BinaryHobo
hauling up the data on the Xerox line
No bio...
User ID: 1535
What the Trump admin seems to think is that other countries work like centralized command economies where he can demand a leader buy more from the US and have the country follow through, rather than individuals and businesses making their own personal purchasing decisions in aggregate.
I mean, a lot of them in the west basically are. Government spending as a percentage of GDP being between 1/3 and 2/3 is pretty common in the west.
Even if all trade barriers (including the nonsensical things he includes as trade barriers) are completely gone, there is no easy way for say, Australia to force their businesses to start buying more American made products. They're not a communist nation and unless we want our allies to turn that way, they can't reach down the hands of government and force private business to do so.
Australia, specifically, isn't actually that high for government spending as a percentage of GDP. But, according to the IMF in 2023, approximately 37% of their GDP was government spending. That's more than both China (33%), a country that calls itself communist, and Russia (36%), a country actively at war for that entire year.
So, yeah, they probably can't force their businesses to do it, but with 37% of the GDP to play with, there's no reason to think that a combination of subsidies and direct buying can't actually do this thing.
Of course it isn't as simple as that. A lot of that is social programs. But the question really is, what percentage of GDP outlay would be required to meet Trump's demands?
The wife probably expects him to be a "roof fixer of last resort" (or at least this would be the case in a traditional marriage). Maybe not as pretty as a professional job, maybe it doesn't last as long, but good enough to get through the next rain storm.
I would expect most men, with a couple hours of watching youtube, and a day off for the project could fix a leaky roof.
I don't recall any complaints about fat obese people not working.
There's been an undercurrent of it. Even the lyrics of "Rich Men North of Richmond" mention it:
Well, God, if you're five-foot-three and you're three-hundred pounds Taxes ought not to pay for your bags of Fudge Rounds
Maybe not in the Hanania/Moldbug/etc online intellectual right. The thing is, that's a vanishingly small percentage of the population/voter base, they're just overemphasized because they write all the blog posts/legitimizing arguments, so they always get pointed to when discussion happens. America's hinterlands are filled with people who are proud of working and think other people should work too.
Well... isn't that just a skill issue then?
You can argue that. But it seems that the obvious counter argument is that these institutions positioning themselves so badly that they lose their funding is a skill issue as well, no?
That is to say, the argument that "if you lose something, it's a skill issue" has the current outcome as a perfectly acceptable option. Given that the original post is arguing for the continued funding, it can't just boil down to that.
Based on the groups involved and the act, my guess is that people in those organizations had some dealings with Palestinian charities. Being charitable, my guess would be that they did less than enough investigation into them, and are realizing that they might be in big trouble.
Do American on The Motte feel that the country is generally in favour of breaking from its old European alliances?
I'm assuming you mean military/political alliance here.
I may have grown up in a more rural place (read: red tribe) than most of the others here, but for the most part, except for middle aged men who are really interested in WWII, I don't get the feeling that most Americans think about Europeans that much. When people do think about Europe, I don't think alliance is the first thing that comes to mind. I think both "nice place to have a vacation" and "land filled with effeminate men and hot women" would show up in peoples' minds before "ally".
I should be clear here, I don't sense a ton of animosity towards Europeans. Most of the people I know can trace their ancestry back to Europe. There's some vaguely positive feelings, but I don't think alliance is the association most of the people I grew up with would draw. I would expect a vague desire to be friendly with Europe, all other things equal, but I would expect a modern "Why die for Danzig?" campaign would leave most Americans scratching their head for a reason. Especially post Afghanistan/Iraq where getting involved in foreign places has the connotation of both "expensive" and "will get people angry at us".
I also don't think Americans think about foreign policy nearly as much as you think. Foreign countries are a long way away from most of the people I know. Most Americans never travel to another country and have little reason to pay attention to foreign policy unless they're trying to look smart to impress someone. I also think it's quite likely that if an actual crisis that mattered to the US cropped up, you could must up enough jingoism to get people to want to intervene on Europe's behalf.
though in this particular case I can imagine Mr. Jones facing consequences even here in the United States. Remind me, is it still okay to call for the punching of U.S. Nazis? Was it ever? I seem to have lost track.
Watching the clip. It looks like Jones's comments would be pretty close to the line in the US. Advocacy of violence is explicitly protected in the US by the 1st amendment (well, by supreme court precedent interpreting the 1st amendment, see Brandenburg v Ohio).
The two things that are more radioactive (legally) are that he's doing it in front of a crowd and pretty immediately goes into a chant (which generally has the effect of shutting off certain parts of the brain). This goes a long way to satisfying the "immediacy" requirement of restricting speech in the US. But you would still have to prove intent, which is really hard to do.
TL;DR: I'd expect a < 25% chance that this would result in legal consequences in the US. Social consequences, on the other hand...
No, something went very weird for about 20 minutes
I wonder if things blowing up take ~20-30 minutes to work their way through whatever cache system twitter has in place (ok, really more of a CDN system with multiple places all over the globe, but still). A throttling system were if something is throttled for 15 minutes, it starts getting replicated seems like an 80/20 solution to the kind of traffic spikes twitter gets.
No amount of technical ability can protect you from the culture war, just ask Stallman.
I mean, you're not wrong. Stallman got ousted from MIT after the progressive/techno-libertarian split of the mid 2010s, it was only a matter of time.
But he ended up back on the board of the FSF. I think you're also ignoring that it's entirely possible to create parallel institutions that are resistant to this stuff. Especially for weird nerds with technical ability
She was tasked to solve the 2021 border problem, namely, migration originating from a few specific countries. In 2024 migration flows from those countries are way down, but migration from other countries has increased a lot. It’s basically two separate problems stapled together by the fact that both problems materialize for the US at the southern border.
On one hand, this is fair. On the other hand, it feels like the way someone who has only spent their life in a bureaucracy would frame the problem. You were given specific criteria, and you satisfactorily met those criteria instead of solving an underlying problem that's creating the specific problem you were tasked with.
However, if the voters see the underlying problem is that there's migration instead of migration from specific countries, the ultimate result is that the problem hasn't been fixed.
So, let's say Bob cheats on Alice. Alice divorces Bob. That's a fairly significant social consequence, and quite the negative one.
However, adultery isn't a crime in basically any modern society. No crime occurred. So is this illegitimate?
It is certainly a shame for people to wish suffering upon others, but it is no crime
Is the implicit argument here that there shouldn't be negative social consequences for things that aren't crimes?
Because then we have to re-do a lot of the last 50 years.
That pivot has to have some correlation with perceived likelihood of him dropping out, though?
I think it has to have some correlation with him doing badly. That could be dropping out or losing the election.
But if this is some managed kabuki theater before Biden steps down, I'd expect one of the names floating around to replace him to be solidified a bit before any of it actually goes down. Maybe I'm not plugged in enough, but that doesn't seem to have happened.
I just don't really see which extra votes this is getting for them.
People who were disengaged deciding to vote. Also, this gave Elon the cover to officially endorse Trump, so that's probably going to help sway some grey tribe members in the tech sector
The advantage of the software industry over hardware is that hardware is bounded by the laws of physics and the costs of making things and moving them around.
It does, but the downside is that your entire industry can be commoditized by a few people (fewer than people think) or completely destroyed by your competition exiting the market and just releasing their product. Effectively every area Borland was monetizing 30 years ago is completely free now.
Yeah, microsoft's product doesn't wear out naturally, but the other side is, how much more could they have taxed the industry if linux didn't exist? On the other hand, open source hardware has never really gone anywhere.
You might enjoy All Tomorrows
You need to be working with adults, not children, you need a certain level of respectability.
What time horizon are you working with? The reason people are so concerned with what is taught in school is because working with kids has a big impact on the long term. Working in children's entertainment is probably even more powerful. I remember blowing a lot of things off in school (especially high school) because it was mandatory and I had to be there, but this is what kids are seeking out in their own time.
That's a fairly reasonable explanation, but there's been a ton of things that started out as "a thing dumb college kids are doing" and ended up in the wider world. Some take longer than others.
Then do something that will lower their social status. Dress them up in a baby bonnet and spank them instead or something.
but the anti-semitic right arguably includes people like Elon Musk and has far more access to the corridors of power than the Columbia protestors do.
On one hand this is fair. Elon definitely has more strings to pull than the protestors right now, but that's a pretty short-sighted view. In 20 years, the current class of Columbia isn't going to have access to the corridors of power, they're going to occupy them. The attitudes at Columbia are going to be beltway consensus in 20 years. That's a much bigger issue than people mouthing off on twitter.
Sure, but anyone who's getting a sentence of a year is unlikely to be deterred by a single physical punishment.
The physical pain is a part of it, sure. But it's not the whole thing. These punishments are generally done in public (or in the modern day, probably televised/put on youtube). The embarrassment and/or loss of social status is a big part of it.
What rich people do is take out a loan using the asset as collateral. So long as the asset appreciates faster than inflation, you come out ahead and get to access the money without selling (I believe this is also not considered income in most jurisdictions).
I think you're ignoring that video games are big business these days, with large staffs. You're going to have a lot of people just phoning it in, along with a general regression to the mean. It's possible for a single person operation to knock it out of the park (or completely bomb, but you're probably not going to hear about that game). It's really hard for a 1000 person operation do do anything that far above average (average for a professional).
Both of those games are over a decade old. It could be a symptom of the drop-off that he's talking about that you aren't listing newer ones.
- Prev
- Next
Because the US government is the only hegemon in history willing to expend resources for a rules based system.
Europe/China/Rome/the mongols/etc all basically pillaged for their own benefit when they were in power. It's much more likely that the next power will also do this, rather than follow the US's lead (especially with a US collapse in this hypothetical giving them a good reason not to).
More options
Context Copy link