5 ms·

This is hand-waving a real concern away. It's why people on the right are so mad right now. Did we hand-wave the homelessness issue away in CA? Seems like ther

This is hand-waving a real concern away. It's why people on the right are so mad right now. Did we hand-wave the homelessness issue away in CA? Seems like there's an awful lot of hand-waving we did in the past 15 years growing the tech sector that left a shit-ton of people behind. I know a bunch of people are going to hand-wave this comment away too. The downvotes generated on hacker news will not translate at the voting booth.

toomuchtodo 3y ago
It's a real concern, but it is the best that is going to be provided. 2 million voters over the age of 55 die every year, 4 million voters turn 18. Conservatives can vote all they want, the electorate turnover and outcome is a combination of inertia (inflation reduction act has stoked an enormous amount of renewables manufacturing capacity coming online) and demographic destiny. Fossil fuels will die due to economics, it is just a matter of time horizon. I want to stress that I strongly support a just transition (policy should express compassion and empathy at scale), and if people can't be found other jobs, retiring them out early to bridge the gap to other social safety nets (medicare, social security, etc), but there is no path to success for conservative ideology on the issue of leaving fossil fuels behind (either through votes or economics). https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37052550 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37052550 (citations)
- danans 3y ago
  > but there is no path to success for conservative ideology on this issue (either through votes or economics). This is perhaps why there has been a big motivation for conservative politicians to use (or look the other way from) anti-democratic means to maintain power. Even more than the claimed small-government ideology, there is such an incredibly strong allegiance with the fossil fuel extraction industries [1] that artificially propping those industries is worth the subversion of democracy. There are models of this elsewhere in the world, after all. 1. Liberals once had that too, but lost the fossil fuel geography after the 60s. Manchin is the last of his kind.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    “Maybe you do not care much about the future of the Republican Party. You should. Conservatives will always be with us. If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. The will reject democracy." ― David Frum Liberals ("neolibs") fucked up bad by taking the working class for granted and letting globalization erode them [1] [2] [3], very similar to what is happening with conservative fossil fuel electorate today. Maybe things have gotten bad enough for that cohort to be catered to again [4], maybe things need to get worse first. [1] https://kof.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/kof-bulletin/kof-bulletin/2020/03/globalisation-middle-class.html https://kof.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/kof-bulletin/kof-bull... [2] https://www.npr.org/2017/07/05/535626109/the-end-of-loyalty-and-the-decline-of-good-jobs-in-america https://www.npr.org/2017/07/05/535626109/the-end-of-loyalty-... [3] https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/09/459087477/the-tipping-point-most-americans-no-longer-are-middle-class https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/09/459087477... [4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCyZHB7NdPE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCyZHB7NdPE
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      Conservatism has always been opposed to democracy from the moment “conservative” and “liberal” as political labels were created. At most, they might abandon pretending to support it as cover while working to chip away at the edges when that pretense stops working for them, but that’s not a loss for democracy.
      - gottorf 3y ago
        > Conservatism has always been opposed to democracy Conservatism distilled to its essence can probably be summarized as Chesterton's fence: to not make rash moves changing the status quo without fully understanding both the reason the status quo is the way it is, and the nth-degree aftereffects of the change. So I grant you, in the beginning of democracy, almost by definition conservatism was against it, when the status quo was a feudal monarchy or whatever; but there's been a few hundred intervening years, and I don't think it's fair to make the argument that "conservatism" is still, and will always be, opposed to "democracy".
- bandyaboot 3y ago
  > 2 million voters over the age of 55 die every year, 4 million voters turn 18. I think this is a bit of a simplification that makes the effect sound much more drastic than it really is. While 2 million voters over the age of 55 may die every year, they are replaced by a similar number of voters who just became over 55 and who's politics, on average, are only marginally different. Of course this applies to every age group as well. Not that I'm assuming that you're meaning to suggest that the effect is drastic, but I often see the very same line of reasoning in the political media and I'm quite certain it is what they're suggesting---because clicks.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    The change is not drastic, but it is inevitable. 2 million deaths per year, 4 million per two year election cycle, 8 million every presidential election cycle. TLDR There are tipping points, keep an eye on these metrics to understand them and predict when they arrive. Think in systems. For example, Rep. Lauren Boebert won by only 546 votes last year in her district. You don't need much electorate change for that to not happen again. https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/16/politics/demographic-changes-voters-fault-lines/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/16/politics/demographic-changes-...
    - PM_me_your_math 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - mrtesthah 3y ago
        That’s a blatant fabrication. Here’s a state-by-state, claim-by-claim refutation of your entire narrative. https://statesuniteddemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/000A-Myths-and-Facts-of-the-2020-Presidential-Election-20210113-FINAL.pdf https://statesuniteddemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01...
      - bandyaboot 3y ago
        > I'm not a serious person. Please disregard my opinion on everything. Ok, thanks for the heads up!
- rayiner 3y ago
  Demographic destiny is the Lucy pulling the football away from liberals’ Charlie Brown. In the first few elections after Joe Biden took office in the 1970s, Democrats won the Congressional popular vote by 6-17 percentage points. Their margin was only 3 percentage points in 2020, and they lost by 3 percentage points last year. Liberalism is weaker than it has been in half a century.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Additional citations: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37152682 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37152682 ("The renewable energy revolution is happening faster than you think.") https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37152803 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37152803 ("The US climate law is fueling a factory frenzy. Here’s the latest tally.")
sanp 3y ago
It's the folks on the right who prevent any action more than hand-waving. I think we have to realize that for folks on the right it is a matter of Identity and not Policy. At this point their opinion or concerns should be just ignored because - 1) Addressing them will not get their votes (as it is a matter of Identity for them. A positive Policy for them will not impact their decision who to vote for) 2) Addressing their concerns just delays the inevitable (the inevitable could be either a significant move to renewables or climate disaster)
PM_me_your_math 3y ago
This is a curious take considering there isn't a person on earth who can force another person to learn, use, and sharpen the technical skills required to work in tech sectors. Are you saying that the success of one group through innovation shouldn't occur because another group refuses or is incapable of learning the skills required for the aforementioned?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

toomuchtodo 3y ago

It's a real concern, but it is the best that is going to be provided. 2 million voters over the age of 55 die every year, 4 million voters turn 18. Conservatives can vote all they want, the electorate turnover and outcome is a combination of inertia (inflation reduction act has stoked an enormous amount of renewables manufacturing capacity coming online) and demographic destiny. Fossil fuels will die due to economics, it is just a matter of time horizon. I want to stress that I strongly support a just transition (policy should express compassion and empathy at scale), and if people can't be found other jobs, retiring them out early to bridge the gap to other social safety nets (medicare, social security, etc), but there is no path to success for conservative ideology on the issue of leaving fossil fuels behind (either through votes or economics). https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37052550 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37052550 (citations)

danans 3y ago
> but there is no path to success for conservative ideology on this issue (either through votes or economics). This is perhaps why there has been a big motivation for conservative politicians to use (or look the other way from) anti-democratic means to maintain power. Even more than the claimed small-government ideology, there is such an incredibly strong allegiance with the fossil fuel extraction industries [1] that artificially propping those industries is worth the subversion of democracy. There are models of this elsewhere in the world, after all. 1. Liberals once had that too, but lost the fossil fuel geography after the 60s. Manchin is the last of his kind.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  “Maybe you do not care much about the future of the Republican Party. You should. Conservatives will always be with us. If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. The will reject democracy." ― David Frum Liberals ("neolibs") fucked up bad by taking the working class for granted and letting globalization erode them [1] [2] [3], very similar to what is happening with conservative fossil fuel electorate today. Maybe things have gotten bad enough for that cohort to be catered to again [4], maybe things need to get worse first. [1] https://kof.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/kof-bulletin/kof-bulletin/2020/03/globalisation-middle-class.html https://kof.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/kof-bulletin/kof-bull... [2] https://www.npr.org/2017/07/05/535626109/the-end-of-loyalty-and-the-decline-of-good-jobs-in-america https://www.npr.org/2017/07/05/535626109/the-end-of-loyalty-... [3] https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/09/459087477/the-tipping-point-most-americans-no-longer-are-middle-class https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/09/459087477... [4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCyZHB7NdPE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCyZHB7NdPE
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    Conservatism has always been opposed to democracy from the moment “conservative” and “liberal” as political labels were created. At most, they might abandon pretending to support it as cover while working to chip away at the edges when that pretense stops working for them, but that’s not a loss for democracy.
    - gottorf 3y ago
      > Conservatism has always been opposed to democracy Conservatism distilled to its essence can probably be summarized as Chesterton's fence: to not make rash moves changing the status quo without fully understanding both the reason the status quo is the way it is, and the nth-degree aftereffects of the change. So I grant you, in the beginning of democracy, almost by definition conservatism was against it, when the status quo was a feudal monarchy or whatever; but there's been a few hundred intervening years, and I don't think it's fair to make the argument that "conservatism" is still, and will always be, opposed to "democracy".
bandyaboot 3y ago
> 2 million voters over the age of 55 die every year, 4 million voters turn 18. I think this is a bit of a simplification that makes the effect sound much more drastic than it really is. While 2 million voters over the age of 55 may die every year, they are replaced by a similar number of voters who just became over 55 and who's politics, on average, are only marginally different. Of course this applies to every age group as well. Not that I'm assuming that you're meaning to suggest that the effect is drastic, but I often see the very same line of reasoning in the political media and I'm quite certain it is what they're suggesting---because clicks.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  The change is not drastic, but it is inevitable. 2 million deaths per year, 4 million per two year election cycle, 8 million every presidential election cycle. TLDR There are tipping points, keep an eye on these metrics to understand them and predict when they arrive. Think in systems. For example, Rep. Lauren Boebert won by only 546 votes last year in her district. You don't need much electorate change for that to not happen again. https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/16/politics/demographic-changes-voters-fault-lines/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/16/politics/demographic-changes-...
  - PM_me_your_math 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - mrtesthah 3y ago
      That’s a blatant fabrication. Here’s a state-by-state, claim-by-claim refutation of your entire narrative. https://statesuniteddemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/000A-Myths-and-Facts-of-the-2020-Presidential-Election-20210113-FINAL.pdf https://statesuniteddemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01...
    - bandyaboot 3y ago
      > I'm not a serious person. Please disregard my opinion on everything. Ok, thanks for the heads up!
rayiner 3y ago
Demographic destiny is the Lucy pulling the football away from liberals’ Charlie Brown. In the first few elections after Joe Biden took office in the 1970s, Democrats won the Congressional popular vote by 6-17 percentage points. Their margin was only 3 percentage points in 2020, and they lost by 3 percentage points last year. Liberalism is weaker than it has been in half a century.
toomuchtodo 3y ago
Additional citations: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37152682 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37152682 ("The renewable energy revolution is happening faster than you think.") https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37152803 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37152803 ("The US climate law is fueling a factory frenzy. Here’s the latest tally.")

sanp 3y ago

It's the folks on the right who prevent any action more than hand-waving. I think we have to realize that for folks on the right it is a matter of Identity and not Policy. At this point their opinion or concerns should be just ignored because - 1) Addressing them will not get their votes (as it is a matter of Identity for them. A positive Policy for them will not impact their decision who to vote for) 2) Addressing their concerns just delays the inevitable (the inevitable could be either a significant move to renewables or climate disaster)

PM_me_your_math 3y ago

This is a curious take considering there isn't a person on earth who can force another person to learn, use, and sharpen the technical skills required to work in tech sectors. Are you saying that the success of one group through innovation shouldn't occur because another group refuses or is incapable of learning the skills required for the aforementioned?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]