vkou

41 ms·

961.
by vkou 1y ago
> Some idea of forcing it to be composed based on arbitrary and irrelevant personal characteristics I can't think of a more arbitrary or irrelevant personal characteristic than being born to a family that inherits a political post
962.
by vkou 1y ago
> so have a lower chance of being correlated with whatever movement of the moment Correct, they instead have a 100% chance of being correlated with what is good for the aristocracy.
963.
by vkou 1y ago
I think the parent poster is saying that he behaved in a fashion that is consistent with traditional royal behaviour.
964.
by vkou 1y ago
Turn off your phone if you don't want to receive robo-dialed calls and unsolicited texts 300 times a day. Fence off your yard if you don't want people coming by and dumping a mountain of garbage on it every day. You can certainly
965.
by vkou 1y ago
It's not a flaw in representative democracy, it's a flaw in America as a whole. Most recently the public looked at the options before them, and chose to send in a slate of absolute lunatics in. When you can't even figure out
966.
by vkou 1y ago
I don't think you understand how legislatures around the world work, if you think this wouldn't be gamed to absurdity. Important bills generally don't go to a vote unless everyone involved knows exactly how many votes they
967.
by vkou 1y ago
Bush pissing on the rules-based world order in the 00s was the real enabler for Russian ambitions. If the US (and the half of Europe that was bending over backwards to curry favor) can start imperial adventures abroad for the most asinine r
968.
by vkou 1y ago
> Who benefits? People who would rather be kings of shit mountain, than rich and powerful but bound by law in a functional society.
969.
by vkou 1y ago
Great. Now, define how we can determine if two bills are the same 'your law' (Who decides? Lifetime-appointed partisan judges? The old legislature? The new legislature? The executive god-king?). ... And then figure out how to prev
970.
by vkou 1y ago
The US public reconsiders it every time it sends a new congress in. Congress can repeal it in any session, they don't need to wait for it to expire. Like, that's just the nature of representative democracy.
971.
by vkou 1y ago
The bar for adding something to it is the same bar for removing something from it. It's not 50%.
972.
by vkou 1y ago
That is the only way to run a government. Consider for a moment what a government of "Yes"/"No Forever, without ever revisiting the question" would result in. We aren't at the end of history.
973.
by vkou 1y ago
Surely, you could make... Whatever point you are making (if any)... Without a character attack against my person ?
974.
by vkou 1y ago
Yes, he does. The sad and stupid and novel thing is how fucking capricious he is about that adherence, and how congress has fully kowtowed to him and his minions.
975.
by vkou 1y ago
> Why would anyone want their government to support this? Clearly not enough people oppose it, because five eyes has been a thing for decades, and isn't going anywhere.
976.
by vkou 1y ago
It turns out that the 'basket of deplorables' was, in fact, calling a spade a spade.
977.
by vkou 1y ago
They've pivoted to "Well, we don't agree with everything he does, but we still support him."
978.
by vkou 1y ago
Why would you believe any clarifying statements they'd give? They'd just tell you they are only going after pedo-terrorists. What are we going to do? Call them liars? They don't care.
979.
by vkou 1y ago
> Per capita emissions aren’t relevant to climate impact They aren't relevant to the climate, but they are relevant to how much energy and wealth you allow each person to have. Does a person in China deserve to have less energy or w
980.
by vkou 1y ago
What exactly is going on that: 1. You (or someone else) gives enough of a crap to be doing forensics about how a lock was circumvented. 2. You clearly care so much about security to do those forensics, but not enough to, I don't know
981.
by vkou 1y ago
Given that the dollar has lost ~10% of its value since the start of the year, that's good... Right?
982.
by vkou 1y ago
Easy, be a low-wage worker. Their gains outpaced inflation since COVID. Or, even easier, just be a capital owner, instead of a wagie. (/s)
983.
by vkou 1y ago
Which is relevant when you're defending against Ocean's 11 or the Mossad, but for the other 99.999% of us, the lock is there to keep a bored teenager or a meth junkie out. Or, more realistically, to convince an insurer that we&#x2
984.
by vkou 1y ago
It absolutely is, and it's complete ass covering from an administration that utterly failed in its primary duty - putting Trump in prison. Nice to see the people who fucked it up isolated from the consequences of his second term. (&#x2
985.
by vkou 1y ago
If you think this is wrong, please, I implore you to do something about it. Your reps (or likely preferred choice of reps, if they didn't win their district) are enabling this, and don't give two shits about anything I say.
986.
by vkou 1y ago
Arguing over whether half or a third are okay with this is splitting hairs anytime that isn't an election (where these margins matter). That even a third is okay with this is a clear enough signal. He represents their values.
987.
by vkou 1y ago
> The people who support Trump are losing the economic game and had no better representative That's not the explanation. He overperforms among middle and upper-middle incomes. Lower and higher incomes lean blue. (Despite the lower
988.
by vkou 1y ago
The motivation of the voters becomes a lot more understandable when you stop giving them the benefit of the doubt. This congress and POTUS is, in fact, a good representation of their values, and they aren't ashamed of it. (You could ha
989.
by vkou 1y ago
Chess is an abstract proxy for a wargame, but is not in itself a wargame. 'Abstract' is somewhere on the chess side of the spectrum between Go and moving miniature battle tanks around and flipping to page 237 of Appendix E to look
990.
by vkou 1y ago
Or SpaceX owning Twitter, or the president owning Truth Social?

More ›