Magic BroomCycle 🧹🚲
@magicbroomcycle.bsky.social
Anonymous urbanist lurker with roots in the DC area. My bicycle is my magic broomstick.
Reposted by Magic BroomCycle 🧹🚲
"we don’t set different air quality standards or fire codes based on neighborhood. If density restrictions actually protected public health, we could identify a scientifically 'safe' density level and apply it uniformly citywide, as we would with any other health-related regulation."
November 24, 2025 at 4:00 PM
"we don’t set different air quality standards or fire codes based on neighborhood. If density restrictions actually protected public health, we could identify a scientifically 'safe' density level and apply it uniformly citywide, as we would with any other health-related regulation."
I didn’t disagree with you. It’s true that without safety regulations, the free market will provide dangerous and horrible housing, as pictured.
That’s why I said there has to be a balance between the free-wheeling unsafe 1800s and the frozen, unaffordable housing regulations of today.
That’s why I said there has to be a balance between the free-wheeling unsafe 1800s and the frozen, unaffordable housing regulations of today.
November 19, 2025 at 6:34 AM
I didn’t disagree with you. It’s true that without safety regulations, the free market will provide dangerous and horrible housing, as pictured.
That’s why I said there has to be a balance between the free-wheeling unsafe 1800s and the frozen, unaffordable housing regulations of today.
That’s why I said there has to be a balance between the free-wheeling unsafe 1800s and the frozen, unaffordable housing regulations of today.
They’re going to charge the price that the market allows them to.
And yes, landlords/owners can lobby to make building new housing harder and keep prices high, but they are also not going to want social housing built for the same reason. Either way we have to convince politicians not to listen.
And yes, landlords/owners can lobby to make building new housing harder and keep prices high, but they are also not going to want social housing built for the same reason. Either way we have to convince politicians not to listen.
November 19, 2025 at 6:24 AM
They’re going to charge the price that the market allows them to.
And yes, landlords/owners can lobby to make building new housing harder and keep prices high, but they are also not going to want social housing built for the same reason. Either way we have to convince politicians not to listen.
And yes, landlords/owners can lobby to make building new housing harder and keep prices high, but they are also not going to want social housing built for the same reason. Either way we have to convince politicians not to listen.
So you agree it was affordable, you just disagree that it was housing. Fair enough.
November 19, 2025 at 6:16 AM
So you agree it was affordable, you just disagree that it was housing. Fair enough.
Profit = sale price - cost.
Increasing the cost doesn’t increase your profit. You could increase the sale price by more than it cost, but if people will pay that higher price for the same good then why not just increase the price without increasing the cost?
Increasing the cost doesn’t increase your profit. You could increase the sale price by more than it cost, but if people will pay that higher price for the same good then why not just increase the price without increasing the cost?
November 19, 2025 at 6:06 AM
Profit = sale price - cost.
Increasing the cost doesn’t increase your profit. You could increase the sale price by more than it cost, but if people will pay that higher price for the same good then why not just increase the price without increasing the cost?
Increasing the cost doesn’t increase your profit. You could increase the sale price by more than it cost, but if people will pay that higher price for the same good then why not just increase the price without increasing the cost?
It’s certainly a balance, but I think we can say the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. A lot of the restrictions in place are not keeping people any safer.
November 19, 2025 at 5:51 AM
It’s certainly a balance, but I think we can say the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. A lot of the restrictions in place are not keeping people any safer.
Because there’s not a free market for housing in NYC. Housing supply is artificially constrained by government intervention.
November 19, 2025 at 5:47 AM
Because there’s not a free market for housing in NYC. Housing supply is artificially constrained by government intervention.
Preferences are forged from experience, not coded into our DNA. Is there a cultural preference for a house, a yard, and a white picket fence? Yes, but that could change fast if folks got a taste of good, affordable urban living.
November 19, 2025 at 1:52 AM
Preferences are forged from experience, not coded into our DNA. Is there a cultural preference for a house, a yard, and a white picket fence? Yes, but that could change fast if folks got a taste of good, affordable urban living.
Hard to say Americans prefer suburbs to urban environments when we don’t build any high quality urban environments.
November 19, 2025 at 1:49 AM
Hard to say Americans prefer suburbs to urban environments when we don’t build any high quality urban environments.
To add context, $0.05 in 1906 is equivalent to $1.80 today. The current fare is $2.90.
The 5 cent fare would stay in place until 1948 (equivalent to $0.67 in 2025), when it was raised to 10 cents ($1.34).
This was also a fully elevated line, as the BRTC opened its 1st underground line in 1908.
The 5 cent fare would stay in place until 1948 (equivalent to $0.67 in 2025), when it was raised to 10 cents ($1.34).
This was also a fully elevated line, as the BRTC opened its 1st underground line in 1908.
November 15, 2025 at 2:02 PM
To add context, $0.05 in 1906 is equivalent to $1.80 today. The current fare is $2.90.
The 5 cent fare would stay in place until 1948 (equivalent to $0.67 in 2025), when it was raised to 10 cents ($1.34).
This was also a fully elevated line, as the BRTC opened its 1st underground line in 1908.
The 5 cent fare would stay in place until 1948 (equivalent to $0.67 in 2025), when it was raised to 10 cents ($1.34).
This was also a fully elevated line, as the BRTC opened its 1st underground line in 1908.
Mamdani at least understands that free fare needs to be government funded. Critics can argue that money would be better spent on service improvements, but it is a budget-coherent strategy to provide free bus fares via subsidy.
November 9, 2025 at 3:55 PM
Mamdani at least understands that free fare needs to be government funded. Critics can argue that money would be better spent on service improvements, but it is a budget-coherent strategy to provide free bus fares via subsidy.
Of course this dogmatic commitment to the 5 cent fare would eventually bankrupt the Subway. It was a rider-first policy, but it needed to be backed up with some other funding source or indexed to inflation for the long term health of the system.
November 9, 2025 at 3:00 PM
Of course this dogmatic commitment to the 5 cent fare would eventually bankrupt the Subway. It was a rider-first policy, but it needed to be backed up with some other funding source or indexed to inflation for the long term health of the system.
There’s definitely a type of person who sees the housing market as only consisting of owner-occupied homes and refuses to accept a broader definition of supply.
Not necessarily what’s going on here but definitely a sentiment I’ve run into a lot.
Not necessarily what’s going on here but definitely a sentiment I’ve run into a lot.
November 2, 2025 at 2:11 AM
There’s definitely a type of person who sees the housing market as only consisting of owner-occupied homes and refuses to accept a broader definition of supply.
Not necessarily what’s going on here but definitely a sentiment I’ve run into a lot.
Not necessarily what’s going on here but definitely a sentiment I’ve run into a lot.
I misread this as well. The left is two different colors associated with the Blue Jays (11 apart from each other). The right is Dodger blue, which is 1 number off from the top color on the left.
October 29, 2025 at 4:14 AM
I misread this as well. The left is two different colors associated with the Blue Jays (11 apart from each other). The right is Dodger blue, which is 1 number off from the top color on the left.
Reposted by Magic BroomCycle 🧹🚲
part of what gets me is the particular double-think involved in left-nimbyism. left nimbyism has been the dominant mode of thinking in urban governance for like fifty years, they won the war and achieved total control of policy, and they *still* think they're the plucky upstarts fighting The Man
October 25, 2025 at 8:38 PM
part of what gets me is the particular double-think involved in left-nimbyism. left nimbyism has been the dominant mode of thinking in urban governance for like fifty years, they won the war and achieved total control of policy, and they *still* think they're the plucky upstarts fighting The Man
HMS Captain Spice
October 3, 2025 at 2:09 AM
HMS Captain Spice
Seems like it would not do well in a storm
September 26, 2025 at 4:39 AM
Seems like it would not do well in a storm
Reposted by Magic BroomCycle 🧹🚲
More than anything, I want a system where rules are straightforward and predictable.
Having “fake” rules just teaches people that rules don’t matter.
Choose the rules you actually want and then actually enforce them.
Having “fake” rules just teaches people that rules don’t matter.
Choose the rules you actually want and then actually enforce them.
September 24, 2025 at 3:38 PM
More than anything, I want a system where rules are straightforward and predictable.
Having “fake” rules just teaches people that rules don’t matter.
Choose the rules you actually want and then actually enforce them.
Having “fake” rules just teaches people that rules don’t matter.
Choose the rules you actually want and then actually enforce them.
Size is ok but lack of shade would be a problem for me (talking about the left pic, right is good)
August 16, 2025 at 5:14 AM
Size is ok but lack of shade would be a problem for me (talking about the left pic, right is good)
I assume this is more expensive than some other options but this is so much nicer in terms of space and traditional form. Though this is also a much smaller building than the others, more missing middle than apartment block.
August 16, 2025 at 5:11 AM
I assume this is more expensive than some other options but this is so much nicer in terms of space and traditional form. Though this is also a much smaller building than the others, more missing middle than apartment block.
Interested to hear what people think about balconies re curb appeal. Some renters do put a premium on having some outdoor space-is that compatible? (I think it definitely is but want to hear what others think)
August 16, 2025 at 3:25 AM
Interested to hear what people think about balconies re curb appeal. Some renters do put a premium on having some outdoor space-is that compatible? (I think it definitely is but want to hear what others think)
Reposted by Magic BroomCycle 🧹🚲
I often use it to reformat lists. Easy to drop a list of things in, not asking it to "think," very easy to see if errors were made in the output.
Love it for that but I've just described a $5 tool, not a $500b one.
Love it for that but I've just described a $5 tool, not a $500b one.
August 11, 2025 at 6:46 PM
I often use it to reformat lists. Easy to drop a list of things in, not asking it to "think," very easy to see if errors were made in the output.
Love it for that but I've just described a $5 tool, not a $500b one.
Love it for that but I've just described a $5 tool, not a $500b one.