3 ms·

I can't imagine taking The Atlantic seriously on anything. My word. You aren't actually supposed to read the endless ragebait. Contrary to the Atlantic's almos

I can't imagine taking The Atlantic seriously on anything. My word. You aren't actually supposed to read the endless ragebait. Contrary to the Atlantic's almost always intentionally misleading framing, the "dot com boom" did in fact go on to print trillions later and it is still printing them. After what was an ultimately marginal if account clearing dip for many. I say that as someone who would be deemed to be an Ai pessimist, by many. But its wildly early to declare anything to be "what it is" and only that, in terms of ultimate benefit. Just like it was and is wild to declare the dot com boom to be over.

arrobbiato 2y ago
> I can't imagine taking The Atlantic seriously on anything. Agreed - I stopped taking The Atlantic seriously after their 2009 cover story, "Did Christianity Cause the Crash?"[1] To ignore CDOs, the Glass-Steagal repeal, the co-option of the ratings agencies and the dissolution of lending standards, and instead blame the Great Recession on a few obnoxious megapastors is to completely discard the magazine's credibility. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/12/did-christianity-cause-the-crash/307764/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/12/did-chr...
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  Really, you can't see a connection between people promoting ever supernatural rewards for being money and prosperity-driven and stoking that fire right alongside rampant capitalism and reckless decisions on how to protect our financial and economic wellbeing? Especially when even some very very bright people still believe in imaginary creatures in the sky and use that to shape and guide their decision process? Maybe not "cause", but "contribute notably to".
  - arrobbiato 2y ago
    You might argue that faith, in its various manifestations, is the root of all economic distortions and malaises. That being said, no, I don’t think that a subset of evangelical Christianity caused or meaningfully contributed to the 2009 crash, since there are abundant facts and analyses to the contrary. To believe otherwise would be, ironically, an act of faith.
  - mrangle 2y ago
    Yes, really. It's okay to not know anything about how the global economy works or its history: each decade defining the next. But it isn't okay to twist that ignorance to become focus on a scapegoat of convenience. Led by The Atlantic's wager on what you don't know, their hatreds, and their mission to distract.

arrobbiato 2y ago

> I can't imagine taking The Atlantic seriously on anything. Agreed - I stopped taking The Atlantic seriously after their 2009 cover story, "Did Christianity Cause the Crash?"[1] To ignore CDOs, the Glass-Steagal repeal, the co-option of the ratings agencies and the dissolution of lending standards, and instead blame the Great Recession on a few obnoxious megapastors is to completely discard the magazine's credibility. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/12/did-christianity-cause-the-crash/307764/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/12/did-chr...

FireBeyond 2y ago
Really, you can't see a connection between people promoting ever supernatural rewards for being money and prosperity-driven and stoking that fire right alongside rampant capitalism and reckless decisions on how to protect our financial and economic wellbeing? Especially when even some very very bright people still believe in imaginary creatures in the sky and use that to shape and guide their decision process? Maybe not "cause", but "contribute notably to".
- arrobbiato 2y ago
  You might argue that faith, in its various manifestations, is the root of all economic distortions and malaises. That being said, no, I don’t think that a subset of evangelical Christianity caused or meaningfully contributed to the 2009 crash, since there are abundant facts and analyses to the contrary. To believe otherwise would be, ironically, an act of faith.
- mrangle 2y ago
  Yes, really. It's okay to not know anything about how the global economy works or its history: each decade defining the next. But it isn't okay to twist that ignorance to become focus on a scapegoat of convenience. Led by The Atlantic's wager on what you don't know, their hatreds, and their mission to distract.