bumby

19 ms·

301.
by bumby 1y ago
Agree. Unfortunately, there seems to be a change in the social norms of business. Eg, pay structures that would be laughed out of the board room in previous generations are considered just the way we do business now. Same with the erosion o
302.
by bumby 1y ago
I was with you until the assumption that more people are earning more in other sectors. 1) they are often not the same populations of people and 2) many people are also making much less in the low-wage service economy when they would have h
303.
by bumby 1y ago
My perspective is that we shouldn’t be trivializing the problem and recognize the tradeoffs and externalities. Pretending we have lots of manufacturing capacity for weapons systems because we know how to make cars misses the point of how di
304.
by bumby 1y ago
Sure, if you want to stop making cars to make weapons instead for a long period of time. Have you ever retooled a highly automated assembly plant? I have, and I can tell you it’s not something that can be changed on a whim.
305.
by bumby 1y ago
I’m saying it’s much harder than your original comment insinuates. That jet in your example has tens of thousands of parts and if you want to protect the entire supply chain, it can’t just be a few companies. Many of those suppliers are als
306.
by bumby 1y ago
> the government is pretty incompetent and full of grifters Is this based on actual data or just vibes from your interactions with the DMV, IRS, etc.? Michael Lewis writes well about this. His perspective is that the govt often shoulder
307.
by bumby 1y ago
The increase in aircraft manufacturing during that period came at the expense of lost civilian automobile manufacturing. There were practically no civilian American cars made from 1942-1945. Same can be said for other industries. To a certa
308.
by bumby 1y ago
This is a bad faith argument, and I think you know it. There is a wide gulf between “just a few industries” and “everything”. The first is naive and the latter is impractical. My suggestion is we take a targeted stance, where the solution r
309.
by bumby 1y ago
“With a nuclear power” != “between two nuclear powers”
310.
by bumby 1y ago
> key military leadership didn't even agree what the goals all were This seems to imply vague leadership is a very human issue, and not necessarily relegated to just politicians.
311.
by bumby 1y ago
It’s probably hard to silo a modern weapon system in the way your question supposes, meaning it may not be a good premise.
312.
by bumby 1y ago
As mentioned in another post, the DoD lists lack of manufacturing capabilities as a growing risk. There are many small batch parts that the US could manufacture, but companies aren’t interested. There are also those items which they no long
313.
by bumby 1y ago
Counterpoint: We aren’t necessarily manufacturing the things that contribute to national security in the same way we were after WW2. The DoD has listed lost manufacturing capacity as a major risk. And I think you’ll need to elaborate more o
314.
by bumby 1y ago
> However, it's arguably a better export that commoditized goods, from a margin standpoint. Importantly, this is the same dynamic that causes economies to move away from manufacturing towards service-oriented economies. Capitalism
315.
by bumby 1y ago
Your gatekeeping keeping is both unwarranted and against the HN guidelines of fostering curious conversation. I don’t know if you’re being obtuse or discussing in bad-faith, but I’ll make the relevance explicit: > "If we want people
316.
by bumby 1y ago
> If you ban gas cars by mandating EVs you have the same problem Yes. The point is you shouldn’t trivialize the problem and need to account for second order effects. If you want to mandate EVs, fine, but now you have to solve the proble
317.
by bumby 1y ago
Definitely agree that it doesn’t have to be that way, but doesn’t the US already use rail for commerce at a much higher rate than other nations? Rail in the US is mostly freight, not public transit. I also believe the highway system provide
318.
by bumby 1y ago
Yet there are clear HN guidelines that were should try to police in the effort to foster curious conversation.
319.
by bumby 1y ago
“Already paid for” does not imply you get to have it on your terms, however and whenever you want it. As an earlier comment alludes to, this is part of the problem of treating students as “customers”.
320.
by bumby 1y ago
The three sectors that are most at risk: construction, agriculture, and meat-packing. (I might also put in-home health aides in there). Ironically, these essentially subsidize the costs that Americans feel the most: food, housing, and healt
321.
by bumby 1y ago
To support your point further, I’ve worked in manufacturing and the there was a lot of competition to fill the well-paying union jobs. The low-pay non-union jobs, not so much. I also worked in automation, which turned lines that previously
322.
by bumby 1y ago
I think the argument is that roads contribute more to the overall economy than public transit.
323.
by bumby 1y ago
I agree with most everything you’ve said, but a lot of manufacturing for critical stuff is not automated in the mass-production sense. There are tons of small batch manufacturing in spaces like aerospace, electrical transmission, etc. that
324.
by bumby 1y ago
It’s directly related to your point about increasing gas taxes as an incentive to build demand for EVs (and eventually reduce gas tax revenue). If it gets to the point where the only people paying gas taxes are ICE hobbyists, the scale won’
325.
by bumby 1y ago
That creates a whole different problem. Gasoline taxes are a major contributor to infrastructure. If everyone moves to EVs, we need a an alternative, like a mileage tax.
326.
by bumby 1y ago
What’s your perspective on manufacturing capacity being necessary for national security? The U.S. has moved to service jobs because they tend to have the highest margins and capitalism is going to do what capitalism does. That is, unless sp
327.
by bumby 1y ago
Except in this case, there is no information to the other party that someone has a disability. So the default that we assume someone has a disability is what most people take umbrage with. I try to be generous as much as is reasonable. I ge
328.
by bumby 1y ago
Isn't it reasonable that we try to disrupt each other as much as possible as a default? It seems odd to force that responsibility onto another party. (ie it's weird to assume the professor is responsible for making sure another ad
329.
by bumby 1y ago
> If the professor is delayed due to a tire puncture, should they lose their tenure? This seems like a false equivalency. The student isn’t getting dropped from their degree program, they’re missing a class. If a professor is late, espe
330.
by bumby 1y ago
FWIW I agree but I think it’s worth communicating a devils advocate position. I don’t think anyone here is disagreeing that those with a disability should be protected. The distinction is that many don’t go so far as to assume someone has a

More ›