Which is not small, but it bears out my anecdotal impression as an NYC resident- most of the people leaving are people who would have left in the next few years anyway, the pandemic just moved up their timeframe.
And no one moved to avoid the “egregious lockdowns”, it’s just that working from home is a lot harder in an NYC apartment compared to a house.
While I'm aware of specific exceptions, I expect that's the norm. People who had moving out of the city on their radar screens deciding that the past year was as good a time as any to accelerate the process.
The question will be whether the usual cycle (of about the past 20 years) of an equal or larger cohort of young people move in to replace them.
I've noticed a lot of NY plates where I live too. Since most people who live in NYC don't own cars, it seems like these must be people who are being displaced. I know quite a few New Yorkers who have moved upstate or out to Long Island semi-permanently.
Anecdotally, many NYCers own cars as family units, especially common in the non-Manhattan suburbs. It's just not typically a 1:1 adult/car pairing like the suburbs are.
Specifically that's 45% of all households, not 45% of residents. Those rates are super low the closer you are to manhattan, and much higher as you reach the outer parts of the outer boroughs [https://edc.nyc/article/new-yorkers-and-their-cars]
Curious how much of that rate is because of AirBnB's and VRBOs closing out with no travelers and these units hitting the market vs people moving away...
Not sure if it’s that many but who knows. Below 34th St is around 17%. Rents are about 20% cheaper than before the pandemic. Here’s an article detailing this:
In June they were already back to only 11% down, and it’s been accelerating since then. I doubt it’ll stabilize at pre-pandemic levels for a while, but it’s nowhere near where it was even 6 months ago
Just so you know, you're dead, and it looks like this comment is what did it. Many of your comments are reasonably substantive, so I thought you should know.
If punishment for murder was sitting in a luxury European prison with a vintage PS3[0] and not death or life, I’d have whacked my former con-artist business partner years ago and likely be out by now.
Worked for a company with a similar approach (circa 2010) and we got rejected and had to just use the one. Can’t say I feel Apple is wrong for fighting app spam, however.
But Apple created the problem. No company that offers white label applications wants to have to upload a completely separate app for every client, but there is no other option.
The requirements military action serves are always political. As with software, yes, things would be easier if the requirements were ignored for the sake of implementation, but that misses the whole point of the activity.
Is this intentional, desired policy on their part or more of a "means to an end?" I understood it that, historically, the Taliban were anti-opium. I suppose if Western nations pursue a North Korean containment style policy, that this would continue similar to NK methamphetamine operations.
> This is a very ironic comment considering that the soviets, not the US liberated Europe from Germany.
You're responding to another human, such that its a locality sensitive sentiment. To a French, Belgian or Dutch national the US is the savior of that war - the Soviets being uninvolved in their liberation.
As an aside, I wonder if there exist an Slavic-language HN where Eastern Europeans argue that American steel was the true winner in the war and the Soviets don't deserve glory...
> As an aside, I wonder if there exist an Slavic-language HN where Eastern Europeans argue that American steel was the true winner in the war and the Soviets don't deserve glory...
At least it is sure that many of them wished the Americans had liberated them, not Soviet.
The USSR for all its achievements was a harsh place to be for everyone except the luckiest ones.
"In America there is huge differences between rich and poor - in USSR everyone is equally poor".
> To a French, Belgian or Dutch national the US is the savior of that war - the Soviets being uninvolved in their liberation.
While the Soviet Union obviously never fought in Western Europe, the article that the person you are replying to quotes numbers from right after the war, where the majority of French people said that the soviets were the ones who were the most responsible for the outcome of the war. And that does make sense, considering for how long they bore the brunt of Nazi aggression, and the number of casualties speak for themselves.
There is a comparison with now, where of course most people would give most of the credit to the Americans. I think a lot of people in Western Europe aren't aware what the costs of the War in Russia were.
We did have a goal. The building of the nation of Afghanistan into a functioning liberal democracy. Of course Afghanistan barely qualifies as a nation and many (most?) have no desire to live in anything resembling a Western nation-state. Short of a truly brutal, imperialist takeover or the installing of a strongman puppet to do the dirty work for the next 50 years, there's no real chance of transitioning the peoples and their cultures over to our way of things. Americans likely have no stomach for such things, and the state of realpolitik is such that this would be truly untenable on the world stage.
> We did have a goal. The building of the nation of Afghanistan into a functioning liberal democracy.
Come on. You can't build a functioning liberal democracy in a place like that while doing zilch to promote even the basics of civil society and liberal norms. (And no, elections and ballot boxes are quite irrelevant; they're simply a red herring. Electoral processes have zero legitimacy to begin with in a non-liberal society.) The whole idea is quite simply preposterous.
I do believe the thing you’re missing with Western forces is that the events listed were aberrations rather than the norm.
Also, should you not like “Delta,” and frankly I don’t see how a Greek letter is aggrandizing, you could always go with “CAG.”
Last, what you’re claiming is neither discussed in TFA nor supported by historical record. CAG was created as a result of European terrorist hostage events.
Greek letters first. I’m not particularly knowledgeable of American military nomenclature. Where there Alpha, Beta, and Gamma forces first? “Delta” suggests small but vitally important difference to me; think calculus or mechanics (delta-vee FTW). Perhaps my inner nerd is getting the better of me, and I’m reading things into the name that weren’t present in the mind of the originator.
Where these aberrations? Maybe. It seems logical to me that for every outrage gaining notoriety, there are N more that escape attention. My own father said he saw plenty of brutality against civilians while fighting in the British army in North Africa and later Burma (now Myanmar obvs). It has been 50 years since tens of thousands of Catholic refugees crossed the border between the UK and Ireland. It was soldiers and policemen they were fleeing from. Britain had its dirty wars in Malaya, Oman, and Kenya (with some convenient record destruction for the latter). The US seems to have covered itself with less than glory in the prisons of Baghdad, and the black sites in Poland and elsewhere. France’s record in North African is pretty ugly. Italy dealt brutally with Ethiopia. The Russians raped there way to Berlin (yes, and fought bravely against the Nazis). Maybe aberrations aren’t as aberrant after all.
I’m not here to draw (false) equivalence between Delta/the Paras/whatever and the Nazis. But I stand by the idea that there’s something odd about professional soldiering. And not everyone who does it is in the business for there love of democracy and the flag! People who kill other people in the furtherance of national goals, rather than in direct defence of their homes need extra attention, and extra love sometimes, but always extra vigilance.
When Delta was founded, the US Special Forces were broken down into three team types.
Alpha Team - (or A-team) was a group of 12 men who would operate in the behind enemy lines together.
Bravo detachment - A similarly sized headquarters group of men who would stay behind and support and communicate with multiple A-teams. (Sort of like a NASA mission control team)
Charlie detachment - An overall administrative headquarters team over multiple A and B groups.
When a new form of special forces was organized with a different focus for the team's capabilities, they just grabbed the next word in the Nato phonetic alphabet - Delta.
This is new information for me; very cool; I assumed there had to be a reason. What's your background in the subject matter?
To the gentleman's post above, it does seem to me that Delta has a more negative public image as compared to say the Navy Seals... is there any specific reason for that? or do you disagree with that comment?
Source: I am not an operator nor ex-military, but my line of work lets me interact with a bunch of ex-SOF guys.
It's interesting you say that, as my understanding is that the perception is flipped within the SOF community. Most of the guys I've spoken with have nothing but positive things to say about people from Delta. On the other hand, at least two Rangers have told me that they were explicitly told to stay away from the SEALs (specifically, Team 6) when deployed together.
As I understand it, the average age in Delta is significantly higher than that of the operators in SEAL Team 6 and that has something to do with it.
The A-team is effectively a platoon (it’s the size of a squad—well, about the size of a USMC rifle squad, a bit bigger than an Army rifle squad—and normally commanded by a Captain, which is more typical of a company, but its the organizational level below the company, which typically has ~6 of them.) A B-team is the company HQ element (so a company has one B-team as well as the A-teams.) A C-team is the battalion HQ element (an SF battalion has ~4 SF companies + 1 C-team.)
> but anyone involved in illicit trade with Pakistan is, as a side effect, funding terrorist groups like Taliban.
I'm not particularly educated or opinionated on the topic. With that said, why is it not possible one is simply funding criminals with monetary intent in an operation like this - does the Taliban have a strangehold on criminality throughout Pakistan?
Then one can update to provide a prominent note of clarification, rather than rewriting history. This deprives conspiracists of the ability to go "See, they rewrite history" while providing the full story, warts and all.
