assman
21d ago
Do you have any ideas for how to deal with the large population of immigrants that weren’t apprehended at the border? The recent wave all seemed to come under the strategy of ‘allow yourself to be apprehended, claim asylum, don’t show up to your hearing’ because the government was allowing it. But even with this giant population of illegal immigrants known to the government, Trump is having a hard time deporting them due to legal process issues. For the massive population of those who aren’t already known to the government, how would we deport them if they just say they are a US citizen and make the government prove that they aren’t? It’s more likely that we overturn birthright citizenship than change the law so that US citizens can be apprehended and be made to affirmatively prove citizenship or get swiftly deported. We’d need some sort of mandatory national ID which would be opposed even by a significant contingent of Trump voters.
assman
21d ago
I am very pro-mass deportation but it seems nearly impossible to do at scale in practice with current laws regardless of the money/political capital thrown at it. I understand that we haven’t even really been trying to enforce immigration laws and have in fact been showering illegal immigrants with money and benefits, but even if we stop all of that, I don’t think we can make a serious dent in the illegal immigrant population.
I’m Jose Gonzalez from Mexico, I cross the border illegally without being apprehended, and go live at my cousins apartment in El Paso. I work as a day laborer paid in cash, don’t have a bank account, and have never had a formal interaction with the state where my fingerprints or anything were taken. ICE raids my workplace and I tell them I’m Jose Gonzalez, I’m a US citizen, and I don’t say another word the whole time. How could they affirmatively prove that I’m not? I don’t understand how anyone who wasn’t apprehended and fingerprinted at the border can be deported without significant time being put into an investigation. What’s the way around this unless we can change the law so that the burden of proof is on the individual to prove citizenship?
It seems possible that a lot of the recent wave that claimed asylum could be deported, but I’d imagine that still leaves ~5-10 million who did it the old fashioned way. I think the only way to seriously mass deport is to make it impossible to work as a non-citizen, which would be massively disruptive to agriculture, restaurants, construction etc. in the short term and would be extremely difficult and probably have costly effects to the economy (as far as the costs of compliance for small businesses, not strawberries being more expensive) to enforce perpetually.
assman
1mo ago
That makes sense but what went differently in the late 90s/early 2000s in Russia compared to other post-soviet countries that did integrate around that time (Poland, Hungary, Romania etc.)? All started out as ramshackle and corrupt but around that time went in a different direction. Was the resistance to integrate more from the Russian elite/Putin not wanting to? Or was the resistance more on the western side?
assman
1mo ago
Is there an ELI5 reason why Russia wasn’t fully brought into the fold of NATO/EU/“the Western world” after the collapse of the Soviet Union? I’m pretty ignorant of the full history here, but I would think that given the politicians there were willing to peacefully dissolve the USSR that they wanted to fully integrate with the US/Europe. I would also think that the US/Europe would be eager to integrate Russia given that they’ve done so for most of the former eastern bloc countries, but obviously it hasn’t turned out that way.
assman
1mo ago
Fair enough- I’m no expert on the state of the battlefield and maybe there’s no ceasefire that Russia would agree to. But between “continue slowly losing now” and “pause, then maybe continue to lose later” it’s not obvious which is the better choice (maybe Putin drops dead, maybe European arms spending actually materializes). And if the Ukrainian war effort is completely reliant on the US, and the US thinks trying to get a ceasefire done is beneficial I think it’s the US’s right to insist on it. It just feels like Trump is being called pro-Russia for trying to negotiate while the Europeans get to LARP as serious defenders of the post-war order, when ultimately they aren’t willing to risk world war 3 over this conflict either.
assman
1mo ago
I think we should defend them fully because we have a formal defense treaty with them.
assman
1mo ago
I feel like so much of the Ukraine discussion avoids the object-level, do the “pro-Ukraine” people think that if we continue the status quo (US/NATO funding the war but not willing to put boots on the ground), that Ukraine can actually win? As someone who doesn’t think so, I feel like trying to get a ceasefire done ASAP is the right move both practically and morally. I understand the value of deterring wars of aggression and that Russia is morally in the wrong etc. etc. but I feel like trying to freeze the conflict in place gives more credibility to US/NATO deterrence and saves thousands of young men’s lives, compared to funding the war until Ukraine collapses spectacularly just to impose the maximum costs on Russia. I see people online argue that Russia would collapse before Ukraine does if we just maintain or somewhat increase current support, but Trump doesn’t seem to think so and the European politicians just speak in moralism and world war 2 analogies. If Trump sees things the way I do, that financial/material support is just delaying an inevitable Ukraine loss and this isn’t worth risking world war 3 by putting boots on the ground, then it doesn’t take any evil motives to think that trying to end or freeze the conflict as soon as possible is the best course of action.
assman
6mo ago
Couldn’t you say Wall Street kind of works like this? Bonuses are allocated to different desks based on their P&L and are usually a larger % of comp than salaries are for more senior employees. Also professional services like consulting, law, accounting etc. are typically “eat what you kill” at the partner level at least and directly measure employee productivity through billable hours
assman
1yr ago
I saw someone link to Meditations on Moloch in the college football subreddit a couple of days ago, to explain why conference realignment is happening and get a lot of upvotes. Was shocked to see Scott referenced in a normie subreddit like that
assman
1yr ago
I agree there are some inefficient markets with deceptive pricing schemes, network effects that create effective monopolies etc. but the idea that this applies to food of all things is absurd. Yes, Wendy’s/McDonald’s are both highly priced now, so as a consumer I simply eat them less. I quite like fast food and if a quarter pounder with fries and a drink was $6 I would probably go to McDonald’s frequently when I didn’t feel like cooking, but it’s $12.29 (just checked) so I’ll get pizza for $2/slice instead
assman
1yr ago
This is kind of what I’m getting at though- right now the status quo is that illegal immigrants have to traverse across Mexico, cross the border, and work jobs where they are paid under the table in shittier conditions than the government allows for its citizens. I and many others have problems with this, but this selects for these hardworking young people you’re referring to. I’m not sure if they end up paying into social security, but I know they don’t draw on it. So point taken there. The legal immigrants are often very smart and conscientious people who largely are a net financial benefit to the government.
But if we were to have de jure open borders, where the rights of citizenship are given to anyone who can scrounge up money for a plane ticket from around the world, you’re going to get a billion people and their old parents following them which would immediately cripple every social program and lead to massive crime and housing shortages. Do you disagree with this? If you’re suggesting some sort of permanent residency program where the immigrants are not ever given a path to citizenship or any entitlements like they have in the Middle East, I actually agree this could potentially work but I don’t consider that open borders, and I rarely see that proposal made explicit.
Regarding your last point about diversity decreasing support for welfare states, I would guess this is because the data is coming from western countries that went from being largely homogenous to having an immigrant underclass very quickly. The data also overwhelmingly shows that second-gen immigrants in the US and Europe vote for pro-welfare parties. This causes a larger share of the majority population to oppose welfare states, but if the previous majority becomes a minority I don’t know why we should expect the immigrants to stop voting for gibs
assman
1yr ago
Don’t you think it’s more likely that for the jobs that AI appears to be capable of automating right now (a lot of things, but basically any job where you sit at a computer all day) we’ll increasingly just turn our jobs into makework? Email and excel have already made us 100x more productive at white collar work, but that’s only created more of it, and people often point out that there are tons of e-mail jobs where nobody is really sure exactly what these people are doing, right now. I don’t see why that trend won’t continue, we’ll create project managers who oversee the AI’s work output, we’ll need people to interpret what’s needed and figure out how to ask the AI for it. We’ll have AI audits and compliance. We’ll create professional licenses to use certain AIs. We’ll have companies employing a bunch of people to have meetings all day about nothing. I think you work in high finance?, if so you’d be well aware there are boomer MDs who don’t know how to use excel and dick around on phone calls all day making million dollar salaries. There are people who work from home for 5 hours a week making 200k in tech. Theres millions of people in low level admin roles making $50k who do approximately nothing all day.
Until we see really impressive AI robotics which automate manual labor (it’s fair to extrapolate capabilities, but we’re not there yet), I don’t think it will fundamentally alter our economy that much. There will be various disruptions, but ultimately I think there is way too much status and people’s self worth tied up in their jobs to fully do away with them. The market is competitive and in theory incentivizes companies to automate away as many employees as possible, but we’ve all seen with our own eyes that lots of companies are very bad at this and employ thousands of people who don’t help the business at all (see Elon firings at Twitter). Plus already a substantial number of white collar employees work for government or non-profits.
assman
1yr ago
In some sense yes, I think “libertarianism” is not a viable political program in a democracy (or maybe at all). But for something like drug legalization which you mentioned below, a lot of the more mainstream arguments for this are that it actually reduces drug use, or makes it safer, or the cost-benefit of enforcement isn’t worth it etc. There’s plenty of arguments that even with our current political program it would be beneficial for various reasons, whether they are correct or not.
But for open borders- I don’t understand what is even meant by this when it is put forth as a policy. If the US were to pass a law tomorrow that literally anyone who wants to live here can show up and be entitled to the benefits of citizenship, we would immediately see millions of immigrants from poor countries around the world show up who are now entitled to welfare, food stamps, healthcare, housing and minimum wage which would become unsustainable immediately. We’re able to mostly handle high levels of illegal immigration now because these people are not entitled to government benefits or subject to minimum wage laws or other labor protections. When people argue for open borders as a policy- do they mean we maintain de jure immigration laws but just completely stop border enforcement and allow anyone who shows up to remain here as illegal immigrants not eligible for our entitlement programs?
assman
1yr ago
What I was trying to say is in an ideal libertarian state, where the government is just law/contract enforcement and a military or whatever, and does not otherwise redistribute money or interfere in much else - de jure open borders would at least be a possibility. Having actual, de jure, open borders in 2024 America would collapse the government relatively quickly if millions and millions of immigrants showed up and were given welfare, healthcare and other entitlements.
assman
1yr ago
Are you in favor of open borders as a practical policy matter under our current political system which does include redistribution schemes, birthright citizenship, various employment regulations etc.? The libertarian case for open borders in a legitimate “libertarian state” makes sense to me as ultimate freedom of association, but in current year US it seems to have second-order effects that are detrimental to libertarianism given the voting tendencies of second-gen immigrants and the fact that they end up as beneficiaries of various redistribution schemes. Is it like an accelerationist point of view, where having actual de jure open borders (which seems unlikely to ever happen in reality) would quickly make redistribution schemes untenable? Or is it just that the moral/ideological importance of open borders supersedes the practical considerations for you?
assman
1yr ago
Not disputing it- just genuinely curious why Gates is considered 99.99th percentile? I’ve never read much about him so I’ve only ever heard redditors say that Gates was more of a ruthless businessman than a genius computer scientist
assman
1yr ago
Yeah it always shocks me how many people seem to sincerely believe in blank slateism despite 1. Recognizing heredity in individual families and 2. Noticing racial stereotypes being so evidently true in real life. When I was a kid and all the adults said that the reason Asians were smart and blacks weren’t as smart was “poverty” or whatever I always assumed it was just being polite. Like it registered the same to me as when little league coaches would tell kids they were batting last to “balance the lineup” or something. I always just assumed everyone privately believed in innate group differences but didn’t like talking about it, but tons of people insist it’s a crazy idea even on anonymous forums so I tend to believe they sincerely think that
assman
1yr ago
I’m not sure I agree that stopping shaming for depression and anxiety was a wise decision. More generally, it seems that “society” is incapable of transitioning from “shaming a behavior” to “tolerating a behavior”, without the pendulum swinging way too far the other way and outright celebrating various forms of antisocial behavior. I might just be too internet-culture-war-brained, but the big examples of formerly shamed behaviors like homosexuality, transgender, various mental illnesses, to older culture war fights about how women should dress or whether people should have sex before marriage tend to immediately flip from general intolerance, to encouragement and celebration, without much of a “tolerate but don’t encourage” phase. It seems like you basically can’t get rid of shame, you can only change the polarity of it. Now you are shamed for being a *phobe, or for not having the “basic human decency” to accommodate people’s questionable self-diagnosed mental illnesses. Are there any examples of this not being the case, maybe for more banal, less politically charged behaviors? The only thing I can think of maybe is obesity, where most people agree it’s rude to outright shame people for being fat, but the “celebrating fatness” movement hasn’t really taken off
assman
1yr ago
Ah I misunderstood the paragraph, but now I’m left wondering what makes the MtFs far more problematic than mere weirdos or perverts. Is it just something like what Sailer says about the AGP types?
assman
1yr ago
Sorry to necro but can you explain what tier two is? I can’t figure out what the HBD informed view of MTFs is and my curiosity killing me. You can send via PM if you don’t want to elaborate on here (if you feel like elaborating at all)
assman
1yr ago
I actually think I have a pretty good idea of how the discrimination against Asians worked in practice. I went to a public high school (not a magnet or charter, just a regular public high school) of about 1500 kids, which was around 50% Asian split pretty evenly between East and South Asians, which placed around 20 kids into Ivy League schools every year out of the ~400 person graduating classes, and many more into the next tier of schools. My 1500 SAT was like 80th percentile in my graduating class iirc. I’d say there were about 100 kids who were the stereotypical children of Tiger Mom’s. They were obviously very smart, but they weren’t geniuses- they studied really hard to get high scores on their APs and to do well in their classes. When they weren’t studying they were doing some sort of resume box-ticking like playing in the orchestra despite not seeming to be passionate about music, playing a sport they weren’t really trying to compete in like cross country, or joining one of the random schools clubs that didn’t really do much. Many of these kids really did seem to fit the exact stereotype of Asian kids with “bad personalities” that seemed to be joylessly going through the motions of trying to get into an elite school, and their résumés and test scores were certainly good enough for any of the ivies. These kids mostly seemed to end up on a large scholarship at local public school, or at one of non-Ivy elites. I’m sure most of them will be very successful in tech or engineering or whatever, but I doubt any of them will be remarkable. The kids who did make it to an Ivy League were the 10-20 who were either: 1. Extremely nerdy, but legitimate geniuses. The kids who took the AP calc exam in their freshman year, and were winning Olympiad competitions and such and 2. The Asian kids who fit all the Tiger Mom criteria, but were also social butterflies involved in student government, seriously competed in sports, etc. The type 1s I expect to be impressive academics in whichever field they study, and the type 2s will fit perfectly in the “elite fields” which require more soft skills like finance, law, consulting or whatever.
I don’t agree this is a fair system at all, but I will say in my experience it seems like the Ivies were quite good at spotting the “future elite” types out of the dozens of qualified Asian resumes they received every year from my school
assman
1yr ago
I’m not really trying to argue for the merits of these ideas- but that they are major issues the various factions of the online right care about, mostly agree on, and are theoretically possible through normal politics.
assman
1yr ago
I saw that, surprised nobody has made a post here about it. I think I had almost everyone on there about 10 pts higher than the average except for Spencer, varg, Kanye, Fuentes and Tate, which maybe is a point against my ability to estimate IQ
assman
1yr ago
I feel like it’s pretty clear by now that he’s not playing a character, which is what makes him so interesting to me. I might’ve internalized the IQ-supremacy point of view where “street smart vs book smart” isn’t a real distinction of intelligence (just high IQ applied differently) too much, which is why I’m overestimating him. It just seems like you have to be pretty high IQ to take “street smarts” as far as he has despite coming across as not very intelligent. I also would be interested to know how difficult it was to get into UPenn back then even assuming a lot of nepotism involved, as that would be a good data point to try and estimate a floor for his IQ
I think you misread the second part. How do we deport you if you were NOT apprehended at the border and fingerprinted? If you’re caught at the border we have proof you illegally entered and biometric proof of your identity. But if you were never apprehended or fingerprinted- what is stopping you from claiming you’re a citizen? ICE can detain you but they have to prove you’re NOT a citizen to deport you. I don’t see how this is possible without significant investigation time given we don’t have any mandatory national photo ID system.
More options
Context Copy link