jahaja

11 ms·

31.
by jahaja 6y ago
I mean, I'm not unaware that there's other strains. But the representation is slim to none.
32.
by jahaja 6y ago
> Just look at how many Nobel Prize winners completely fuck up when they try going outside of their specialty. Either way there's no basis to dismiss people's opinion solely on their primary field of study. One obvious example
33.
by jahaja 6y ago
> Planned obsolescence is not a general property of a market-driven economy. Are you really gonna try to explain one of the most obvious consequence of capitalist profit incentives by some random reddit post along with another dismissive
34.
by jahaja 6y ago
> Economics is about as hard as any other modern applied science. That still doesn't mean that it's indecipherable by brilliant people in other field of studies nor that the core parts are particularly hard. > because of the
35.
by jahaja 6y ago
> Bertrand Russell was an amazing logician and mathematician. Albert Einstein was an incredible physicist. I would trust none of them to handle economics. You guys need to stop pretending that economics is 1. something really really har
36.
by jahaja 6y ago
> The theory that free markets are highly effective isn't based on a belief in magic. Well, yes, that capitalism will cause a production craze is even written in the Communist Manifesto. What "effective" means in practice
37.
by jahaja 6y ago
The problem here is that you're outright dismissing the entire Socialist movement and the very prominent scientists (e.g Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein) within its history as quacks. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever an
38.
by jahaja 6y ago
> To the layman, theories on the efficacy of free markets sounds like a type of fundemantalism > Anti-free-market-ism is the anti-vaxxerism of the intelligentsia. Well, I mean, yes? That is blatant fundamentalism. "Everyone who d
39.
by jahaja 6y ago
HBD is just how that particular crowd (less-wrong rationalists, a.k.a reactionaries who can spell) dog-whistles their racism.
40.
by jahaja 6y ago
> Above a certain minimal level of education, demographic outcomes like crime rate seem to be 70-80% predicted by entirely heritable characteristics, with very little environmental interaction. This is just racism in a language that&#x27
41.
by jahaja 6y ago
You're missing the point. The entire societies are more left-wing.
42.
by jahaja 6y ago
> Left-wing run cities are much worse off than right-wing ones with respect to homelessness, violent crime, drug-abuse, etc, by any metric you look at Unless of course you look at the generally much more left wing Western-Europe. But th
43.
by jahaja 6y ago
That it has gone from extremely shite to very shite is not something that can just be translated to "people have become soft, weak, fragile". Suffering looks different now. It's a lazy take to conclude that people must have b
44.
by jahaja 6y ago
> It’s a couple of hundred dollars a year more than Finland or Sweden, but nothing dramatic. In the sunny day scenario. Why can't you stop cherry-picking? > And the fees/co-pays are of course not the end of the road. People
45.
by jahaja 6y ago
What's your point? This is more or less the end of the road in Sweden and Finland with regards to fees/co-pays, there's no difference with regards to severity. Not sure why you guys are so eager to try a "it's actua
46.
by jahaja 6y ago
I think it's pretty relevant to post how large these Finnish fees and co-pays are compared to the US? It comes across as pretty dishonest to omit that the fee is almost symbolic in comparison. In Sweden it's like 200SEK (~$20) per
47.
by jahaja 6y ago
But we have to realise that the common situation here is a corporation against a single individual. How is it comparable to a cartel of corporations?
48.
by jahaja 6y ago
You don't see any power disparity here?
49.
by jahaja 6y ago
That's just unsubstantiated nationalistic nonsense.
50.
by jahaja 6y ago
I can't really see anything in your post that contradicts anything I've written in this thread so I'm not sure what your point it.
51.
by jahaja 6y ago
There clearly isn't much ground for a constructive discussion here with that kind of dogmatic market fundamentalism. Pretty much all of what you wrote is trivially refutable by just comparing the US to other western-European nations.
52.
by jahaja 6y ago
> So your position is that Day labor and/or independent contracting is only predatory? Yes, especially when the primary USP is just to lower labour costs compared to having them as employees. > That people are incapable of lookin
53.
by jahaja 6y ago
> I would love to see your source on that, most cities with any kind of taxi system have some permitting or medallion system that limits the number of taxis It's an assumption because the medallion system is very US-centric. Permits
54.
by jahaja 6y ago
Alright, but that's not the case in the majority of the places where Uber have, and have tried to, introduce day labourers.
55.
by jahaja 6y ago
> The regulations created an artificial scarcity Is the classification as an employee, with attached benefits, artificial scarcity in a negative sense? If so, we got quite a few industries that would also love to remove this "artifi
56.
by jahaja 6y ago
> The preamble is the most important section of an article. You don't "cherry pick" the most important part of an article. Yikes. If this is the level that you're at, I really hope that you are trolling. The point is
57.
by jahaja 6y ago
> Institutional racism is "racism that is embedded as normal practice within society", which only occurs through the mechanism of systemic properties like its laws or rules, or its social contract, just as I explained. Come on.
58.
by jahaja 6y ago
Alright, so you've redefined the entire concept into something else and then went about dismissing the established concept entirely. Because that is, unlike your objective science, based on "extremely ideologically biased humaniti
59.
by jahaja 6y ago
> You do realize that I think exactly the same about you, right? To assume that your perspective is so superior, that it gives you a right to ignore civil protocol, is incredibly arrogant. > absurd allegation of systemic racism So the
60.
by jahaja 6y ago
> Please don't flame me. I could just easily flame you and I'm not. Your first claim so blatantly false and wrong that it's pretty appropriate to assume that you're trolling. I mean, systemic/institutional racism

More ›