretaries also know that they kept receiving full checks even though their workloads dropped by about half for several months.

sancarlos wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:26 pm Steve, I think his point is that a lot of people got loans who didn’t need them or deserve them.

That probably is the point - but it misunderstands the whole point of PPP. PPP was not intended to help businesses. So whether a business "needed assistance" doesn't matter.

PPP was designed to keep people employed when everything was going to shit. It was the government paying employers to keep their employees on payroll. Not the government lending employers money to keep employees on payroll.

It was a great success. It was a great liberal success. We avoided major economic collapse, and between PPP and various other Covid relief programs, the poverty rate in the US actually went down. And if we run into another situation like that, we should do it again. But if business owners are going to be called freeloaders for participating in the program, that provides a disincentive to participate the next time around.

The rub is the fact that employers would have kept 2/3 of the employees but got paid for all of them. That goes straight into owners pockets particularly those for whom revenues not tied to in person transactions. The good part was it happened quick but too quick to avoid waste and there was already the unemployment benefits which were slower but effective. Too effective and combination more or less added turbo boost to inflation such that housing is all but unaffordable now and the labor market has been not good enough for long enough that employers and consumers behaviors changing to compensate for less and less competent employment. Even if inflation is now trending to normalcy, fair to ask in retrospect whether the economy would have been better off with a less aggressive policy. Regardless serious questions about the length of government stimulus policy. That said the mind really does forget COVID days fast. Better check the 100 page thread

HaulCitgo wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 4:52 pm The rub is the fact that employers would have kept 2/3 of the employees but got paid for all of them. That goes straight into owners pockets particularly those for whom revenues not tied to in person transactions. The good part was it happened quick but too quick to avoid waste and there was already the unemployment benefits which were slower but effective. Too effective and combination more or less added turbo boost to inflation such that housing is all but unaffordable now and the labor market has been not good enough for long enough that employers and consumers behaviors changing to compensate for less and less competent employment. Even if inflation is now trending to normalcy, fair to ask in retrospect whether the economy would have been better off with a less aggressive policy. Regardless serious questions about the length of government stimulus policy. That said the mind really does forget COVID days fast. Better check the 100 page thread

I think I get what you are saying but also I might need a 100 page explainer.

Defacto rent deferrals a big factor too. Closing of courts and CDC eviction barriers went a long way towards housing inflation. Same with federal cares act rental payments. Govt paid and mandated a lot of free rents for a long time. Any sane landlord would increase rents by 20% just on those factors

Eviction filings are 50% higher than they were pre-pandemic in some cities as rents rise

At the same time, rent prices nationwide are up about 5% from a year ago and 30.5% above 2019, according to the real estate company Zillow. There are few places for displaced tenants to go, with the National Low Income Housing Coalition estimating a 7.3 million shortfall of affordable units nationwide.

DSafetyGuy wrote: Sun Jun 25, 2023 8:49 am Eviction filings are 50% higher than they were pre-pandemic in some cities as rents rise

At the same time, rent prices nationwide are up about 5% from a year ago and 30.5% above 2019, according to the real estate company Zillow. There are few places for displaced tenants to go, with the National Low Income Housing Coalition estimating a 7.3 million shortfall of affordable units nationwide.

Yeah it’s gotten crazy here. We’re having our 20yo daughter move into the condo I inherited from my mom because there’s no practical way for her to rent a place on her own.

We're seeing this trying to find a place for my son near Penn. Rents are super high.

My vague understanding of this ongoing housing issue is that it's in large part due to Airbnb. You have companies buying up houses, apartments, condos, etc. in cities so they can rent them out on Airbnb. This is creating a housing shortage and driving up prices. I haven't checked, but I bet you're seeing an opposite downward pressure on hotel room prices as they have so much more competition now.

Meh. Not saying the short-term residences aren't messing with the rental market, not sure it's having a major impact on the hospitality industry. Obviously just anecdotal, but I've spent a lot of time booking hotel space the last 2 months and rates sure didn't seem lower than they normally are. (We've booked in Denver many many times over the years, plus places that we've tended to stay while driving back and forth.)