sanderjd

31 ms·

721.
by sanderjd 1y ago
This is essentially a "something must be done, this is something, therefore this must be done" type of argument. It's very easy, indeed common, for the "something" to be worse than the status quo.
722.
by sanderjd 1y ago
Yep, the giant Canada tariffs, in particular, as his first act on trade, was probably the most deeply weird and inexplicable thing I've seen a major world leader do in my lifetime. I've seen lots of policies I've disagreed wi
723.
by sanderjd 1y ago
No, I don't think people are going to eat it up. I think he's screwing this all up, badly. He's an adept showman but very far from being infallible.
724.
by sanderjd 1y ago
You tell me, but isn't this pretty noisy so soon after the last election?
725.
by sanderjd 1y ago
There's also no reason that whatever it does look like would be better than that, or even that the "modern democracies" we currently have would actually survive.
726.
by sanderjd 1y ago
Maybe! I struggle to see why you would feel confident in this outcome.
727.
by sanderjd 1y ago
No, that's all just normal "this is how an economy works" stuff. It has nothing to do with Reagan or what people refer to as "trickle down economics".
728.
by sanderjd 1y ago
Recession is the base case. The worst case is ... worse.
729.
by sanderjd 1y ago
It definitely isn't better for America or the world. We had a "flatter more multipolar world" during the "long 19th century". Pax Americana is certainly subject to a lot of valid criticism, but it was an even bigger
730.
by sanderjd 1y ago
I honestly don't understand the comment that started this thread. Brexit eventually led to a historic defeat of the conservative party who was (rightly) blamed for it. I guess the original commenter may have been surprised how long it
731.
by sanderjd 1y ago
This is a reasonable theory, but empirically we are already seeing a lot of defection from the "team", before the real pain has even begun.
732.
by sanderjd 1y ago
Yep, this is a political story that is unusually relevant here (as is the DOGE stuff). This has a lot of impact on business at large and arguably an outsized impact on both high tech and entrepreneurial businesses. It would be deeply weird
733.
by sanderjd 1y ago
I didn't downvote, but I don't think this seems like a very well thought out description of Trump's behavior. He doesn't care if he "will be fought", he wants to be fought, dramatically, because that's the
734.
by sanderjd 1y ago
My two cents is that if this had been, from the start, a dedicated effort to decouple the US economy from Chinese producers, for national / economic security reasons, then they might have been able to convince me that the short term pa
735.
by sanderjd 1y ago
This happens with every hype cycle. Some people fully buy into the most extreme of the hype, and other people reverse polarize against that. The first group ends up offsides because nothing is ever as good as the hype, but the second group
736.
by sanderjd 1y ago
Sorry but this just definitely isn't true. I would (similarly insultingly) suggest that if you think this is true, you're spending time doing things more slowly that you could be doing more productively by using contemporary tools
737.
by sanderjd 1y ago
I agree that we should do those things. But what I've seen for the past couple decades that I've been voting is that Republican politicians pretend to want to do those things, but refuse to do them "until we've stopped t
738.
by sanderjd 1y ago
I'm in favor of that too, but I think this insistence on it being step 1 is actually just a resistance to solving the real problem. (Which is that employers are happy to pay below market wages to illegally employ immigrants who are her
739.
by sanderjd 1y ago
What I'm arguing for is to not let employers do that.
740.
by sanderjd 1y ago
I don't think it's chicken and egg at all. I think lots of employers employ immigrants illegally, and then the immigrants take all the political heat. Anyone pissed about "all these illegals" should be at least just as p
741.
by sanderjd 1y ago
I think then we would have an "oh shit" moment and finally reform the legal immigration system to allow immigrants to come do all these jobs legally. It would be a forcing function.
742.
by sanderjd 1y ago
Yep, the solution is pretty clear in broad strokes, as you described, but the bases of both parties advocate for radically opposed policy through executive action, which just makes the situation worse.
743.
by sanderjd 1y ago
Yeah I think you just described what sitting on their thumbs looks like, for a legislative body :)
744.
by sanderjd 1y ago
Despite past congresses passing laws, the system is not good. A major contributor to the problem of people immigrating illegally is that our legal immigration system is a total mess. This is why there have been a number of efforts at reform
745.
by sanderjd 1y ago
It's not just "unfortunate", it's also illegal.
746.
by sanderjd 1y ago
Yes, because expelling citizens is illegal, and separating children from their families is tragic. Just being sarcastic and cynical about it doesn't change this.
747.
by sanderjd 1y ago
What does this "had to" mean? Was it "forced to" or was it "chose to"? Seems like the former.
748.
by sanderjd 1y ago
No, deporting means sending someone back to their country of origin. You can't "deport" someone from their country of origin to some other country.
749.
by sanderjd 1y ago
This gets at another portion of the answer to the "what's your alternative suggestion?" question: I'd suggest Congress pass laws, rather than presidents making stuff up, illegally. This is clearly not a partisan point! E
750.
by sanderjd 1y ago
> the children's citizenship was solely one of birthright Under the US Constitution, this is not a distinction. What you're looking for is just "the children's citizenship" without this qualifier that signifies

More ›