Andrew Rivas
@rivasad.bsky.social
I agree, and I personally use an ebike as my primary mode of transport, but we don’t have line of sight to winning any election on a “make cars less convenient” platform, even here in SF.
The lobbying worked because most of humanity loves having their own car
The lobbying worked because most of humanity loves having their own car
November 21, 2025 at 8:53 PM
I agree, and I personally use an ebike as my primary mode of transport, but we don’t have line of sight to winning any election on a “make cars less convenient” platform, even here in SF.
The lobbying worked because most of humanity loves having their own car
The lobbying worked because most of humanity loves having their own car
Agreed. But it’s not Waymo’s responsibility to solve public transit in the US.
November 21, 2025 at 8:35 PM
Agreed. But it’s not Waymo’s responsibility to solve public transit in the US.
Liberals: “we want more public transport. And we want the wealthy to pay for it”
Also Liberals: “No! Not like that!”
Also Liberals: “No! Not like that!”
November 21, 2025 at 4:47 AM
Liberals: “we want more public transport. And we want the wealthy to pay for it”
Also Liberals: “No! Not like that!”
Also Liberals: “No! Not like that!”
Homes *are* affordable. That’s the whole problem! The minimum wage fast food worker doesn’t live in SF, for example; they commute into the city from Oakland or Richmond because the fixed supply of homes has been allocated (by policy) to the wealthy and/or protected long term tenants
November 21, 2025 at 4:37 AM
Homes *are* affordable. That’s the whole problem! The minimum wage fast food worker doesn’t live in SF, for example; they commute into the city from Oakland or Richmond because the fixed supply of homes has been allocated (by policy) to the wealthy and/or protected long term tenants
Napa is more than $1900 for *new* tenants. There are many long-term tenants who pay that or less. Napa/San Jose/SF/etc are generally affordable for the people who are *already there*. The policy problem is specifically for *new tenants* against whom the law discriminates today
November 21, 2025 at 4:24 AM
Napa is more than $1900 for *new* tenants. There are many long-term tenants who pay that or less. Napa/San Jose/SF/etc are generally affordable for the people who are *already there*. The policy problem is specifically for *new tenants* against whom the law discriminates today
The literal answer to that question is yes.
What you should be asking is why have policies in CA favored affordability for long-term residents at the expense of new residents?
What you should be asking is why have policies in CA favored affordability for long-term residents at the expense of new residents?
November 20, 2025 at 11:56 PM
The literal answer to that question is yes.
What you should be asking is why have policies in CA favored affordability for long-term residents at the expense of new residents?
What you should be asking is why have policies in CA favored affordability for long-term residents at the expense of new residents?
Interestingly enough, San Francisco has better median affordability than Houston, TX! Isn’t that wild?
(We priced the poor people out who don’t have either long-term rent control or a generational family home. But those people are still here which is the point Matt is trying to explain to you)
(We priced the poor people out who don’t have either long-term rent control or a generational family home. But those people are still here which is the point Matt is trying to explain to you)
November 20, 2025 at 11:55 PM
Interestingly enough, San Francisco has better median affordability than Houston, TX! Isn’t that wild?
(We priced the poor people out who don’t have either long-term rent control or a generational family home. But those people are still here which is the point Matt is trying to explain to you)
(We priced the poor people out who don’t have either long-term rent control or a generational family home. But those people are still here which is the point Matt is trying to explain to you)
Which city are you talking about? Here in SF, most residents are something other than doctors and software engineers.
November 20, 2025 at 11:52 PM
Which city are you talking about? Here in SF, most residents are something other than doctors and software engineers.
I think it’s frustrating for those of us who believe in evidence-based policy over vibes-based policy. Free bus fares don’t reduce car trips, do reduce walking and cycling, and make the quality of the bus ride lower for folks who have no other options because people turn the bus into a hangout.
November 20, 2025 at 6:08 PM
I think it’s frustrating for those of us who believe in evidence-based policy over vibes-based policy. Free bus fares don’t reduce car trips, do reduce walking and cycling, and make the quality of the bus ride lower for folks who have no other options because people turn the bus into a hangout.
Pro tip: leftover stuffing is meh, but if you pop some into a waffle iron the next morning until it gets crispy on the outside, you get to enjoy the Thanksgiving GOAT a second time!
November 19, 2025 at 8:39 PM
Pro tip: leftover stuffing is meh, but if you pop some into a waffle iron the next morning until it gets crispy on the outside, you get to enjoy the Thanksgiving GOAT a second time!
Most development on robots is on things you probably don’t consider as a robot. Here’s one you might have in your house that washes your clothes for you:
November 19, 2025 at 8:18 PM
Most development on robots is on things you probably don’t consider as a robot. Here’s one you might have in your house that washes your clothes for you:
This is just not true unless you think people don’t want to live in eg Austin, Tampa, Charlotte, or Nashville
November 18, 2025 at 10:55 PM
This is just not true unless you think people don’t want to live in eg Austin, Tampa, Charlotte, or Nashville
Obama was actually fairly soft on pro-choice rights and tried to avoid it during his campaign (he was criticized for his “above my pay grade” comment). It’s easy to forget these things for sure:
www.politico.com/blogs/ben-sm...
www.politico.com/blogs/ben-sm...
Obama says marriage is between man and woman
<p>Blog: Obama defines marriage as being between a man and a woman.</p>
www.politico.com
November 18, 2025 at 2:11 AM
Obama was actually fairly soft on pro-choice rights and tried to avoid it during his campaign (he was criticized for his “above my pay grade” comment). It’s easy to forget these things for sure:
www.politico.com/blogs/ben-sm...
www.politico.com/blogs/ben-sm...
Obama ran on an explicit platform that “marriage is between a man and a woman” which I don’t think most folks considered as a progressive position at that time, and he picked Biden, a moderate, as VP.
Most of the evidence we have is that Harris lost due to inflation/high prices and immigration.
Most of the evidence we have is that Harris lost due to inflation/high prices and immigration.
November 18, 2025 at 1:52 AM
Obama ran on an explicit platform that “marriage is between a man and a woman” which I don’t think most folks considered as a progressive position at that time, and he picked Biden, a moderate, as VP.
Most of the evidence we have is that Harris lost due to inflation/high prices and immigration.
Most of the evidence we have is that Harris lost due to inflation/high prices and immigration.
I don’t think Clinton and Harris were all that similar (Clinton was MUCH better-known, for example) but I agree this isn’t conclusive evidence.
Do you think it’s more likely that it was due to being women (keeping the median voter in mind) or were eg men just experiencing more economic angst?
Do you think it’s more likely that it was due to being women (keeping the median voter in mind) or were eg men just experiencing more economic angst?
November 17, 2025 at 3:53 PM
I don’t think Clinton and Harris were all that similar (Clinton was MUCH better-known, for example) but I agree this isn’t conclusive evidence.
Do you think it’s more likely that it was due to being women (keeping the median voter in mind) or were eg men just experiencing more economic angst?
Do you think it’s more likely that it was due to being women (keeping the median voter in mind) or were eg men just experiencing more economic angst?
Well, it’s also the same strategy that Biden and Obama had.
Again, you’ll have a hard time finding a successful politician without baggage. Bernie was a pro-gun, anti-immigrant congressman for years before he became nationally famous
Again, you’ll have a hard time finding a successful politician without baggage. Bernie was a pro-gun, anti-immigrant congressman for years before he became nationally famous
November 17, 2025 at 3:49 PM
Well, it’s also the same strategy that Biden and Obama had.
Again, you’ll have a hard time finding a successful politician without baggage. Bernie was a pro-gun, anti-immigrant congressman for years before he became nationally famous
Again, you’ll have a hard time finding a successful politician without baggage. Bernie was a pro-gun, anti-immigrant congressman for years before he became nationally famous
Maybe? AOC failed the leftist purity test too and got kicked out of the DSA. There are a lot of people convinced of their own righteousness
November 17, 2025 at 3:45 PM
Maybe? AOC failed the leftist purity test too and got kicked out of the DSA. There are a lot of people convinced of their own righteousness
I wish you were right, but men have shown they are unwilling to vote for a woman in Presidential elections
November 17, 2025 at 7:11 AM
I wish you were right, but men have shown they are unwilling to vote for a woman in Presidential elections
This is pretty much the reason Newsom has Bannon on his podcast (and I’m not saying you’re wrong to feel this way). The compromises required for any nationally successful politician will fail any leftist purity test. It’s more likely Newsom will win votes from fickle moderates than the left.
November 17, 2025 at 7:06 AM
This is pretty much the reason Newsom has Bannon on his podcast (and I’m not saying you’re wrong to feel this way). The compromises required for any nationally successful politician will fail any leftist purity test. It’s more likely Newsom will win votes from fickle moderates than the left.
Yeah, Chiefs had a lot of good luck last season and bad luck so far this season. Still, I think the winner of KC-LAC gets a wild card slot
November 17, 2025 at 3:59 AM
Yeah, Chiefs had a lot of good luck last season and bad luck so far this season. Still, I think the winner of KC-LAC gets a wild card slot
They’ve got to catch one of BUF, LAC, or JAX. KC should have easy wins over DAL, LV, and TEN, and HOU at home should favor them. I think the wildcard probably comes down to LAC v KC in KC on 12/14. JAX has an easier schedule and BUF has 3 easy wins left plus the head-to-head tiebreaker over KC.
November 17, 2025 at 2:01 AM
They’ve got to catch one of BUF, LAC, or JAX. KC should have easy wins over DAL, LV, and TEN, and HOU at home should favor them. I think the wildcard probably comes down to LAC v KC in KC on 12/14. JAX has an easier schedule and BUF has 3 easy wins left plus the head-to-head tiebreaker over KC.
It’s shocking because it’s not true. Canada spends about $370B per year on healthcare (roughly $9k per person).
November 17, 2025 at 1:45 AM
It’s shocking because it’s not true. Canada spends about $370B per year on healthcare (roughly $9k per person).
The “no income tax” bit goes a loooooong way, though. You’ve got to drink and drive a LOT (and hopefully never at the same time) before you’re paying the ~$5k extra that you’re saving by not paying income tax
November 14, 2025 at 6:10 AM
The “no income tax” bit goes a loooooong way, though. You’ve got to drink and drive a LOT (and hopefully never at the same time) before you’re paying the ~$5k extra that you’re saving by not paying income tax
I’m not sure this is true for *any* marginal tax rate increase, but MA just increased from a 5% flat rate to 9% for income over $1M. This is roughly the same rate we pay here in CA for income over $72k (you hit the top rate of 12.3% at $743k). How was it so low before?
November 14, 2025 at 4:36 AM
I’m not sure this is true for *any* marginal tax rate increase, but MA just increased from a 5% flat rate to 9% for income over $1M. This is roughly the same rate we pay here in CA for income over $72k (you hit the top rate of 12.3% at $743k). How was it so low before?
Bit different when we are talking non-UK passport holder transfers these days
November 13, 2025 at 11:36 PM
Bit different when we are talking non-UK passport holder transfers these days