@FlyingLionWithABook's banner p

FlyingLionWithABook

Has a C. S. Lewis quote for that.

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 October 25 19:25:25 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 1739

FlyingLionWithABook

Has a C. S. Lewis quote for that.

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 October 25 19:25:25 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1739

Verified Email

They got movies and shows and such too. I think Jordan Peterson is working on his second exclusive series for them.

I agree, which is why they'll be fine if the IMLS disappears. They don't need other people's money to get by.

The amount per taxpayer is small, sure, but the question is whether the amount should be used to fund other people's libraries. That question remains the same whether the tax is $1.50 or $1,000 per taxpayer.

As explained in that comment, most of library funding is already local, and in the case of Alabama, you pointed out that Alabama effectively got $0 from the federal government for 2024.

Puerto Rico got $2,147,080 and they're not even a state.

And I don't want to encourage local and regional brilliance, I want to encourage people paying for the services they enjoy instead of getting other people who don't enjoy them to pay for it.

Last I checked, Daily Wire was doing a victory lap after Trump's election. This doesn't seem like the result of Boreing screwing up, he's always been more interested in making movies.

Though their DailyWire+ subscriber counts are not public, they have announced numbers from time to time. They said they had 1,000,000 subscribers in 2022. According to Axios last year they had over $200 million in revenue, and in 2023 they had a capital valuation of over $1 billion (https://www.axios.com/2024/12/10/the-daily-wire-eyes-growth-investment-in-2025).

I don't see any signs of Daily Wire declining, in a business sense. They seem to be headed up and to the right.

Let's assume that $211m was equally distributed among the states

It is not. They make their largest grants to state libraries, but they don't distribute it evenly. In 2024 they didn't even give Alabama state libraries a grant at all! California got $15,705,702 for their state library system, the only grant that went to anybody in Alabama whatsoever in 2024 was $184,876 to the Alabama African American Civil Rights Heritage Sites Consortium.

Here's the full list of 2024 grantees under their "Grants to State Libraries" program:

California State Library $15,705,702

Texas State Library and Archives Commission $12,512,132

State Library of Florida $9,533,426

New York State Library $8,125,215

Pennsylvania Office of Commonwealth Libraries $5,891,819

Illinois State Library $5,736,330

State Library of Ohio $5,448,084

Georgia Board of Regents $5,162,498

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources $5,089,381

Library of Michigan $4,788,124

New Jersey State Library $4,506,420

Library of Virginia $4,289,358

Washington State Library $3,948,629

Arizona State Library $3,804,635

Tennessee State Library and Archives $3,689,581

Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners $3,642,371

Indiana State Library $3,589,836

Missouri State Library $3,338,467

Maryland State Library Agency $3,332,465

WI Div. for Libraries and Community Learning $3,230,831

Colorado Department of Education $3,218,246

MN Dept of CFL/Library Development & Services $3,165,524

South Carolina State Library $3,028,013

State Library of Louisiana $2,726,161

KY Department for Libraries and Archives $2,708,198

Oregon State Library $2,597,695

Oklahoma Department of Libraries $2,529,938

Utah State Library Division $2,289,874

State Library of Iowa $2,210,343

Nevada State Library and Archives $2,205,502

Connecticut State Library $2,164,184

Arkansas State Library $2,157,781

PR Dept. of ED/Public Library Programs $2,147,080

Kansas State Library $2,109,780

Mississippi Library Commission $2,109,457

New Mexico State Library $1,797,977

Nebraska Library Commission $1,746,652

Idaho State Library $1,741,500

West Virginia Library Commission $1,668,036

Hawaii State Public Library System $1,541,630

New Hampshire State Library $1,529,144

Maine State Library $1,526,754

Montana State Library, Natural Resource Information System $1,427,530

Rhode Island Office of Library & Information Services $1,413,623

Delaware Division of Libraries $1,389,442

South Dakota State Library $1,346,956

State Library, North Dakota $1,295,858

Alaska State Library $1,276,792

District of Columbia Public Library $1,256,248

State of Vermont Department of Libraries $1,244,357

Wyoming State Library $1,220,427

And did most of them really eat your internal organs after raping your children?

Depends on the tribe, really. I recall that the Five Civilized Tribes weren't so bad, but when you get to the plains it's a real horror show. The Comanche were not nice guys, to say the least.

Museums, libraries, etc., primarily benefit local communities. Why should my tax dollars go to a local library 1,000 miles away: can't they fund their own library if it matters so much to them?

An additional bit of info: for 2024 their largest grantees were:

California State Library: $15,705,702

Texas State Library and Archives Commission: $12,512,132

State Library of Florida: $9,533,426

New York State Library: $8,125,215

Pennsylvania Office of Commonwealth Libraries: $5,891,819

The big grantees are all state libraries, looks like they give a grant to each state. The lowest state library grant? Wyoming State Library, $1,220,427.

The smallest grant of 2024? $2,510 to the Seneca Nation of Indians, in a grant they will use for a "Kid's Reading Project".

How much money are they actually giving out here? How many local libraries are going to disappear because they don't have federal grants?

You can search their list of awarded grants here (https://www.imls.gov/grants/awarded-grants) and for calibration's sake I looked up the town whose library I spent the most time in as a wee one, wandering the stacks. Looks like that library has received zilch from the IMLS. They did give a local wildlife park near the town $1,775 back in 2003, and the local "Pioneer Farm Museum" (which is just a little farm all done up in historical style where kids can take a trip and learn how to churn butter or whatever) got $6,370 in 2002. That's it.

Searching around, they seem to give out a lot of $10,000 grants to native tribes, presumably for village libraries. So where is the big money?

So I went ahead and searched for Tacoma, which was the closest city to where I grew up that had proper museums, big ones that people like to go to. What did I find? $400k to the University of Washington, $630k to something called "Environment & Culture Partners" which appears to be an NGO that tries to get museums to talk more about climate change, $170k to the Museum of Glass (a great museum I must admit, check it out if you're in Tacoma), $250k for the Children's Museum, $145k for the 9th and 10th Horse Cavalry Buffalo Soldiers Museum (never heard of it), $140k to the Washington State Historical Society, and $25,000 (Back in 2014) to the Pierce County Library System (which, come to think of it, my hometown library was part of. Still, 25k spread over all the libraries in Pierce County is kind of small potatoes).

My test seems like a mixed bag, since the Glass Museum and Children's Museum were pretty nice to go to as a kid (and even today, for the glass one). On the other hand, shouldn't a big city like Tacoma be able to support their own museums? I doubt either of these places would close their doors without the IMLS in any case: the Museum of glass got exactly two grants, one in 2024 and one in 2006, so I doubt they're relying on the money to stay open. Meanwhile it seems like a lot of this money gets funneled to universities and NGOs.

Why would Walsh leave the Daily Wire? I don’t see anything particularly verboten to Shapiro about either of those tweets. I’ve heard Ben say much the same on his show many times.

It doesn't matter whether it was binding or not because we haven't broken it in any case: in the Budapest Memorandum we promised not to invade Ukraine ourselves, and complain to the UN Security council if someone else did. That's it. We never promised to protect them, just to leave them alone.

Yeah, Matthew Stover’s version is the best version of RotS for sure.

I would object to describing the situation as “Christian gangsters going after Christian community leaders”. I don’t think anyone can rightfully complain “No True Scotsman” if I say that the vicious killers of the cartels, who murder pastors because they help addicts recover, are not Christian.

If you think their standards are too loose, fine, but is there any doubt that millions of Christian’s are currently being persecuted? If not in Mexico or Columbia than certainly in China, North Korea, India, Malaysia, Pakistan, and other countries that enforce laws against Christian religious practice.

It makes sense that they get stuck at Cerulean City: the only way to leave the city and progress is to go on a side track to rescue Bill, then you need to go in an NPCs house and then out their back door. Most NPC houses don’t have back doors, and this is the only time you need to go through a house to progress instead of going in a house and then leaving the way you came in.

If you click on the individual country they explain their reasoning. Here was the reasoning for listing Mexico:

Although the majority of Mexico's population is Christian, many believers live in danger of persecution, particularly from criminal gangs, drug cartels and indigenous groups. In many parts of the country, the presence of criminal groups is growing. Christians who bravely speak out against their activities, or who are involved in community work or evangelism (especially with youth, drug addicts and migrants) are deemed a threat. That makes them a target. In some cases, Christian children or the children of church leaders are singled out.

In some Indigenous communities, those who decide to leave ancestral and traditional beliefs to follow Jesus face ostracism, fines, incarceration and forced displacement. Given that indigenous leaders are those who administer justice in such areas, believers have no one to turn to to investigate wrongdoing and protect their religious freedom. These families can also face harassment from the community, such as property damage, restriction of access to schools for their children, and threats.

Christians are the most persecuted group in the world. Their plight is almost entirely ignored by corporate media.

This is certainly true if you count by volume. It seems likely to me that Jews may be more persecuted as a percentage of all Jews, because there are very few Jews and billions of Christians. According to the non-profits who care about this sort of thing, 380 million Christians live in countries that have high levels of persecution and discrimination towards Christians.

They're trying to make Japan better by making it easier to access mental healthcare and find ways to fight societal isolation. That you would want them to make Japan better is obvious, what specifically should they be doing to make it better that they're refusing to do? Give everyone a check each month? Let the zombie corporations die? Mail everyone a waifu pillow?

That makes a great deal of sense, and I would broadly agree. Thanks for clarifying.

What a strange thing to believe. Do you believe parents have no duties to their children, and that children have no duties to their parents?

Kind of seems like they're trying to change the conditions. That 9 step plan they started off with in 2007 consisted of:

(i) research on the prevalence, risk, and protective factors for suicidal behaviors; (ii) increased public awareness; (iii) human resources for early intervention; (iv) community efforts for mental health; (v) better access to mental healthcare; (vi) supportive community environments; (vii) prevention of suicide reattempts; (viii) support for persons bereaved by suicide; and (ix) enhanced public–private partnerships.

Seems like doing more to treat depression, improving access to mental healthcare, and creating supportive community environments are all ways of changing the conditions. What would you want them to do?

Kind of seems that that is exactly what they are doing: providing mental health services, attempting to find ways to reduce social isolation, trying to change social norms so that literal oblivion does not look like such a nice choice in comparison to social disgrace, etc.

It's popular because the financial benefits are great: for many (maybe even most) veterans the care they get through the VA system is either free or close to it. And the VA Community Care Network program means that for outpatient stuff you can actually get seen by a non-VA doctor and the VA wills still pay the whole bill (there are hoops you have to jump through, but a lot of people are motivated to jump if it means they don't have to pay a cent of their healthcare bills).

Suicide is a form of murder: self-murder. We make efforts to stop murders, we should make efforts to stop suicide. Overall, society must signal disapproval of suicide. Cultures that honor or otherwise approve (even the implied approval of not bothering to do anything about it) fall into failure modes that our current society doesn't, without much obvious benefit. See Imperial Japan, for instance, which continued fighting long past the point where there was no hope of victory because their culture venerated honorable death over defeat. It did their society active harm. Their suicide rate remained high up until around 2010, when it began to drop and has continued to drop until today, where the suicide rate is actually a little less than the United States (it went from a high of 25.6 per 100K people in 2003 to around 12.2 today, compared to the US's 14.5).

Why did suicide rates drop so significantly in Japan? Well, in 2007 the government released a nine-step plan to lower suicide rates. Since then they funded suicide prevent services, suicide toll lines, mental health screenings for postpartum mothers, counseling services for depression, and in 2021 created a Ministry of Loneliness whose job is to reduce social isolation. In other words, when the Japanese government tried to make a societal effort towards preventing suicide, suicide rates dropped.

Which is good, because Japan needs every citizen it can get. Population is still dropping, and everyone who kills themselves can no longer contribute to society nor create and raise society's next generation.

If you're talking about actual speechcraft: as in, oratory, speechifying, talking out loud to a crowd, etc, then I have one piece of advice that it seems people desperately need: stop saying "Um"! Or "Um" derivatives such as "like", "er", "you know", "really", etc. It seems like everybody I hear give a speech can't help but pepper the whole speech with them. Trump is a notable exception, but he gives so many speeches that it's expected he would get the basics right.

There is a method which can cure you of this common bad habit. It was performed on my by my venerable public speaking professor, and I can testify to it's efficacy. Get a friend, and give them a bell; one of those bells you see at reception desks, where you give it a good whack on top and it lets out a loud ring. Then start talking. It doesn't matter what, any kind of monologue will do as long as it's not memorized. Tell them to ring the bell every time you let out a filler word. That's it. After doing a few sessions of this your filler words will be gone. Just make sure the bell is loud enough to be a bit startleing.

As far as writing goes, I can only pass on the advice of the great C. S. Lewis (who, whatever anyone thinks of him, was undoubtedly as successful and extremely effective writer). Here is a cosolidated list of his writing advice, gathered from a few different sources:

  1. Always try to use language so as to make quite clear what you mean and make sure your sentence couldn’t mean anything else. The reader, we must remember, does not start by knowing what we mean. If our words are ambiguous, our meaning will escape him. I sometimes think that writing is like driving sheep down a road. If there is any gate open to the left or the right the reader will most certainly go into it.
  2. Always prefer the plain direct word to the long, vague one. Don’t implement promises, but keep them.
  3. Never use abstract nouns when concrete ones will do. If you mean “More people died” don’t say “Mortality rose.”
  4. Don’t use adjectives which merely tell us how you want us to feel about the things you are describing. I mean, instead of telling us the thing is “terrible,” describe it so that we’ll be terrified. Don’t say it was “delightful”; make us say “delightful” when we’ve read the description. You see, all those words (horrifying, wonderful, hideous, exquisite) are only like saying to your readers “Please, will you do my job for me.”
  5. Don’t use words too big for the subject. Don’t say “infinitely” when you mean “very”; otherwise you’ll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite

From time to time I have had sudden bouts of insecurity because I never had an experience like that when I met my wife, or when we were dating. So when people talk about “love at first sight” I get uncomfortable. I’m a romantic at heart, and I like the idea of falling desperately in love with someone like that, but that’s not what happened to me. I was not especially attracted to her when I met her, no more than any other young woman. I grew to love her slowly, as I got to know her. I love her deeply today: I would die for her if I had to. But I never “fell for her”, so to speak.

Of course I never fell for anyone else either. There have been three times in my life that I saw a woman and was struck by her beauty. I felt strongly physically attracted to her: infatuated might be a good word. But I wanted to bed those women, not love them. Two of them were complete strangers whose character was unknown to me. The third I had a conversation with, and discovered she was not the kind of person I wanted to have a discussion with, much less live with. It was lust only.