Recent comments in /f/vermont

PromiseNorth t1_je1mutb wrote

☝🏼Have you seen how hard they work there sarcastically.. Those dudes can’t even string together a face to face order at 3:00 in an empty shop for drip coffee. “Ohh but the mobile order pace is so taxing” … this is madness. Some will boycott cuz it’s corporate coffee, but corporate coffee served by union members delivered to people who would only buy corporate coffee because it’s unionized but would never join a union in 1 million years. Breaks the logic center of my brain down.

0

bravestatevt t1_je1mhkg wrote

Hey OP u/headgasketidiot - I wanted to weigh in here to say that it's genuinely cool to see how much time you took to absorb the information in the episode and respond in all these ways. I appreciate your thoughtfulness. Same goes for many of the commenters in this thread. It's never easy to hear critique of something my colleagues and I spend so many hours working on, but it's important and I'm grateful for it. There are a couple things I want to address directly:

To the point about the "growing demand of people who want to live here" -- I agree that there seems to be a perception that people are moving to Vermont in droves that does not match reality. I was focusing on data about the increase in demand for "year-round households" (an increase that predates the pandemic). See this overview from the VHFA (https://www.vhfa.org/news/blog/30000-40000-more-vermont-homes-needed-2030). The pandemic accelerated things slightly, but factors like more flexible remote work options and climate migration have the potential to increase in relevance in the future. And given that Vermont has the *lowest* rental vacancy rate in the nation already, and that there is currently a clear shortage of year-round housing stock, any increase in demand (even a relatively slight one) has an outsized impact. This is the reason I included the line ("and to keep up with the growing demand of people who want to live here"). I'd be interested in a deeper comparison of population data vs year-round household data, and I appreciate you pointing out that the influx is not as dramatic, numbers-wise, as some seem to think.

Meanwhile, I agree that ~10,000 short-term rentals does represent a potentially large chunk of the "new" year-round housing needed to meet demand. That's one of the reason I wanted to include the numbers, though I could have put a finer point on it. One of the reasons I didn't is the fact that VT does not have a statewide rental registry, which makes it impossible to know how many of those 10,000+ short-term units could realistically serve as long-term ones -- i.e. they aren't just seasonal camps, etc. As a reporter (and as a VT resident), this is frustrating! And it's why I wanted to include more detailed stories about Airbnb units that *could* serve as year-round housing, and the impact of that, in the episode as well.

Based on my reporting, I think much of our housing crisis can be attributed to factors other than short-term rentals, but addressing STRs is also an important step for Vermont to take. One housing expert I spoke to described the necessary approach to the state's housing crisis as "silver buckshot, not a silver bullet" and it stuck with me.

I hope this helps shed some light on my and my team's approach to this piece, even if it's not completely satisfying. Again, I'm grateful for the thoughtful critique!

1

amoebashephard OP t1_je1lgj0 wrote

here's the paper I've been basing the idea of using it as a feedstock for pellets. Both giant and regular knotweed is present in VT.

The thought is to have a solar/bio gas drying facility; and that I would go through the permit process to transport from pickup spots around the state, or that people could schedule pickup.

My hope was to have some sort of system in place to harvest from stream sides legally.

I'm mostly just brainstorming at the moment, and I really appreciate your response!

3

ChocolateDiligent t1_je1k4rv wrote

Of course abstinence doesn't work, that is my point. Are you on a parade to provide birth control to people for free? It's comments like your original one that misses the mark. People have kids, it is inevitable, planned or unplanned. You can wish people were smarter, but they are not.

So my question is what do you do with that information? Do we support children and their parents knowing that it helps the majority of people who receive funding or not? I'm guessing you are in the not, camp. You unfortunately cannot legislate laws or credit to those who are smart and those who are not, it doesn't work like that.
edit: You still haven't proved why people who can't afford housing shouldn't have it comment is unrelated, it certainly isn't. At the core of your argument lies the same logic, how would you differ from this position if "someone can't afford something they shouldn't have it" and not contradict yourself?

1

xxxDog_Fucker_69xxx t1_je1jo65 wrote

I’ve been shooting there, owner is a cock jockey, but some of the folks are fine regular minded people.

They should have just got permits. Simple solutions to the issue, but at this point he is trying to have them come on the property and tear it down.

Unlikely anything is going to happen with this until the town thinks they can safely send a crew to demolish the buildings.

−1

cpujockey t1_je1i09x wrote

> already made up their mind to be a Starbucks customer

brand loyalty is so strong that even when the dunkin sanitary conditions were figured out - people didn't care. "I NEED MY DUNKIES".

People rather be a meme than stand for anything. This is a fact. No matter if that place is unionized or not, the faithful will still spend their money.

4