palmfacehn

7 ms·

31.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
I've noticed that most reports fit the following format. 2-5 minutes of selective reporting of the headline issue. Then, "For more, we're joined by [credentialed think tank expert]". At this point the gloves come off and
32.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Billionaires often prefer the centralization which socialist narratives rationalize. It allows them to more easily capture wealth from the state. The central bank is a boon to Wall Street. The USDA is a boon to big agriculture. The central
33.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Empiricism is overrated in the current era. Pure reason is underappreciated. A triangle has only three sides. Two parallel lines will never meet. Wikipedia edit wars and reliable sources can't change that. If you wish, you can go far b
34.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Guilt by association is a poor substitute for an argument. The partisan takes on this site have eclipsed actual discussion. Mearshiemer has also appeared with a variety of think tanks, because he is widely respected. It is easy to cherry pi
35.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
If the extent of your reasoning ends with hasty generalizations (specifically, perceived parallels with Russian propaganda), many things will seem super weird . Simplistic categorization is a poor way to model the world. In a productive di
36.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Please stop presuming malicious intent. If you want to have a discussion, try starting by assuming good faith. If you do not wish to have a discussion, well... >...state the origin of the conflict as if a sovereign people being invaded
37.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
As an armchair Internet commentator, my theory is that the deliberately provoked proxy war is designed to drain Russian resources, gauge their capabilities and potentially destabilize without direct engagement. I would agree that neither si
38.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
They used a filament to guide their charge.
39.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Emotional takes and angry takes specifically aren't helping. Would prefer well reasoned, detached takes. Also not sure why the race or religion of the speaker is relevant.
40.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
>Instead of wading in... I regard it as important context. Yes, the country seems to be devolving into partisan recrimination. Similarly the comments... However, there was a time when obvious crimes like torture and false pretenses for w
41.
Hiroshi Senju: Selected Works(hiroshisenju.com)
2 points by palmfacehn 1y ago|0 comments
42.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Instead of wading into the partisan morass of the current topic, perhaps we could reflect upon this parallel: https://ccrjustice.org/ccrs-assessment-obama-administrations... >Despite the fact that the prosecution of offi
43.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
I remember when the Internet was celebrated as decentralized media, allowing common citizens to criticize repressive regimes. Today it seems like the west is emulating the countermeasures already perfected by those repressive regimes.
44.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
In practice the pseudo-crime of being "suspicious looking" also requires ID. Good luck if you want to argue your constitutional rights. Immigration status is topical for the current era. Something as benign as walking up the stree
45.
Nintendo of America president Doug Bowser retires(gamedeveloper.com)
6 points by palmfacehn 1y ago|1 comments
46.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
>Who gets to decide what’s the truth vs. lies? The “police”? This keeps coming up on this site. It seems like a basic premise for a nuanced and compassionate worldview. Humility is required. Even if we assume the best intentions, the fal
47.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Irrationality abounds. Meanwhile the other partisans are insisting that the paracetamol claim is junk science. The whole episode is ridiculous. I get the sense that if RFK linked lung cancer to smoking, the same appeals to tradition would b
48.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/expa...
49.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
That's the larger point here. We should be able to hold two different concepts in our minds when we describe the outcome. Yes, all things being equal tariffs and interventions create economic inefficiency. That is in my view, a rationa
50.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
From the article: >I read hackernews on a daily basis and I visit lots of different websites regularly. I am almost always on my VPN as I am internally firewalled by the government and externally shooed because of the sanctions, so I am
51.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Lee Jae-myung is seeking closer relations with the PRC. I view it as part of the missing context to this spat. These events preceded the US administration's actions. https://world.kbs.co.kr/service/news_view.htm?Se
52.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Agreed. That's what makes it so inane. I don't generally favor Trump's policies or the opposition's. Yet it is impossible to have a discussion here without providing explicit disclaimers. Even with those disclaimers, we&
53.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
That's not wrong, but it isn't the full picture either. Access to the US market has other values. If the manufacturer is carrying USD denominated debt, they or someone else must obtain those dollars through trade. Access to a larg
54.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
You have posed a reasonable question with good intentions. A simple Google search reveals: >U.S. authorities said some of the detained Korean workers had illegally crossed the U.S. border, while others entered legally but had expired vis
55.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Agreed. That's a summarized version of the (ECP, knowledge problem) argument against economic interventionism.
56.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWjpDxvqSSE Here's an even handed approach and overview of some of the tariff related stats. The presenter is a critic of tariffs, but concedes that the results thus far are not as simpl
57.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
Previously discussed https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45305845
58.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
I agree that the outcome will be destructive. The questions are: Is it is more or less destructive than the alternative destruction? Who is it more economically destructive for? Over what time period is it more or less destructive than the
59.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
At this point the debate has been reduced to which flavor of central planning you prefer or dislike least.
60.
by palmfacehn 1y ago
It isn't immediately clear that the administration's heterodox approach to state capitalism is more destructive than what passes as orthodox. Personally I'm not a fan of either option. Given the general mainstream preference

More ›