grafmax

17 ms·

271.
by grafmax 1y ago
Most refugees don’t live in camps. Some camps don’t restrict movement, and those that do restrict it to widely varying degrees. Some do have features of concentration camps. Typically, even in closed camps, there’s no claim that refugees
272.
by grafmax 1y ago
At Alligator Alcatraz and CECOT, people are held without charges, denied timely access to legal counsel, and prevented from having a fair hearing to challenge their detention. At CECOT, transfers from the US occur without notice to attorney
273.
by grafmax 1y ago
People aren’t legally detained in refugee camps though. They are fleeing worse conditions.
274.
by grafmax 1y ago
They’re not death camps. But mass detention without due process - that’s a concentration camp.
275.
by grafmax 1y ago
This is part of the fundamental contradiction of libertarianism. Why would those with the power and the purse strings curtail the government (including spending) when it doesn’t suit them? Instead it’s things like environmental regulations
276.
by grafmax 1y ago
Unfortunately there is a chance you are underestimating the hubris of our leaders.
277.
by grafmax 1y ago
I mean, he’s not wrong. Libertarianism is freedom - for the rich. And concentrated wealth is antithetical to democracy because it’s concentrated power. He’s just taking libertarianism to its logical extreme by repudiating democracy. Is it a
278.
by grafmax 1y ago
Not only is China a peer with vast resources and numbers of people, it is also a nuclear power. A full scale conflict would be disastrous for us all.
279.
by grafmax 1y ago
I wonder if the VCs have given up on growth. AI isn’t really profitable. Unless you can get government to pay for it (“socialism for me, capitalism for thee”). That means military contracts. So we have a top heavy system with a perverse inc
280.
by grafmax 1y ago
Raising taxes generally raises money. In some cases it can lead to capital flight but that’s hardly some universal economic rule. But besides raising capital, taxation reduces wealth inequality, which is itself beneficial as it makes societ
281.
by grafmax 1y ago
> The change isn't that the government is collecting less money. The government is collecting less spending relative to taxes. A deficit is a difference between the two. Logically addressing either side would improve the deficit. H
282.
by grafmax 1y ago
Google’s DEI rollback might seem like it’s just an example of liberal-conservative culture war but what’s happening is more sinister than that. We should read it in context. A mega-corp strategically bowing before the government like this
283.
by grafmax 1y ago
I’m not sure how this is the center. We have devolved into something else. This is an expression of the tight control this authoritarian government holds on business. What we’re stumbling toward is possibly white nationalism. It’s not just
284.
by grafmax 1y ago
Jobs and culture are indeed reasons for people to move to the city, but it’s odd to claim that housing types don’t factor into consumer demand. Because housing types do, developers are incentivized to build housing that is the most profita
285.
by grafmax 1y ago
A developer in our example would still profit by offering a luxury unit with 3 bathrooms instead of 4. But you’re right that there will often be multiple baths and HVAC systems in a luxury unit - although electrical, plumbing, and fire supp
286.
by grafmax 1y ago
This “abundance” ideology which aims to influence Democratic policy promotes YIMBYism to address housing shortages by deregulating construction. It’s this claimed benefit I’m criticizing. Public housing does address this issue, which is why
287.
by grafmax 1y ago
It’s more than just extra fixtures and interior walls but bathrooms, kitchens, plumbing, and HVAC - some of the most expensive parts of a build. For example if a developer has 4,000 square foot of land, and it costs $1.6 million to build 4
288.
by grafmax 1y ago
> Klein and Thompson's political project is a plan to organize the Democrats. “Abundance” appeals to the financial backers of the Democratic Party because deregulation doesn’t threaten them. But our problems are much graver that wha
289.
by grafmax 1y ago
Developers are incentivized to build whatever units are most profitable, not what lowest income people need. More expensive units make more money. Besides that, land and construction are both limited resources that constrain developers abil
290.
by grafmax 1y ago
Abundance YIMBYism has many shortcomings. It doesn't address the risk of gentrification and displacement, the slow and unproven trickle-down effect of market-rate housing, or the critical need for direct public housing to serve low-inc
291.
by grafmax 1y ago
The average Joe doesn’t make the laws. The wealthy class do. Consider for a moment whether Elon Musk and his millions financing elections or Rupert Murdoch and his media empire have the same influence over the political process and you or I
292.
by grafmax 1y ago
My point is that there is no motivation for balance since you have the people with the wealth and power determining the laws. You allude to a “normal functioning” capitalist environment but as counterintuitive as it might seem, that’s what
293.
by grafmax 1y ago
It’s a bit of a mirage to appeal to capitalism against IP laws. Markets exacerbate wealth inequality (a well-established phenomenon). And consolidated wealth is consolidated power. The wealthiest companies can lobby for laws that suit them
294.
by grafmax 1y ago
Increased financialization of the economy plays a role as well. It tends to consolidate market players though M&A. That in turn that allows firms to similarly profit from rent-seeking in captured and semi-captured markets, leading not j
295.
by grafmax 1y ago
I see. Elon Musk with the wave of his hand can conjure a new political party. Billionaire lobbyists hold politicians in tow. Or shape public opinion with the mass media companies they own. Supposedly my voice really is the same as theirs. (
296.
by grafmax 1y ago
I guess ‘democratize’ means something different to you than me. Most Americans don’t have any substantial savings whatsoever.
297.
by grafmax 1y ago
Billionaires have so much power that they 1) start asking themselves questions like “how can I change society?” and 2) are surrounded by sycophants waiting for crumbs. Besides that they are free to effectively decide the fates of others wi
298.
by grafmax 1y ago
Manufacturers aren’t held liable for negligence like this. It’s a classic case of economic externality.
299.
by grafmax 1y ago
I guess with the impending climate crisis quality of life will very likely go way down. Climate catastrophe is expected to destabilize societies. A natural outcome from that could plausibly be the rise of extreme ideologies that advocate fo
300.
by grafmax 1y ago
> I’m not convinced that LLMs are the future. I’m certainly not convinced that they’re the future I want. But what I’m most certain of is that we have choices about what our future should look like, and how we choose to use machines to b

More ›