alentist

31 ms·

241.
by alentist 6y ago
There's no need to "trick" you. You said it on your own: > I'm gonna punch them for it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25753591
242.
by alentist 6y ago
> uh... so? Don't play coy. Punching someone is not the same thing as "showing them the door".
243.
by alentist 6y ago
That’s not what you said. You said you would punch them.
244.
by alentist 6y ago
This is not a defense of anything. That's something you projected onto the comment on your own. The comment is simply pointing out the hypocrisy and double standard that pervades this discussion. If pointing this out makes you angry, t
245.
by alentist 6y ago
> The topic does not need to focus on government or the US constitution. Exactly.
246.
by alentist 6y ago
> But they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop. They’re not. This is a movement. I’m telling you. They’re not going to stop, and everyone, beware. Because they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop before election d
247.
by alentist 6y ago
> But they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop. They’re not. This is a movement. I’m telling you. They’re not going to stop, and everyone, beware. Because they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop before election d
248.
by alentist 6y ago
dang, what part of my comment did you feel was "abusive"?
249.
by alentist 6y ago
> "no u" > It would be funny if it weren't so sad. Please join us in reality when you're ready. I rest my case. I was suggesting that you take your own advice, instead of throwing stones in glass houses.
250.
by alentist 6y ago
> it seems like you are attempting to justify the insurrection on Capitol Hill What mental gymnastics led you to this conclusion? It's obvious that the comment was pointing out the double standard and hypocrisy that pervades this di
251.
by alentist 6y ago
So should you.
252.
by alentist 6y ago
> censorship: the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security. Why do you conflate any discussion of censorship and freedom of speech
253.
by alentist 6y ago
> Public systems however have the same price pressure than private systems, since people put this pressure up via democracy. Not at all. Far from it. This is a very naive view of voting and public choice systems. See for example: https:
254.
by alentist 6y ago
> I interact with quite a few very conservative people and perhaps the ‘average man on the street’ is already more culturally conservative than on the coasts. You’re claiming that all these people you’ve met are anarcho-capitalists? Are
255.
by alentist 6y ago
I highly doubt that.
256.
by alentist 6y ago
Read up on SELTIC (the Service, Efficiency, and Lower Taxes for Indianapolis Commission) and how their privatization initiatives dramatically improved Indianapolis. https://bg.hbr.org/1997/05/can-business-really-do
257.
by alentist 6y ago
It’s an article of economic faith that government parties will always, by definition, provide superior outcomes with reduced costs.
258.
by alentist 6y ago
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1282404647160942598.html
259.
by alentist 6y ago
The IAT is pseudoscience. The Implicit Association Test at Age 21: No Evidence for Construct Validity [0] > The Implicit Association Test (IAT) is 21 years old. Greenwald et al. (1998) proposed that the IAT measures individual differen
260.
by alentist 6y ago
> Tax codes, Health and Safety, Child Labour, Employee exploitation These also apply to individuals.
261.
by alentist 6y ago
> coercion of persuasion Don't butcher the English language. That's not what coercion means. Persuasion is not a "coercion".
262.
by alentist 6y ago
What you're describing seems to come down to the identity (((w ∨ c) → a) ↔ ((w → a) ∧ (c → a))) That is, an implication whose antecedent is a dis junction is a con junction of implications. On the other hand, ((a → (w ∨ c)) ↔ ((a → w
263.
by alentist 6y ago
It underlies the decision tree model of computation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_tree_model
264.
by alentist 6y ago
> western property rights Not sure what you mean by "western" property rights. I'll assume you meant private property rights. > turn out not to prevent famine at all They do prevent famine. They don't prevent al
265.
by alentist 6y ago
> Is the great Chinese famine relevant to a discussion of colonialism? It is relevant insofar as it addresses the question of private property and its value as an institution, which is precisely what the chain of comments I replied to wa
266.
by alentist 6y ago
Correction: Particularly if you don’t enjoy starving to death. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine
267.
by alentist 6y ago
1. Many of the links I shared are about the Bay Area as a whole . 2. Here's the definition of zoning: > Zoning is a method of urban planning in which a municipality or other tier of government divides land into areas called z
268.
by alentist 6y ago
> You can burn the money in a furnace for all I care, as long as the ratio between the richest and poorest goes down substantially. How does making everyone worse off make things better? For example, inequality skyrocketed in China after
269.
by alentist 6y ago
> Citation needed. How Effective is Government Welfare Compared to Private Charity? [0] “[Government] income redistribution agencies are estimated to absorb about two-thirds of each dollar budgeted to them in overhead costs, and in some
270.
by alentist 6y ago
> got caught up in a blue/red debate Huh? > rather than contemplate what was written That’s exactly what I did? Do you actually have anything substantive to say?

More ›