5 ms·

There have always been Kochs and Soroses. What’s new post 1960 is: 1. Massive increase in the college-educated. 2. Women getting educated and entering the wo

There have always been Kochs and Soroses. What’s new post 1960 is: 1. Massive increase in the college-educated. 2. Women getting educated and entering the workforce in large numbers.

eru 5y ago
Also lots more restrictions on building residential housing.
- pfkurtz 5y ago
  This is a real problem, and a direct consequence of elite competition: keep other competitors out. There should be enough places to live built as there are humans.
  - eru 5y ago
    Have a look at 'Why are there NIMBYs?' (Eg http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.981.2856&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.981... ) I wouldn't exactly call your typical middle class home owner an elite. Would you? > There should be enough places to live built as there are humans. We have the technology to build high and stack apartments, and the wealth to afford it. In many places, we just don't have the regulatory environment to do so legally.
    - pfkurtz 5y ago
      Yes NIMBY is a problem and may be more about human nature. The broken regulatory environment that exacerbates the problem is a consequence of elite competition: government not working for the public is caused by being captured by narrow interests, who work to corrupt its purpose. The (upper) middle class homeowners who don't want apartments built nearby? They are, for various reasons, better represented by local governments than people who want to do new things. I agree that the concept of "elite" doesn't cover what's going on here, but there are echoes, because power is a spectrum. That's the point I actually wanted to make.
      - eru 5y ago
        > The broken regulatory environment that exacerbates the problem is a consequence of elite competition: government not working for the public is caused by being captured by narrow interests, who work to corrupt its purpose. Alas, not necessarily. Normal voters are perfectly capable of demanding broken stuff all by themselves. Voters (somewhat rationally!) behave like idiots.
pfkurtz 5y ago
I didn't say Soros, and I didn't say "Koches". I said Charles Koch and Rupert Murdoch because they are the men destroying the fabric of our society by 1) fueling non-stop culture wars and hatred (about a trillion dollars has been spent on right wing media since it's inception as big business) and 2) destroying our environment, which is already a crisis for many people around the globe if it's not for you. These are the real problems we face. Not "wokeness" (basically just a nouveau slur). More educated people aren't a problem, this has driven the greatest economic boom in history. It has driven the greatest reduction in interpersonal violence in history. Education is an unalloyed good. Political, cultural and economic equality for women and however many other categories of people you want to add to that list are unalloyed goods. The problem is that all rewards are distributed to the top, because of the dominance of a small number of evil men over our political and economic system since about 1980. That is why competition to become an elite is so intense: only elites benefit from the current system. It is why we cannot get Democrats to govern properly, and why Republicans govern only with malice.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  Charles Koch and Rupert Murdoch are the ones destroying our environment? Can you explain or justify why you single out those two? Because from where I sit, that claim seems to be completely divorced from reality.
  - pfkurtz 5y ago
    Is it that from where you're sitting my points 1) and 2) a) aren't true, b) are true but aren't really harmful to society, or c) aren't the particular fault of the man who sits atop the right wing media ecosystem (which creates constant cultural conflict), and the biggest funder of climate change denial (because he's an oil baron)?
    - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
      I don't think that your point 2) is true of Murdoch. The right wing media ecosystem is not the prime driver of environmental destruction. People (on all sides) wanting more stuff, and in particular more energy, is the culprit.

There have always been Kochs and Soroses. What’s new post 1960 is: 1. Massive increase in the college-educated. 2. Women getting educated and entering the workforce in large numbers.

eru 5y ago

Also lots more restrictions on building residential housing.

pfkurtz 5y ago
This is a real problem, and a direct consequence of elite competition: keep other competitors out. There should be enough places to live built as there are humans.
- eru 5y ago
  Have a look at 'Why are there NIMBYs?' (Eg http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.981.2856&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.981... ) I wouldn't exactly call your typical middle class home owner an elite. Would you? > There should be enough places to live built as there are humans. We have the technology to build high and stack apartments, and the wealth to afford it. In many places, we just don't have the regulatory environment to do so legally.
  - pfkurtz 5y ago
    Yes NIMBY is a problem and may be more about human nature. The broken regulatory environment that exacerbates the problem is a consequence of elite competition: government not working for the public is caused by being captured by narrow interests, who work to corrupt its purpose. The (upper) middle class homeowners who don't want apartments built nearby? They are, for various reasons, better represented by local governments than people who want to do new things. I agree that the concept of "elite" doesn't cover what's going on here, but there are echoes, because power is a spectrum. That's the point I actually wanted to make.
    - eru 5y ago
      > The broken regulatory environment that exacerbates the problem is a consequence of elite competition: government not working for the public is caused by being captured by narrow interests, who work to corrupt its purpose. Alas, not necessarily. Normal voters are perfectly capable of demanding broken stuff all by themselves. Voters (somewhat rationally!) behave like idiots.

pfkurtz 5y ago

I didn't say Soros, and I didn't say "Koches". I said Charles Koch and Rupert Murdoch because they are the men destroying the fabric of our society by 1) fueling non-stop culture wars and hatred (about a trillion dollars has been spent on right wing media since it's inception as big business) and 2) destroying our environment, which is already a crisis for many people around the globe if it's not for you. These are the real problems we face. Not "wokeness" (basically just a nouveau slur). More educated people aren't a problem, this has driven the greatest economic boom in history. It has driven the greatest reduction in interpersonal violence in history. Education is an unalloyed good. Political, cultural and economic equality for women and however many other categories of people you want to add to that list are unalloyed goods. The problem is that all rewards are distributed to the top, because of the dominance of a small number of evil men over our political and economic system since about 1980. That is why competition to become an elite is so intense: only elites benefit from the current system. It is why we cannot get Democrats to govern properly, and why Republicans govern only with malice.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
Charles Koch and Rupert Murdoch are the ones destroying our environment? Can you explain or justify why you single out those two? Because from where I sit, that claim seems to be completely divorced from reality.
- pfkurtz 5y ago
  Is it that from where you're sitting my points 1) and 2) a) aren't true, b) are true but aren't really harmful to society, or c) aren't the particular fault of the man who sits atop the right wing media ecosystem (which creates constant cultural conflict), and the biggest funder of climate change denial (because he's an oil baron)?
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    I don't think that your point 2) is true of Murdoch. The right wing media ecosystem is not the prime driver of environmental destruction. People (on all sides) wanting more stuff, and in particular more energy, is the culprit.