@Bingbong's banner p

Bingbong


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2025 September 08 16:50:05 UTC

				

User ID: 3940

Bingbong


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2025 September 08 16:50:05 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3940

Yeah I was raised in the developed West and was barely exposed to aunts/uncles/cousins due to a combination of my parents moving away and fighting some crab bucket tendencies in the wider family. My kids can now go downstairs and run into a ridiculous amount of cousins and neighbors inside the same gated community, which I hope can serve to ameliorate spectrum behaviors and tendencies on the part of my genetic material.

Back when I was in Australia for the first year or so, a combination of being the only person in my early-thirties yuppie friend group to reproduce and my own parents bailing to be closer to the ocean meant that there wasn't really a social layer. The government parenting group programs were well-meaning, but even then tended to have weird hodge podge cultural mixes of like... 18 year old headscarf-wearing recent immigrants and mid-late thirties upper middle class neurotics in my area. With nothing in between. Plus even if my friend group was particularly fecund the geographic reality of home-ownership in the city I lived in essentially forced people to buy an hour and a half away from the CBD in farflung locales so unless you happened to land on the same compass-point as your social group you were fucked.

Highly anecdotal but my mom is a now-retired teacher who did about 40 years of special ed across UK/New Zealand/Australia, generally focusing on a band between say the 5th-percentile to the 15th-percentile. She had a very clear seat to see the diagnostic drift of stuff like that, considering to her eyes the 'intellectual level' of the kids stayed consistent but the amount of formal diagnoses absolutely exploded between the start of her career and the end of it.

There were always kids given actual diagnoses to begin but they tended to be the ones on the absolute bottom end of the scale who were essentially incapable of functioning in society at all. Over time, due to a mixture of increasing availability of psychologists, shifts in the diagnostic criteria and frankly shifts in how public funds are allocated towards special education students the diagnoses proliferated. What used to be a fairly vibe-driven system of 'kid seems unintelligent, gets funneled into my mom's classes' 40 years ago became 'Kids with diagnoses for XYZ get funneled to that class, kids who seem unproductive get diagnosed, sent into my mom's classes'

I've got 2 under 2 at the moment. I did the first year or so of the first kid's life in stately 'Developed World Nuclear Family' style and then relocated to somewhere with a sprawling multi-generational family structure.

The difference in quality of life between the former and the latter is insane, in terms of how much time you get back, but I think you're vastly overstating exactly how punitive childrearing is at the early stages and how engaging a lot of the creature comforts you were otherwise packing your time with actually were. I feel I'd experienced a sufficiently wide slice of 'the good life' before having kids, between going to 50-odd countries, having a solid dating history, playing sport at a high level and being a reasonably high earner to be able to say most of that is fine but ultimately when/if you experience having kids there's an inherent flip of perspective and drivers.

IMO the main fall-off now is that the rise of birth control & abortion means that increasingly people are having to 'opt in' to having children instead of it just being a constantly present baserate risk of conceiving and then rolling with it.

Why do you need Quant Finance if you're already at the 95th percentile? There's plenty of ways to make money in this world.

Go find your couple-million dollars lying in the gutter, then. You don't need quant finance as an elite human capital.

Look having been in your shoes of sparkling-good-but-not-elite academic accomplishment, being a mildly autistic egotistical white guy getting moderately discriminated against in hiring and academic admissions. You don't have to be a quant to make money, always opportunities surfacing and trying to wedge yourself into the elite end of the System(TM) is not necessarily going to be the best fit.

Yes, it's galling that your SBFs or whatever occasionally get grabbed off the pile for having the exact right references and autism vibes to align with the hiring team, but that's life. Poke around stuff that interests you and there'll probably be a couple million dollars lying around somewhere.

My point is more 'I can see why somebody would judge Abortion to be cold-blooded murder of the vulnerable' than 'I think that the debate on abortion should solely stop there'

I mean I agree he's annoyed his fellow protestors at this point but if somebody were to do this for an equivalent Right Wing movement that job would be gone essentially instantaneously amidst other actual life consequences upon aggravating the rest of the socialist protestor commune.

True but money where his mouth is for Stancil doesn't mean a ton aside from exposure to maybe getting gassed. It doesn't seem to have impacted his academic position at all to spend days meandering around driving after ICE.

Abortion's a tricky one to me since whilst I personally believe it's something that shouldn't be done frivolously but there are legitimate applications. I can see how somebody's belief systems can directly draw a line from abortion to cold-blooded murder of the most vulnerable, in a far more coherent and sensible way than a lot of other protest movements.

By saying I am arguing in bad faith I feel that you are 'Mean Girlsing' me.

Prepare yourself for I shall come at you with the full force of Vigilantism

You're the one coming to this point in radical centrism and advocating for the slaying of random political pundits on account of them resembling 'mean girls' and you feeling you have no adequate defense that isn't homicidal. Any real extension of this belief places everybody in the crosshairs.

I agree it's not perfect but I think a gunshot in close proximity moves it way closer to a good shoot than where it is otherwise.

Seems like sufficient leeway to start blasting under your preferred guidelines to society, though.

So Charlie Kirk is not entitled to his beliefs due to them potentially being against the absolute maximum freedoms for other people, or is simply not allowed to advocate for his beliefs in public if it may result in any modification of society that resembles that?

There is no possible argument for the Charlie Kirk killing being in anything but cold blood with an abundance of forethought. Even if you are maximally pushing the 'he was doing harm through espousing his ideology', you have to acknowledge that it was a planned assassination from somebody who sat down and rationally thought through the plan. I don't think the Pretti killing was necessarily good or justified, but it was a spur of the moment decision from somebody in an inherently stressful and chaotic situation.

Additionally doing the 0.0000000001m stunt whilst armed is just massively increasing the risk of something going off the rails even if you are actually 100% compliant and pleasant in your interactions with law enforcement.

One was gunned down in completely cold blood whilst the other was deliberately trying to make an already hectic and confusing environment yet more stressful essentially entirely for the purpose of generating videos of bad activities by making them more likely.

Yeah prettymuch the only thing that'd change my vibe on Pretti would be conclusive proof on whether or not his gun misfired whilst being confiscated. If it misfired and people reacted off that I think there's sufficient argument for it being a reasonable shoot, whilst if it didn't then it's essentially inexcusable.

Most of the Minneapolis Mounted Whistle Orchestra is coordinated and belligerent so Pretti having multiple contacts with ICE is pretty par for the course.

I see similar shotgun, canned openings for skilled positions in the engineering field that aren't really trying to be competitive if you look at their offered compensation, they feel more like dangling a hook hoping to get a bite from a desperate engineer they can snap up for cheap even as the engineering field as a whole supposedly has huge engineer shortages.

Isn't this atleast partly to justify having unfillable positions that require H1Bs et all?

Yes but inevitably like all issues of this nature the stack of asylum seekers will be sifted until a small core of genuine and/or sympathetic applications will be surfaced then the entire narrative will be forced to pivot around them despite massive grift outside of it. Plus Trump's team is already running into random vigilante judges in farflung circuit courts attempting to adjust whatever they pass.

Yes but that is a vast oversimplification and at best all it can do is briefly reset the current issue.

It's clearly not being done in good faith though when they are not investigating the ice agents involved.

Good's widow is on camera committing a clear offense. The ICE agent singular has an adequate argument for self defense and I can't really see what you'd try pinning on the other guys who didn't shoot.

The United States accepts asylum seekers because of laws such as the Refugee Act of 1980, which was passed into law by legitimately elected democratic representatives.

Yes but it was contingent on a good faith application and used in a world with far more poverty and random bloodshed. Decades of concept drift, deliberate gaming of the system and the inherent tendency of a judicial system to continuously swing more permissive as cases accumulate have then produced the current metagame.

The vast majority of these asylum applications are simply contigent on the processing timeline being so long (due to the sheer weight of frivolous applications) that you can easily apply without any real expectation of actually getting it then frolic around randomly whilst you wait. This is playing out consistently across essentially all developed Western democracies

Actually I think the Right could lean in to due process as a meme here -- especially with regards to folks who have had asylum denied, had their chance to appeal to the BIA and already ignored a final order of removal.

It seems to me as an external outlier that quite a few of the 'heartbreaking story of peaceful productive illegal immigrant removed stories' are these people, though. Cases where they entered the USA in 2005 or whatever, have explicitly run through all of their options for appeals over the course of a decade and have then wandered off the reservation till occasionally picked up on the current day. Even the OP mentioned with the Grandma who had explicitly received a final order of removal.

Also hasn't a soft-amnesty and opportunity to self deport also been provided with an additional payment to those who take it up?