5 ms·

This could be an interesting topic, but inevitably these posts devolve into politics and it’s always about the same thing. Yet this is the type of comment at th

This could be an interesting topic, but inevitably these posts devolve into politics and it’s always about the same thing. Yet this is the type of comment at the top. Why bother leaving a comment like this?

Ar-Curunir 2y ago
You realize that the only reason this is a topic of discussion is because of politics, right?
- jameslk 2y ago
  No? I see comments here discussing things other than politics
  - consteval 2y ago
    You don't, you just don't understand how they're intrinsically linked to politics. That's not me being mean, because a lot of the time it isn't obvious. But, you would be shocked how often you can trace an exact bill or executive order that is causing the thing people are thinking about. I mean, you can trace various seemingly random effects today to Reagan policies.
    - jameslk 2y ago
      I responded to a similar comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43263416 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43263416 Essentially, yes those other comments are linked to politics. All things could be extrapolated to politics. That doesn't mean we should directly talk about the political aspects, otherwise it drowns out curious discussion
- MichaelZuo 2y ago
  There rarely seem to be any substantive discussion in these types of threads, beyond vibes or repeating tautologies and talking points. Over the past few months I doubt there have even been 10 discussions total with some non-circular, credible, arguments along with some coherent logic backing them…
  - ty6853 2y ago
    Both right wing economists like Friedman and Mises, and left wing, understand initiating tariff wars against friendly neighbors is economically illiterate. No persons of educated thinking have anything fundamental to add. There is nothing to discuss. What we are witnessing is, to be crass, an exercise of pure idiocy.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      Based on what logic…? There’s not a widely agreed upon definition of intelligence last time I checked. So it seems impossible for “idiocy” to be any better defined. There’s not even such an agreement that all human adults are even sentient in the first place, or what the critical threshold is.
      - johnnyanmac 2y ago
        >Based on what logic That trump's narrative of what tariffs are is a lie and that these do not in fact help the economy. They can help, but not the way trump is using the tools. >There’s not a widely agreed upon definition of intelligence last time I checked. >Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        How does this relate to the prior claim? It’s clearly possible for people to have ulterior goals and motives… so assessments based on outward usages, of anything, seem irrelevant to determining intelligence, or the lack of it.
        johnnyanmac 2y ago
        This is my first reply to you, AFAIK. So I'm not sure what the thoughts are of the claim up the chain. I'm not interested in this tangent here that you keep trying to veer on. Point it many economists know this trade war is not good for the economy. The history of this is as recent as Trump 45.
thunkingdeep 2y ago
[flagged]
- jameslk 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    >When did I say that? I interpreated as such here: >inevitably these posts devolve into politics
    - jameslk 2y ago
      It looks like your interpreter might be buggy
      - thunkingdeep 2y ago
        For what it’s worth it wasn’t me that flagged your reply. All I’m saying is that politics is as intertwined with technology news as much as economics or religion or pop culture or anything else, and imho should be considered as equally valid sidebar conversations as the others. If we can’t talk about things that make people uncomfortable, sicko people will take control of those very things and we will all suffer down the road. Better to just bite the bullet and let it all hang out.
        jameslk 2y ago
        It's alright, I'm not shy to the flagging and downvotes. I appreciate your thoughtful response From my understanding, your argument is a variation of "many/all things are politics and therefore politics cannot be disentangled from the topic" which I've seen others mention before. Sure, you can find ways to connect things to certain policies and politicians and then talk about that solely. Yes, economics becomes politics and recent tariffs are certainly policy-related. That doesn't mean we must discuss the political aspects of it. The problem becomes that jumping to politics is very polarizing, identity-driven, and quickly drowns out curious discussion. The OP made a political statement, which won him easy points to push his comment to the top since there are so many who share the mindset of OP's comment. Any discussion about things not directly related to politics was pushed down. The effect happens across threads so frequently that no other conversation is left but politics. Those who don't want to talk politics spend time elsewhere, creating a feedback loop. PG has a great essay about this here: https://paulgraham.com/identity.html https://paulgraham.com/identity.html
kadoban 2y ago
You appear to be asking people to keep politics out of politics. What am I missing?
- jameslk 2y ago
  Straw man
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    Straw man is picking out a weak or unrelated argument. Seriously, what are you asking here?
    - jameslk 2y ago
      > Why bother leaving a comment like this?
      - whattheheckheck 2y ago
        Ask yourself
- pfannkuchen 2y ago
  More like asking people to focus on the economic considerations because the political discussion is boring and repetitive, I think.
  - lazide 2y ago
    Is invading Greenland really all that boring?
    - pfannkuchen 2y ago
      Have people not noticed that Trump seems to habitually make hyperbolic and ridiculous sounding statements? Like it’s not doing him any favors, I tend to feel it’s some kind of personality defect. Though it did get him a lot of attention in the past, which substantially led to him becoming president. Either he can’t turn it off, or the decade plus of increasingly internet centric media exposure among the general population just selected for a guy who had obvious populist but not too radical views and also makes ridiculous statements to get attention. Greenland will not be taken by force. The reminder of a possibility of force may be used as leverage in the negotiation. The messaging is kind of whacky, but it would make sense to broadcast the threat widely to achieve credibility. Like “he’s so crazy he might just pull the trigger”.

Ar-Curunir 2y ago

You realize that the only reason this is a topic of discussion is because of politics, right?

jameslk 2y ago
No? I see comments here discussing things other than politics
- consteval 2y ago
  You don't, you just don't understand how they're intrinsically linked to politics. That's not me being mean, because a lot of the time it isn't obvious. But, you would be shocked how often you can trace an exact bill or executive order that is causing the thing people are thinking about. I mean, you can trace various seemingly random effects today to Reagan policies.
  - jameslk 2y ago
    I responded to a similar comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43263416 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43263416 Essentially, yes those other comments are linked to politics. All things could be extrapolated to politics. That doesn't mean we should directly talk about the political aspects, otherwise it drowns out curious discussion
MichaelZuo 2y ago
There rarely seem to be any substantive discussion in these types of threads, beyond vibes or repeating tautologies and talking points. Over the past few months I doubt there have even been 10 discussions total with some non-circular, credible, arguments along with some coherent logic backing them…
- ty6853 2y ago
  Both right wing economists like Friedman and Mises, and left wing, understand initiating tariff wars against friendly neighbors is economically illiterate. No persons of educated thinking have anything fundamental to add. There is nothing to discuss. What we are witnessing is, to be crass, an exercise of pure idiocy.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    Based on what logic…? There’s not a widely agreed upon definition of intelligence last time I checked. So it seems impossible for “idiocy” to be any better defined. There’s not even such an agreement that all human adults are even sentient in the first place, or what the critical threshold is.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      >Based on what logic That trump's narrative of what tariffs are is a lie and that these do not in fact help the economy. They can help, but not the way trump is using the tools. >There’s not a widely agreed upon definition of intelligence last time I checked. >Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - MichaelZuo 2y ago
        How does this relate to the prior claim? It’s clearly possible for people to have ulterior goals and motives… so assessments based on outward usages, of anything, seem irrelevant to determining intelligence, or the lack of it.
        johnnyanmac 2y ago
        This is my first reply to you, AFAIK. So I'm not sure what the thoughts are of the claim up the chain. I'm not interested in this tangent here that you keep trying to veer on. Point it many economists know this trade war is not good for the economy. The history of this is as recent as Trump 45.

thunkingdeep 2y ago

[flagged]

jameslk 2y ago
[flagged]
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  >When did I say that? I interpreated as such here: >inevitably these posts devolve into politics
  - jameslk 2y ago
    It looks like your interpreter might be buggy
    - thunkingdeep 2y ago
      For what it’s worth it wasn’t me that flagged your reply. All I’m saying is that politics is as intertwined with technology news as much as economics or religion or pop culture or anything else, and imho should be considered as equally valid sidebar conversations as the others. If we can’t talk about things that make people uncomfortable, sicko people will take control of those very things and we will all suffer down the road. Better to just bite the bullet and let it all hang out.
      - jameslk 2y ago
        It's alright, I'm not shy to the flagging and downvotes. I appreciate your thoughtful response From my understanding, your argument is a variation of "many/all things are politics and therefore politics cannot be disentangled from the topic" which I've seen others mention before. Sure, you can find ways to connect things to certain policies and politicians and then talk about that solely. Yes, economics becomes politics and recent tariffs are certainly policy-related. That doesn't mean we must discuss the political aspects of it. The problem becomes that jumping to politics is very polarizing, identity-driven, and quickly drowns out curious discussion. The OP made a political statement, which won him easy points to push his comment to the top since there are so many who share the mindset of OP's comment. Any discussion about things not directly related to politics was pushed down. The effect happens across threads so frequently that no other conversation is left but politics. Those who don't want to talk politics spend time elsewhere, creating a feedback loop. PG has a great essay about this here: https://paulgraham.com/identity.html https://paulgraham.com/identity.html

kadoban 2y ago

You appear to be asking people to keep politics out of politics. What am I missing?

jameslk 2y ago
Straw man
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  Straw man is picking out a weak or unrelated argument. Seriously, what are you asking here?
  - jameslk 2y ago
    > Why bother leaving a comment like this?
    - whattheheckheck 2y ago
      Ask yourself
pfannkuchen 2y ago
More like asking people to focus on the economic considerations because the political discussion is boring and repetitive, I think.
- lazide 2y ago
  Is invading Greenland really all that boring?
  - pfannkuchen 2y ago
    Have people not noticed that Trump seems to habitually make hyperbolic and ridiculous sounding statements? Like it’s not doing him any favors, I tend to feel it’s some kind of personality defect. Though it did get him a lot of attention in the past, which substantially led to him becoming president. Either he can’t turn it off, or the decade plus of increasingly internet centric media exposure among the general population just selected for a guy who had obvious populist but not too radical views and also makes ridiculous statements to get attention. Greenland will not be taken by force. The reminder of a possibility of force may be used as leverage in the negotiation. The messaging is kind of whacky, but it would make sense to broadcast the threat widely to achieve credibility. Like “he’s so crazy he might just pull the trigger”.