Thursday's Most Active Threads

I'm sorry to say that the British Royal Family has again reared its head, or more accurately, its head has been reared, in yesterday's most active thread. Titled, "King Charles evicts Harry and Meghan from Frogmore" and posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum, the original poster offers little beyond the subject line and a hope that Meghan and Harry get reimbursed for renovations for which they paid. But, that was enough to launch this thread to the top of our charts. Obviously I am not going to read this thread and therefore have nothing to say about it. I was surprised to find just now that the thread is locked because I have no memory of locking it. If I have somehow developed the ability to lock Royal Family threads in my sleep, I will count it among my greatest achievements. For those of you with, shall we say, more refined tastes than me, you can still read 11 pages of what I am sure are scintillating posts.

The second most active thread yesterday was posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. Titled, "Columbia University becomes first Ivy League institution to go permanently test-optional", the original poster predicts that other top colleges will follow Columbia University's lead in dropping its requirement for standardized test scores. Columbia had already become test-optional during the pandemic so this decision simply extends the current practice. The topic of test-optional admissions is one that has been heavily debated on DCUM. As a result, I'm not going to read much of this 10-page thread because I don't expect it to offer much that is new. In the past, test-optional admissions has been supported by those who believe standardized tests are unfair because they advantage those who can afford test-prepping and multiple test retakes. On the other hand, posters who think that dropping standardized tests is a ploy to allow discrimination against certain students, especially Asians, strongly support keeping the test requirement. Previous threads, and I suspect this one as well, have been disappointing due to the frequent employment of racial and ethnic stereotypes. Asians are either seen as especially intelligent and being unfairly punished for their superior performance on tests or as the beneficiaries of intense test-prepping and a culture that places test scores above all other qualities. Lower scores among Black and Hispanic students are used by test-supporters to claim that those students don't deserve slots in competitive schools. Proponents of test-optional admissions policies believe such practices allow applicants to be viewed more holistically, though it will be interesting to see how that develops in practice. Opponents believe that dropping the test requirement simply allows more subjective selectivity in which bias and discrimination is less visible.

The third most active thread was titled, "AP: Biden will not stop override of DC crime laws" and posted in the "Metropolitan DC Local Politics" forum. For those who are not familiar with this topic, the District of Columbia created a commission that spent several years revising DC's criminal code which has not been overhauled in more than 100 years. The DC Council developed a bill based on the commission's recommendations which was approved unanimously. However, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser vetoed the bill, only to have her veto overridden by the Council. All DC legislation is subject to a review period before the US Congress and, during the review of the revised criminal code, the House of Representatives passed a motion of disapproval. It appears that the Senate will likely vote in favor of a similar motion, which will then go to the desk of President Joe Biden. Proponents of the revised code had been hoping that Biden would veto any such motion. If fact, Biden had previously indicated that was his intention. However, yesterday Biden announced that he would sign the motion, all but dooming the legislation. I am not going to read this thread because, frankly, most of the discourse — especially coming from those who oppose the revised code — is dishonest and misleading. "The revision lowers penalties for violent crime" you will hear the opponents screech. True, in some cases, false in others. In the cases in which penalties were lowered, the penalties are still substantial. Moreover, the commission that recommended the penalties — and we are basically talking about jail time here — studied the jail terms that judges had historically given out. For instance, if a specific crime may have had a range from 10 to 25 years but actual jail terms given out averaged 15 years, the new range might be 8 - 20 years. Opponents fixate on the small differences but ignore that historically few of those convicted actually received sentences at either the lower  or higher ends. Moreover, the revised code is better structured to allow layered charging, meaning that while a specific crime might have a lower sentencing in the new bill, it would be easier for prosecutors to also charge a second crime that could be added on top for additional prison time. Opponents completely ignore both this and the crimes for which the revised code stipulates higher punishments. On top of all of this is the subject of DC's right to self-determination. Many of those who support a Congressional override of the legislation, including Biden himself, claim to be supporters of DC statehood. You can't have it both ways and claim to support DC Statehood on the one hand and treat us like a colony on the other. It was very disappointing to see Barack Obama, when he was president, sacrifice DC's interests for politcal expediency and it is equally, if not more, disappointing to see Biden do the same. DC residents have given these presidents tremendous love and support, only to receive disrespect in return.

The final thread at which I'll look today was posted in the "Real Estate" forum. Titled, "two million is the new starter home price for close in neighborhoods", the original poster describes his findings after watching home prices in several close in zip codes. Based on what he observed, few single-family homes in those areas are available for less that $2 million. He feels lucky not to have sold his current house a few years ago because he couldn't afford to buy in the area now, I'm kind of running out of time this morning so I am not going to be able to read this thread either which means, maybe for the first time, I won't have read any of the threads discussed today. However, this topic has been covered fairly exhaustively in the past and I have even discussed several such threads in my blog posts. Nobody really disagrees that the prices for the type of homes the original poster has been considering are in the price range that he cites. However, those responding point out that there are areas that are cheaper, that expectations can be lowered to find more affordable options — for example a townhouse instead of a single-family home — and, in the case of this thread, the original poster is not viewing "starter homes". The repeated threads on this topic do suggest that something is going to have to give at some point. High home prices combined with increased interest rates will eventually result in fewer buyers. I don't know if it was brought up in this thread, but I wonder about the impact of investment buyers on the housing market? I receive a half-dozen or so calls or texts a week from people offering to buy our home which we have no intention of selling and have never expressed any interest in selling. I suspect these offers are coming from investment funds or something along those lines, but not from anyone planning to actually live in the house. I suspect this is significantly distorting the market. But, this is well outside my areas of expertise so I may be speaking gibberish.