dr_analog
razorboy
No bio...
User ID: 583
dr_analog
razorboy
12hr ago
This kind of asylum is very much in the spirit of the asylum treaty that Congress enacted and the President should be blocked from deporting them.
dr_analog
razorboy
1d ago
elicit glee from yours truly because they're so obviously needed.
I have expressed similar amounts of glee. Here on TheMotte even. Repeatedly. Watching people on /r/fednews react with outrage at the collision with reality has been like porn.
But I still think the government does some useful, good things and the carpet bombing approach DOGE is taking is very costly. I would consider it worthwhile if the goal was to substantially reduce the deficit, but not if the goal is to score ideological victory. If the goal is to keep the deficits and cut taxes, you can score ideological victory through more surgical cutting.
dr_analog
razorboy
1d ago
This inner peace comes from recognizing that nobody cares and that it's never going to happen.
I had been resigned to this. Then Elon and Trump appeared initially quite serious about fixing the deficit. If there was a silver lining to these greedy unprincipled clowns taking control of the government, to the fucking all-in podcast / PayPal mafia now being in the President's ear, it would be that they were at least serious about the budget. Libertarians rejoice!
Except they aren't. Or, at least, Trump used Elon. Or, Elon was never serious about it either.
Instead we're slash and burning the government, which includes useful important stuff with no replacement. And we're doing it for, what... approximately nothing? Because the cruelty is the point? To own the libs?
dr_analog
razorboy
1d ago
dr_analog
razorboy
1d ago
The theme is marking the occasion of the SOTU by taking inventory of some of the broken promises, incompetence, lies and hypocrisy in just six weeks.
In his first term, he added approximately $8 trillion to national debt, and the spending and tax bill is set to add trillions more.
I was willing to put up with the risky, indiscriminate slash and burning of the government if it meant America was going to reduce its deficit. This is a major thing Elon and DOGE campaigned on.
But the Trump budget proposal to Congress, which slashes spending proposes to slash taxes even further and net increase the deficit overall.
That's just beyond the pale for me.
dr_analog
razorboy
2d ago
We were being LeanFIRE for a bit[1] and my waifu and kids were getting by on bulk rice, lentils, beans, flours and eggs and a quarter cow in the freezer. Also a CSA. Worked out to about $300/month.
It was fairly edible food albeit not really what you'd call American. What it did require was a lot of planning and being resourceful, and I'm absolutely positive the people on food stamps just don't have this capacity available.
- Eventually we decided being OverweightFIRE was better
dr_analog
razorboy
2d ago
incentivizes collecting your paycheck and running before the whole house of cards collapses around you.
I am not this pessimistic about private sector work, but even if I was I think I'd still consider it less soul crushing than tending a computer lab in a public high school?
dr_analog
razorboy
2d ago
Because of a treaty that isn't worth the paper it's printed on. You know this stuff.
I don't follow. If it's not worth the paper it's printed on why does the "Because" happen?
I'm seeing people who had long term and stable government contracts, sometimes decades, being let go.
I have fairly negative reactions to this kind of lamentation.
My first experience with "government stability" is when I was in high school. I was really good at computers and would cut class and hang out in the computer lab and the people working there decided I was a mild net benefit so they put up with me. This was during the dot com bubble so I was on the cusp of dropping out and chasing big money.
Most of the technicians there were grade A mopes who couldn't hack their way out of MS Word, but one was particularly skilled and we got to talking. He said he was making some meager $45k/year. I asked him why he was working there for so little money instead of at a dot com and he said he just wanted the job security.
That made no mathematical sense given that he could have been raking in $150k/year as a systems administrator with the slightest bit of hustle but whatever.
In a somewhat Joker kind of way I think it's more life-affirming to cut these government jobs. Between market forces for labor and more regular job changes, this guy would be dragged kicking and screaming into finding a job that paid him what he was actually worth.
(Or maybe not whatever)
dr_analog
razorboy
2d ago
At the very least this is all going to be fascinating - one of the ironclad, universally agreed-upon tenets of a social science being put to the test. Markets have not reacted well so far, but that's as much a feature of groupthink as it is reflective of material reality. It's a good time to be a prospective PhD in Economics. You're about to have more than you could have ever hoped to work with.
This is like firing up the Large Hadron Collider for the first time for macro-economists right?
dr_analog
razorboy
4d ago
We enter the war on the side of Ukraine, mudstomp Russia for six minutes before the nukes fly, and we all sing Kumbaya as the bombs fall.
So. What are the limits to nuclear armageddon blackmail here? Why can't Russia just invade a NATO member like Finland and say fuck you, they're a threat to our security, surrender or the nukes fly?
dr_analog
razorboy
4d ago
Sure, though whether or not it's a good idea depends on what the goals of the invader are, no?
Russia has engaged in a series of expansionist salami-slicing tactics like this. Giving in just seems to embolden them.
dr_analog
razorboy
4d ago
Right, I doubt Ukraine would give up its sovereignty simply to appease Russia. I don't quite blame them.
European boots on the ground are, if anything, more likely now that Trump has sent everyone into hysterics - South Vietnam and France also held out for years with their situation going from bleak to bleaker until the US finally caved and sent in its own GIs.
Doesn't this also raise the risk of nuclear exchange? It's not like Europeans aren't nuclear powers themselves.
What choices are there?
What actual peace proposal is even credible?
Ukraine can cede the annexed land to Russia and then do what, promise it won't align with NATO and stay neutral? What happens if Russia decides it wants to capture even more of Ukraine in a few years, for whatever reason? The tools available for resolving that are the same as the tools we have now. All that was accomplished from that was that Russia was granted even more edge.
Ukraine should just unconditionally surrender? Their people won't accept that.
Russia won't accept any deal that involves a security guarantee for Ukraine. The West can impose one anyway but some worry that will lead to a nuclear exchange.
It's a shit sandwich no matter where you bite into it.
dr_analog
razorboy
5d ago
I'm sorry I was hallucinating. I just checked my bottle and it's actually 10mg. I've been at that the whole time.
dr_analog
razorboy
5d ago
Huh. You sure do get dates easily.
Are you like, attractive? Or do you say in your profile you're looking to get married and have kids soon?
We don't need nuclear weapons to open a can of whup ass on Russia. We can use our conventional forces for that and the gloves will be off if they use nukes in a war of conquest.
And even if we obliterate all of their power projection capability, it's still better for them to just take that and not choose suicide by nuking us directly.
The only reason we need to use nukes is to guarantee Armageddon if they nuke us.
The problem with your comment is it's flippant and unserious. NATO attempts to establish no-fly zone over Ukraine and then Russia nukes Ukraine and maybe be few airbases where the planes were being stationed in Eastern European
Then we use conventional weaponry to obliterate all of their power projection capability and they become a pariah even the rest of BRICS can no longer tolerate for having used nuclear weapons in a war of conquest.
And even in that case it still does not logically follow to choose nuclear armageddon (escalating nuclear weapons use).
No, the US and European air forces would suffer catastrophic casualties if they tried to do something like this, so Russia would call their bluff and it wouldn't happen.
I'm fairly skeptical Russia has a meaningful response to NATO air power but we can call me a Kool Aid drinker if you like.
Oh? Nuclear Armageddon where hundreds of millions die is unlikely? Okay, well I guess let's just push it.
It doesn't really logically follow that supposing the West surrenders substantial territory and the war can end, it's not enough and Russia is going to push the big red button and now everyone dies. That is the opposite of improving Russia's security posture!
After all, we desperate need land on Russia's border in the NATO alliance because... well who cares, Russia has to make the substantive case why we shouldn't!
As has been demonstrated, countries that aren't part of NATO get invaded by Russia and there's that whole substantive case of the rules based order where you don't get to just conquer nations because it would totes help quiet your paranoia.
That offer is DOA because it would put NATO military within 300mi from Moscow
Why is that the magic number? Maybe the map is distorting things but Ukraine being in NATO doesn't seem much different than Finland, Latvia and Estonia being nearby and much closer to St Petersburg and not that far from Moscow. Ukraine minus Donbas buffer seems like more of the same spitting distance.
The US has already used most of its leverage in the Biden administration. The only thing left is to appeal to Russia to avoid the butcher's bill, but given the above Russia has already paid most of the cost and political will so they're going to need a whole lot to stop.
Leverage: we could just say okay this bullshit has gone on long enough. The unilateral peace deal is the free part of Ukraine is part of NATO now. Keep Crimea and Donbas etc. Well played, Putin, you got your buffer. Now kindly cut the shit or our air forces will light you up.
Are they going to nuke over that? Seems unlikely.
dr_analog
razorboy
6d ago
I am curious what you think about this security guarantee: Russia gets to keep the land it annexed, which is more Russian aligned anyway (right?), but the rest of Ukraine gets to join NATO.
All of this drama went down while I'm on a flight and I can't watch video right now, so I'm left with everyone else's takes. I love Hanania but am often surprised by how wildly he misreads emotions and facial expressions (he's admittedly autistic, no?)
Has anyone watched the full 40 minute video? Is this an accurate representation?
I would continue to provide intelligence sharing, weapons, economic aid. I would not involve our own military. Continue to strike as many deals as possible to economically isolate Russia as well.
Slowly and annoyingly bleed out Russian resources until they get exhausted and go home. No grand last stand. No obvious red lines crossed. Just endless quagmire for Russia, enormous cost for no lasting progress. Make it crystal clear that there's a rules based order and if you just cross boundaries in a war of conquest we will not make it easy.
A world where we didn't defend Ukraine is a lot more volatile. I contend that our willingness to simply surrender Afghanistan to the Taliban because we got bored is likely what contributed to the Ukraine invasion. I'm sure Putin thought he's nowhere near as fucked up as the Taliban, surely the US won't mind if he retakes Ukraine.
Oops.
If this causes WW3 and we all die in nuclear armageddon I would say it was a bad idea. But to some degree it would be unavoidable if Russia is that suicidal and that expansionist.
More options
Context Copy link