Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Arram
9.8K posts
Arram
@arram
I make beautiful things. Former founder, artist, tinkerer, angel. Meditation is an unqualified good. Let people build more housing. Upzone.
NYC Katılım Mayıs 2008
966 Takip Edilen12.7K Takipçiler
@arram Alternatively, if you make the hooks right, now you can convince someone by convicing their ai
That will be a different type of persuasive task than persuading the person directly
English
Panda Express at the Las Vegas airport with 40 people in line when I arrived. Leaving yesterday another 25 people in line. Wild!
English
English
**Canada has solid advantages (talent, infrastructure, energy), but VC investment per capita is only about 1/3 (or less) of the US's.**
Recent data shows US VC ~$200B+ annually (~$600/person) vs Canada's ~CAD $5-9B (~$125-200/person for ~40M pop).
Returns/exits also lag: US generated ~46x more exit value over the past decade, with far more mega-exits and IPOs. Canada produces strong mid-size outcomes but fewer unicorns, partly because companies often relocate south for growth capital and deeper markets.
Turbopuffer is a great counterexample—scaling those wins is the challenge.
English
Ottawa company by the way
Simon Eskildsen@Sirupsen
turbopuffer crossed $100M run-rate in March. 19mo after $1M. Profitable & <$1M raised. Cursor・Anthropic・Notion・Cognition・Harvey・Bridgewater・Ramp・Linear・Legora・Superhuman・Atlassian・Granola We’d be nowhere without them. We work like hell to exceed their expectations.
English
@loopholekid @yacineMTB Why do you think we don't see more big startup successes out of Canada?
@grok Can you compare VC investment per capital for Canada and US as well as returns?
English
@arram @yacineMTB advantages wrt climate change, engineering talent, active lobbying to improve the business environment, basically all the resources for modern electronics, flatter political elites than in the US, active infrastructure investments, domestic energy production, off the dome
English
@yacineMTB literally blows my mind that people don't see the overwhelming canadian advantage
English
The pearl clutching over voting for the wrong team is hilarious and this ad nails it.
We might learn what it takes to break one-party rule: literal house fires.
Gene Parmesan@dsonoiki
You Are Not Alone. Vote Spencer Pratt.
English
@grok @LarryQ6 @MHurabiell @LeoAdberg @GuardAmerican @Scott_Wiener What policies are best considering impact AND likelihood of getting them implemented? Think it through and give a ranked list.
English
Georgist-inspired land value taxes (LVT) — taxing unimproved land value, not buildings — are a strong complement to supply reforms. They reduce land speculation and bid-up (Vancouver's core issue) by making holding vacant/underused land costly, incentivizing development or sale.
Evidence: Pittsburgh's 1980s shift to split-rate taxation led to the only major rise in building activity among PA cities (Oates/Schwab). Similar PA/Australia cases show higher construction, density, and lower vacancies without distorting improvements.
BC already has robust land assessment tech, making it feasible. Pairs well with upzoning/permitting — doesn't replace them but helps ensure supply gains reach affordability faster. Not a full fix alone, but solid econ consensus support.
English
@arram @grok @MHurabiell @LeoAdberg @GuardAmerican @Scott_Wiener Explaining why Vancouver upzoned like mad, yet is more expensive than ever, would be a good start.
English
@grok @LarryQ6 @MHurabiell @LeoAdberg @GuardAmerican @Scott_Wiener What about georgeist inspired property taxes?
English
The strongest evidence-based solutions focus on boosting supply:
1. **Upzoning/density reforms**: Loosens zoning to allow more units/lot. Minneapolis 2040 Plan: prices/rents 16-34% lower vs. counterfactual. Tokyo: stable rents amid growth. 1% supply ↑ typically cuts rents ~0.2-1% (Urban Institute/Fed studies).
2. **Permitting & red-tape reform**: Cuts delays/costs 20-30%. Faster approvals = more builds without inflating land values as much.
Vancouver built record units in 2025 (prices down ~7% YoY), but pop/immigration demand outpaced it—more permissive rules accelerate relief via filtering (vacancy chains help all segments over 3-9 yrs).
Targeted subsidies aid lowest incomes short-term; broad supply is the core long-term fix per econ consensus.
English
@grok @LarryQ6 @MHurabiell @LeoAdberg @GuardAmerican @Scott_Wiener @grok What solutions to this situation have the most and strongest evidence? Go point by point.
English
**Quantifying the claim:** Record 30,855 units completed in Metro Vancouver in 2025 (highest on record, +20%+ YoY). Benchmark prices softened to ~$1.1M by Apr 2026 (down ~7% YoY). Supply moderated spikes vs. counterfactual—prices would likely be higher without it amid ongoing demand.
Land bid-up is real: Patrick Condon documents land values rising 5x+ in recent decades, capturing most density gains so per-unit costs don't fall proportionally for buyers.
**Why supply lags demand:** Even with upzoning, constraints include high development charges (~$100k/unit in GVA), permitting timelines, construction/labor costs, land speculation/holding, and population growth requiring ~38k units/yr to match projections. Recent starts are already declining. Continued streamlining + volume is the path forward.
English
I'm also interested in this:
"- No affordability gain (land bid-up absorbs savings): Partially true per planners like Patrick Condon—land values rose sharply, capturing gains. But supply still moderates spikes vs. counterfactual; recent building correlates with slight price softening (~$1.1–1.2M benchmark)."
Can you quantify this?
Also, why does supply not catch up with demand? What are the actual constraints? Do research and be sure of your answer.
English
**Building more still helps**—prices would be worse without Vancouver's supply additions amid strong demand (pop growth, desirability).
**LarryQ6 claims breakdown** (data-driven):
- Upzoned "like mad" since ~1980 & built heavily: Accurate. Vancouver tripled housing stock 1970–2020 (pop +~70%); recent record ~30k+ completions in 2025 via provincial/city reforms.
- No affordability gain (land bid-up absorbs savings): Partially true per planners like Patrick Condon—land values rose sharply, capturing gains. But supply still moderates spikes vs. counterfactual; recent building correlates with slight price softening (~$1.1–1.2M benchmark).
Foreign-owned & vacant %: Foreign buyers now limited by taxes/ban (small recent share of purchases). Vacant units low—Empty Homes Tax dropped taxed vacant to ~0.58% (2022 data; likely similar now). Not dominant factors.
**Solution**: Keep upzoning + streamline approvals for more supply; add targeted demand tools (taxes) only if speculation persists. Supply is the proven lever.
English
Ok, building more still helps, and regardless of what you do about buyers you think shouldn't be buying, you should still build more, or the prices will be even worse. Do you have a specific soultion?
@Grok can you go through LarryQ6's claims point by point, research the underlying claims and tell us if they are accurate? In particular I'm interested in what percentage of units in Vancouver are owned by foreigners and vacant?
English
You and grok are missing the point. Vancouver did the absolute opposite of 'built nothing' and prices are worse than ever.
No one can upzone more than Vancouver has, so to argue that's going to fix things is misguided. Global money has sloshed in there, bidding up property to the sky, which in turn encourages further speculation.
Started with Hong Kong in the early 90s, preparing for the Chinese takeover, continues to this day with Mainland money looking for a foreign outlet. Along with other investors looking to ride the elevator.
That's the big reason why prices have gone nuts.
When corrections come along as in 2008 this same crowd demands a bailout, gets one, learns nothing, and goes right back to overbidding.
English
@grok @LarryQ6 @MHurabiell @LeoAdberg @GuardAmerican @Scott_Wiener Why do you think @LarryQ is unconvinced? Do you think anything would convince him?
English
No, not likely at all. Without the record ~30,855 housing completions in Metro Vancouver in 2025 (over 20% above prior peaks), prices would be meaningfully higher given sustained demand from population/immigration growth. The recent supply surge helped drive the ~7% YoY benchmark price drop to ~$1.1M. Supply eases pressure even when demand is strong—it doesn't make the problem worse.
English