such a cool story!

>if it were me, they would have tripled it

Mayor Cianci, is that you?!

Dollar General store count?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIqC5y1zm-4

My old roommate once challenged a ticket on the grounds that he was guilty but had lost his job and simply couldn’t afford it. Judge had violation changed to a $25 parking ticket, so no hit on insurance. I’m sure it helps that he is a very charming, likable guy; if it were me they would have tripled it.

Your driving record is on file and accessible via the internet. They know if your driving record is clean or not.

Don't lie. Just take the offer from the Judge. They want to get through the docket and go home just like everyone else. You're small potatoes.

Assuming Cranston traffic court operates like mine and that nothing has changed in like 5 years, the judge will very clearly tell you what to say to ask for clean driving record mercy. The script was even taped to the podium, and like 95% of the other 40 people in the room did the exact same thing.

Your name gets called, you say the line, the judge says yep got it. Totally routine, takes two seconds, nothing to be worried about.

If you haven't had an RI drivers license for over 3 years where they can see the clean history, you might need to get a copy of your driving record from the previous state.

More info here: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Courts/rhodeislandtraffictribunal/PDF/KnowYourRights.pdf

I hate that section of 95. People love to lane dive there.

Awesome thank you! What kind of things would they ask you when you go? I'm not sure if I should say that I didn't stop and then plead the good drivers statute, or say that I stopped.

That’s for bringing some sense to this! I didn’t even want to try and clear this up Ahaha.

Battery generators are a great idea for apartments and condos. No noise and can be recharged by a solar panel. Goal zero, Eco Flow, Jackery, ect.

What a prick

If you have a clean driving record you will most likely be able to pay court fees and have it expunged. Which is cheaper than the ticket and doesn't negatively affect your insurance.

Damn, hahah that would have better.

What an asshole. Does he live in RI?

> Not sure why you’re getting downvoted

I think it's because they're misunderstanding the point /u/Accurate-Historian-7 is making. Historian is saying that having a backup generator will protect you when the power goes out. Beezle is arguing against a generator as a solution to energy costs going up, which no one ever claimed them to be.

You have a good point as well - if you're in an apartment, you might not have a place to hook up and run your backup generator if the power goes out. Another way people in apartments are worse off. At least it won't be you paying for the work when a pipe bursts in your landlord's building, but that will be small consolation when you get kicked out for the construction and have to figure out somewhere else to live. That's a shitty situation all around, caused by the landlord's failure to plan ahead.

FWIW, if you have gas heat and hot water, they only need a tiny bit of power to run zone valves, circulators, and thermostats, so you could run them from your car or one of those lithium ion "generators" like the brand Jackery popularized.

If you have a balcony or somewhere protected outside, a cheap generator like this one would be enough to keep your fridge cold and your house warm, assuming you have the access and know-how to change around wiring.

> His comment about generators also puts the burden on individual people to remedy their own energy-supply / cost crises

That's not the point at all, they are recommending a generator as a backup power supply for when the grid goes down, which would be a money saver. Whether it's fossil fuel or nuclear or wind, when a tree falls on the line, your power is going out.

Even a nice $1k generator is a hell of a lot cheaper than water remediation and repiping a house.

> There'd be an apartment for every man, woman, child, and many pets in San Francisco, given the size of its population.

Right, we agree so far.

> Whether they could afford them is not clear

Why isn't it clear? What are the possibilities?

To me, the owner will have a bunch of buildings that are costing them money sitting empty. They list them for $4,000/month. No one rents. $3,000/month. No one rents. They try to sell the building, but no one wants to buy a vacant apartment building. $1,500/month and people become interested.

That is supply reducing pricing.

If you don't think or aren't sure pricing will get lower, what do you think will happen instead? The owners just keep them listed for $4,000/month with 0 tenants, and just lose money into bankruptcy?

> you've cited research papers on how zoning regulations affect the number of housing units that get built in certain

If you think that's the topic you might be literally illiterate. Or, more likely, you're just misrepresenting it because in your imagination you think it makes it seem like your unwillingness to learn is you winning an argument.

> As soon as you cite an actual city, we can discuss what the effects of luxury housing have been there.

Against my better judgment, I will do some reading for you and pull out a few of the cities referenced in the paper: Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis.

Excellent points. His comment about generators also puts the burden on individual people to remedy their own energy-supply / cost crises, instead of addressing the structural causes of those crises. Rhode Island, Texas, and the U.S. as a whole could have already done more and should be doing more now to diversify their energy sources, by generating more within each state from renewable sources that are much less vulnerable to supply disruptions / cost rises. Instead, people are forced to rely on fossil fuels from external sources and are expected to buy generators to keep their lights on and food from spoiling when those volatile energy supplies are disrupted and costs soar ...

> I've offered you examples of cities that actually built a lot of luxury housing, and yet other housing there didn't get cheaper

I showed you how population growth outstripped housing growth, and why prices going up still fit my increased demand=higher prices model.

I also provided many academic resources that agree with what I'm saying.

So far, you can't even explain what you think is happening, let alone provide any corroborating evidence. I don't know what else to do to get you to explain your own logic. I asked multiple times, and provided a quote of yourself criticizing the exact behavior you're partaking in now.

> The problem isn't in asking specific questions, it's in asking vague deflective questions like, "What's your solution?"

Is it poor reading comprehension, or a failing memory that is causing you to misquote what I asked? To ask you for the third time, what do you think would happen if a million new apartments opened up in San Francisco tomorrow? I am crossing my fingers hoping that you'll actually attempt to explain what you think the housing market will do this time. Third time's the charm...?

>including in Providence itself.

Providence is in the same situation as San Francisco. Supply has dropped in relation to demand, so prices are higher.

2011: 72,600 housing units; 178,000 people

2020: 74,800 housing units; 190,000 people

That's 2,200 new units, and 12,000 new people. More demand, higher prices.

Were you just straight up making stuff up and hoping I wouldn't check, or do you really think that population has nothing to do with housing pricing?

> Give examples where your theory actually worked as claimed.

I gave you studies with data tables, which you immediately demonstrated your unwillingness and/or inability to read and/or understand. You failing to read the thing you asked for is no longer my problem. You are willingly choosing ignorance.

>Ooops, you forgot to answer the question I asked! That would look an awful lot like deflection to someone reading your comment.
>
>So let's try again...what do you think would happen if a million new apartments opened up in San Francisco tomorrow?

There'd be an apartment for every man, woman, child, and many pets in San Francisco, given the size of its population. Whether they could afford them is not clear, since adding additional apartments in San Francisco has so far not lowered rents. I've stated that dozens of times, but if you keep asking, maybe the answer will change ...

> I already did what you're requesting.

No, you haven't — you've cited research papers on how zoning regulations affect the number of housing units that get built in certain. What you cannot possibly do is actually state the name of a city where the construction of high-price housing has reduced the cost of lower-price housing.

You can't do it, because there are none. As soon as you cite an actual city, we can discuss what the effects of luxury housing have been there. But since you're certain that your theories on high-price housing are valid, why is it so hard to find even one concrete example ...?

Wow this guy has a death wish if this is his MO. Thinks he's funny mocking the accent, gonna do it to the wrong person and wind up in a landfill lol.. On the bright side this couple just got their meals comped.

I've offered you examples of cities that actually built a lot of luxury housing, and yet other housing there didn't get cheaper — that's my refutation of your high school textbook theory. What you haven't done is the opposite: Give examples where your theory actually worked as claimed.

The problem isn't in asking specific questions, it's in asking vague deflective questions like, "What's your solution?" or in responding to someone's critique entirely with questions, or with theories of what should happen, while conveniently ignoring what actually has happened and can be substantiated.

If you need further examples of cities that haven't "luxuried" their way out of an affordable housing crisis, I've got plenty of them — including in Providence itself. What you don't have is examples to the contrary.

I’ve used George’s in Peacedale, they are good folks, honest and affordable.

I thought it was going to be Savers, where they at least give you a coupon for your trouble.

My town did the bank thing a few years ago and now the new thing is it just gained three car washes.