@Glassnoser's banner p

Glassnoser


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 October 30 03:04:38 UTC

				

User ID: 1765

Glassnoser


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 October 30 03:04:38 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1765

I have a lot of lawyers in my family, one of whom is close to me and the main part of his job is to write legal documents in clear, precise, unambiguous language, so I'm used to thinking about language and rules in a certain way (I also have a STEM background, where things have precise definitions). I've been blown away by how bad otherwise intelligent people are at writing and interpreting resolution criteria. They throw out basic principles which I would have thought were necessary for there to be any hope being able to decide these things in a consistent and predictable manner. I even explained one of the resolution disputes on Polymarket to these family members, one that was ambiguous due to a blatant self-contradiction in the resolution criteria, and they said it should definitely be resolved one way, which ended up being resolved the other way (essentially on the principle of most people wouldn't read that far into the description of the resolution criteria).

One possible solution is that you have people pay to have questions answered, and as part of that payment, they pay people to act as oracles who have good reputations. So the incentive is to decide things in a way that most closely matches what the question asker intended and also most closely matches what bettors think the question is about so that they are willing to bet on it, since this improves the market's accuracy.

No, it's a Pixel 6 Pro.

I'm saying it isn't because you can control notifications within apps on Android. For example, on Instagram, I can click my face on the bottom left, then the three lines at the top left, and then notifications. Every app has something like this.

In Instagram's case, controlling notifications through the OS doesn't work because they're labelled too vaguely. They don't even mention Threads.

Why wouldn't the ecumene include Ethiopia and India?

Regression to the mean is an argument for having higher or lower trait thresholds for certain races, but not for excluding those races altogether.

One issue that I've heard from friends and relatives who have had to hire contractors lately for construction and renovation work is that they are extremely unreliable. They will just drop a job at the last minute even though they agreed to do it and the rest of the project depends on them doing it. This has caused people to have to scramble at the last minute and go around begging people to help them out or it has delayed projects by months.

In Canada, your estate would have to pay a tax on 50% of the $999 capital gain before your heir inherited anything.

No, I think many want a racially white society where there is a substantial reduction in the non-white population and immigration restrictions based on race. For example, I've heard proposals to split the United States up so that part of it can be a white ethno-state and another part can be given to blacks. To achieve that, you do have to actually define who is white.

Canada is a less litigious country than the US, and awards for successful lawsuits are much smaller and often capped by law. But there are still a lot of rules due to people being afraid of liability. But my high school's solution to that was that you were not allowed to hang around the school when you weren't in class. You were free to leave the property though and once you did, they were not responsible for anything that happened.

By the way, 7am? Wtf? Our school started at around 8:30 (in high school) or 9?

What do you mean when you say they screened people going in like an airport? Is there some kind of security or someone watching the door? We had nothing like that in high school. You could come and go freely and no one was tracking who was in the building. In elementary school, it was a little different, in that you'd line up once the bell rang and the teacher would escort you in, and then once inside, they'd take attendance.

What I'm saying is not true is your assertion that the US's notion of protecting freedom of speech was a reaction to it being non-existent.

I'm not saying they're obligated to do anything. I am saying that in conversations with white nationalists where they're trying to convince me of white nationalism, they have rarely made any effort to define white people and I find that frustrating.

I'm not sure if I believe they really have that preference. Imagine a woman running into a hear in the woods. She's probably going to freak out. Now imagine her running in to a random man. She's probably going to feel relieved and ask him for help. Just, intuitively it seems obvious that women are not nearly as scared of men as they are of bears. I think the framing of the question causes people to think about how men can be dangerous and to answer in a way that doesn't actually comport with their true beliefs.

Scott Sumner has a whole series of posts about this phenomenon. https://www.econlib.org/archives/2015/05/theres_no_such_2.html

I'm guessing the first post is all real people and the second one is bots copying it. All the comments in the second post were posted within a very short period of time on a new post by accounts with usernames typically used by bots.

I have Android 14, but I didn't know it had this ability.

I'm not disputing that you can control notifications from within Android's settings. I'm disputing that you can't control from within apps.

You do avoid some of it though by delaying it. The rate is effectively higher. The original investment was the same in both cases. There was no rebalancing.

If you owe any capital gains tax, you're almost certainly already I'm the top tax bracket and you pay less tax the longer you go without selling.

The median Canadian does have siblings. My point was actually that the average (not median) Canadian doesn't have enough siblings and does own enough property such that he comes out ahead.

There is no reason why it has to be delayed. The parents can sell at any time.

We are talking about housing affordability? What do you mean I'm being too materialistic? If materialism doesn't matter, why complain about high housing prices or a reduced standard of living?

Yes, there is no reason why am increase in property values should mean an increase in property taxes. Cities don't need more money just because property values are higher. They should fall and as a percentage of property values when property values rise.

No, I'm definitely not expecting them to agree with each other. I've witnessed arguments over whether Jews are white or whether Iranians or Armenians are white. I've witnessed arguments over whether you need to be 100% pure European or whether some lower threshold is good enough. I'm just saying that when you ask any given white nationalist for a definition, they usually reject the question outright.

Flipping the woke pyramid doesn't work because the main question is who makes the cut and is allowed to stay or immigrate to your ethno-state.

He's not trying to smuggle a plan for the rich. Read the part where he advocates for a progressive consumption tax again.

At this point you might be thinking “Yes, but wouldn’t eliminating all income and consumption taxes be a giveaway to the rich?” No, it would be restoring fairness by taxing the thrifty and spendthrift at equal rates. If we think the rich should pay more tax, then let’s put a progressive consumption tax into effect. This is easy to do, just turn the regressive FICA into a progressive payroll tax, with much higher rates for those with high wages and salaries. This sort of tax can achieve any desired degree of progressivity. Unlike most libertarians, I think a progressive payroll tax is desirable for simple utilitarian reasons.

He is explaining that there is no reason to tax capital gains if your goal is to reduce inequality. From the second article:

What “principle” suggests that patient people should be taxed at higher rates than impatient people—even if they have the same lifetime wealth?

Your only answer that seems to be that they have different wealth, which he explains is not true, so what reason remains for taxing capital gains?

As for what is wrong with discouraging saving, he never says that saving is inherently good. He gives a very clear and specific reason for why it's bad to discourage saving.

The inheritance tax discourages saving, and thus reduces the capital stock. This lowers the real wage of workers who work with physical capital.

This one may clarify a few things.

Taxing capital gains is not a way of avoiding taxing labour. The capital gain is a return on an initial investment that was earned with labour. Taxing it is taxing labour, just in a way that creates a deadweight loss by taxing someone who saves more than someone who spends. You get all of the deadweight loss of taxing labour and then some.

In my third link, Scott Sumner directly addresses the point about inequality. Taxing capital gains doesn't reduce inequality. The two brothers in his example are equally wealthy. But one chooses to invest his wealth and the other chooses to spend it. The fact that the one who invests it earns a capital gain does not mean he is wealthier. His brother had the same opportunity and didn't take it because he valued earlier consumption over later consumption. Claiming there is a difference in equality is just like claiming there is a difference inequality between someone who bought watermelon and someone who bought blueberries.

The author is saying the current privileged mix of taxing investments less than labor income isn't good enough, that we should institute massive taxes on labor to reduce all taxes from investments to 0.

He's not saying that at all. You've completely misunderstood. You should read the articles more carefully because he directly addresses this kind of argument.

Were you specifically asking how the state is supposed to go from 50% nonwhite to 0% nonwhite?

No, I was asking who counts as white.

I'm a bit confused by this concept. Elsewhere, I've read that Scotland should also be on the other side of the line. Is this actually a robust concept and does it really explain anything?