@HaroldWilson's banner p

HaroldWilson


				

				

				

					1 follower  

					follows 0 users  

					

					
joined 2022 October 03 21:22:34 UTC
				

				

				

				

				

				

					
				

				

				
				
				

				
User ID: 1469


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
HaroldWilson


								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				

				
				
				

				

					1 follower  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2022 October 03 21:22:34 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 1469


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


with some archaic or unusual word choices (as is common in former British colonies, most famously in India).




Such as?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Besides the fact that they're called National Action, I, and I suspect most other Brits, have no issues with organisations like this being proscribed because they aren't just racist and anti-semitic, they're outright calling for the murder of Jews and other minorities which crosses a pretty clear line.


From the Wikipedia article;




Renshaw had called for Jews to be "eradicated" as "nature's financial parasite and nature's social vermin", and had said that the UK had backed the wrong side in the Second World War, since the Nazis "were there to remove Jewry from Europe once and for all"






By 2014, he had written on his blog, "There are non-whites and Jews in my country who all need to be exterminated. As a teenager, Mein Kampf changed my life. I am not ashamed to say I love Hitler."[16][23] He has expressed admiration for Anders Breivik, the far-right terrorist, as "the hero Norway deserves"




On whether it's a hoax, I mean obviously I have no way of knowing but I don't see why it's implausible; the sort of basement-dweller who might join a organisation like this seems exactly the sort of person to write a poorly written screed such as this.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


the fact has been revealed that you 'invested' in a bunch of snake oil.




That such programs are less likely to be considered value for money these days is not proof that they were at one time 'snake oil', only that different economic conditions have now rendered them less useful.




wasteful fashion statement.




Fashion statements are not necessarily wasteful, especially if you are a very public facing company who markets their goods to the general public.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
So? It's not supposed to be. Whatever people say, it's more of a benefit than a public retirement account. After all, it's current revenues that pay for current expenditure.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


SS scam




This is silly, there will need to be some (moderate) increase in payroll taxes or means testing or (moderate) decrease in payments in the next decade or two to keep SS solvent in the long term, but it's nowhere near a 'scam'. Who is it scamming, it's working precisely as intended?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This overstates the case considerably. The report of the trustees in 2022 estimates (rough estimates of course but the best ones we have so they'll do) that all the way through to 2096 SS benefits at 74% of the current level would be sustainable with no changes at all in tax law. That's a big gap, but not a completely irresolvable one with some changes here and there. A couple of percentage increase in payroll taxes eliminates the problem entirely, and while there may not be political will for that at this juncture when the problem starts to come into closer view by the 2030s it's hardly out of the question.


The important point to remember is that the OASDI trust fund is huge and generates its own income so a moderate deficit between income and outgoings in not a particularly large problem; in the coming decades it will start to be exhausted if no changes are made, but as I say those changes don't have to be revolutionary for the problem to be resolved.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Well because however you structure your system of work and benefits, a society a growing share of which is composed of those no longer productive and a shrinking share of those in work is clearly going to run into problems down the road. Now, I would say that immigration can help to make up some of the gap but I imagine that isn't a view amenable to most here so trying to raise TFR (though I should say I don't really think it's possible to arrest its decline) is the only other road out.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I sort of agree with a mild version of this but I think it way overstates the case; companies are no more amenable to wasting money in good times than in bad, what may in fact be the case is that DEI departments did actually represent, or at least were perceived to represent, a reasonable investment in boom time, for any number of reasons (attracting young talent, maintaining a good public image etc.), and this is no longer to be the case in more lean times. The question was always 'is this value for money', it's just that for many the answer used to be yes, and now it's no.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 6, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
While I haven't read much about the Holocaust, reading this thread you seem to have an absolutely absurd standard for what constitutes breaching the 'mainstream' narrative in a meaningful way. Historians clearly disagree on minor details in all areas of history without being classed as of a different school or interpretation. What you seem to be implying is that if @To_Mandalay has even the smallest of disagreements with an influential mainstream writer then he suddenly can longer be considered to subscribe to the mainstream view, which is patently ridiculous. Find me any other area of historical research where there is not disagreement even within supporters of one particular interpretation or narrative on points of a similar magnitude to expanding somewhat the range of time for cremation at Treblinka.


To give an example of something of which I am better acquainted, in the study of the Ostrogothic kings of Italy one major interpretation (probably the 'mainstream' one if there could be said to be such a thing) is that there was considerable continuity between their rule and Roman rule in the reign of Theodoric, with Roman institutions and culture preserved across a range of areas. Now, if I agree with that argument, but disagree with one of its most strenuous and influential proponents, say Moorhead, on the translation and interpretation of one particular letter in the Variae, no-one would ever say I had meaningfully diverged from his interpretation. The same goes here; I don't think expanding the date range for creation or arguing that some minority of corpses didn't get cremated (on which point, I don't see why that's incompatible with a cover-up intention; they may simply not have been able to complete the task) now renders, as you put it, the entire narrative 'discredited'. 'More research' is always a good thing but the broad thrust of a narrative can still remain intact even if some tweaking of it might be needed.


Edit, something I forgot to put: I realise that your disagreements with the mainstream narrative are probably much bigger than that, but the problem is you're declaring anyone disagreeing on anything, no matter of what importance, with a mainstream historian as necessarily being in the revisionist camp, which is silly.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 30, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


We can kill officials who completely drop the ball and totally fail to provide rational advice, wasting enormous amounts of time with nonsense like spraying surfaces as opposed to useful recommendations




All this would achieve is dramatically reducing the number and quality of applicants to civil service positions.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 30, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Trump availing himself of all legally permissible options to contest the results is not the same as refusing to leave. So the media was wrong.




This seems a little ridiculous. I don't think the media ever confidently predicted that Trump would literally try to instigate a coup or something; other than what he did, what else was he supposed to have done that in your eyes would have vindicated the media's position?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 23, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
In fairness, it did work for Alec-Douglas Home. There were two left-wing students who came to kidnap him when he was PM and he gave them a beer and said that if they did follow through the Conservatives would win the next election in a landslide in a reaction against the kidnapping, and then they agreed to leave.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 23, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Unlike 24 Sussex Drive or Buckingham Palace, you can just go in to the White House to the point that they have organized tours most every day. You'd kind of expect that from a country with such anime-esque slogans and beliefs about government... especially since most people still believe in it 250 years after the fact.




I should defend Britain here by saying that you can in fact just go and watch the proceedings of the House of Commons or Lords whenever you like. Unless you want to watch PMQs or a very important debate you don't have to book, you just walk in and queue. In quieter times you can often go straight in iirc, even though the gallery is quite small.


Also, you can actually just walk into the lobby of Parliament and ask to see your MP, and I am told that some MPs do sometimes (though probably relatively rarely) just go and see random constituents who turn up there and ask for them.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 23, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Yeah but if you read the wiki article it's not like there weren't security systems, the police just ignored the alarms since they assumed they were faulty. All it takes it one or two fuck ups for something like the Pelosi break in to happen, which is hardly implausible.


Also, MPs in Britain still don't really have extraordinary levels of security. David Ames' murderer was seemingly able to just walk up him in a constituency surgery and stab him. Iirc in the mid-2000s there was an MP who was attacked by someone in the lobby of the House of Commons, which you wouldn't think likely.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 23, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Lol. There were a few admittedly ridiculous instances here and there of police visits but a) they didn't result in anything (still silly but an important caveat) and crucially b) that it absolutely not the norm. I mean you can go on twitter right now and see loads and loads of British commentators and other twitter users with names and faces etc. taking a v. critical position on trans issues. I mean this is just an absurd suggestion to make.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Mainstream Media is Worse Than Silence: If your Big Picture is wrong, say nothing.
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Sure there are some problems were there just is no solution, but I don't think any MSM outlet would suggest otherwise. Clearly though, there are innumerable problems that industry has not simply solved, in many cases because industry has no incentive to resolve negative outcomes that aren't internalised. In general though, most 'big' problems are not new ones we just have to wait for industry to sort out, they're fairly long-running or sometimes getting worse.


In addition, even if that's sometimes true, which I concede it may be, coverage will inevitably be framed in terms of a government policy response because that's the only putative action one might consider taking.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Mainstream Media is Worse Than Silence: If your Big Picture is wrong, say nothing.
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Not sure I really catch your drift. Simply because the people of Flint weren't willing to uproot their entire lives to find better water that doesn't imply that the problem isn't important enough to be worth solving via government intervention.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Mainstream Media is Worse Than Silence: If your Big Picture is wrong, say nothing.
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Ok but even in such cases the solution is a governmental policy response (albeit a 'negative' one, not just asking individuals to solve it.)


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Mainstream Media is Worse Than Silence: If your Big Picture is wrong, say nothing.
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Ok but clearly that's a non-answer because the problems still exist. If you want to say 'I think the problems continuing is better than any potential remedy' that's a fine argument to make, but individuals cannot be called upon to solve existing systemic problems. Poverty exists, so clearly letting individuals 'solve' it themselves has not worked.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Mainstream Media is Worse Than Silence: If your Big Picture is wrong, say nothing.
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The problem is that he's criticising MSM specifically not just the idea of 'news' in general.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Mainstream Media is Worse Than Silence: If your Big Picture is wrong, say nothing.
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Got to say all of Caplan's arguments seem a bit ridiculous. To go through his enumerated list of reasons;




Endlessly complaining about alleged social problems. Poverty, the environment, racism, Covid, Ukraine, terrorism, immigration, education, drugs, Elon… Even if all of the coverage were true, the media is still - per Huemer - aggressively promoting the absurd view that life is on balance terrible and reliably getting worse.




Two problems here. Of course the news is going to have a slant towards bad news because notable events are usually bad things,  though of course not always. What would Brian Caplan's news bulletins contain, reports on all the cities and countries were there were no terrorist attacks, wars didn't start and the economy was fine? That's not really news. Secondly, I don't think it's at all accurate that news promotes the view that life to terrible. While there is a slant towards 'negative' news if a viewer thinks that implies that things are in general bad and getting worse that's surely a fault of the viewer not of the coverage, because it doesn't imply that at all, it just as I say reflects the fact that newsworthy events are more likely to bad than good.




Spreading innumeracy. The media endlessly shows grotesque stories about ultra-rare problems like terrorism, plane crashes, police murdering innocents, school shootings, toddlers dying of Covid, and the like. They show almost nothing about statistically common problems like car crashes or death by old age. The media doesn’t just spread paranoia; it spreads inverted paranoia.




Again, while this is true this is simply the nature of news, not a problem specific to mainstream media. News is, by its nature, a record of events not an analysis of the general current state of affairs. Perhaps people should consume less news and more analysis, in fact they probably should, but again that's not really the fault of the organisations providing the news coverage.


Reasons 4 and 5 are basically the same thing, Caplan arguing that MSM puts everything in a negative light and places particular focus on whatever the 'current thing' is. Again I think these just complain about the nature of news, not the behaviour of MSM specifically.


Reason 2 is a bit different;




Painting government intervention as the obvious solution to social problems. Often the media openly asks loaded questions to this effect, like “Why isn’t the government doing more about this?!” with an exasperated tone. The rest of the time, they rely on heavy-handed insinuation, like “The people of Flint, Michigan feel like they’ve been forgotten.” Forgotten by who? Government Our Savior, of course. Mainstream media barely considers whether past government policies have worked, or how much they cost, or whether they have important downsides.




I mean who else is supposed to solve social problems? Clearly not 'individuals' or whatever, because manifestly absent government intervention they haven't been able to solve them, otherwise they wouldn't exist


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 23, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Ah, I may have misread your comment. When you said 'point to statements' I thought you meant they'd point to specific statements that liberals or whoever actually had made, and that you were implying that that did actually happen.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 23, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


The differences in probability of getting scores near the SAT high end work out to huge differences in percentile. Asian and white Harvard admit scores are high enough to need that higher precision data. A 745 looks like a 1490 composite, top 2.75% of SAT takers; over 2x less common. The average Asian-American admit is around 1540, top 1% of SAT takers, over 5x less common. Saying "the other 90% are rightly called affirmative action admits" seems to be correct, but at least "the other 50% are" might be defensible.




This is interesting to note, but I wonder at that end of the bell curve how much these small discrepancies in scores actually reveal. While the small number of very top scorers means that a 1490 scorer is 2x less common than a 1430 scorer, the question is whether how much 'better' an average 1490 scorer is than a 1430 scorer. Over a population level differences at the top might be able to be put down to actual differences in knowledge/ability but surely SAT-taking contains a sufficient level of randomness that 50 points doesn't tell you all that much.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 23, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I believe that mass incarceration can explain most of the reduction in violent crime from 1990–2015 and most of its subsequent rise.




I just don't think there's that much evidence that harsher punishments actually do explain the crime reduction to a very large extent. For one, Britain (and probably most other Western countries) also saw a similar rapid decline in crime rates over the New Labour governments, and while Blair wasn't 'soft' on crime he didn't oversee anything like what happened in America. The prison population did increase, but that increase wasn't really sufficiently faster than the pre-1990s rate of increase to explain the enormous drop in crime. Same goes for Canada. While it may have played a role, I'm not convinced that it could be the central factor.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 23, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


If we lowered the punishment for shoplifting to a $1 fine with no other consequences do they really think we'd see the same amount of shoplifting?




This is why I said 'within reason'; clearly, if you decrease punishments enough you'd get to the point that potential criminals would not see it as a considerable deterrent. However, the point is that above a certain point you get diminishing returns, and the 'tough on crime' sentencing policies usually touted like three strikes laws are at the point where your returns have diminished to almost nothing.