HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
No bio...
User ID: 179
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
5mo ago
Some might argue that not being allowed to use the pronouns we think accurately apply to someone is enforcing ideological conformity.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
5mo ago
I think this is extremely silly and enshrines into the rules the disputed premises of one side of the culture war (i.e., that pronouns refer to self-described gender and not sex). I think that's quite uncharacteristic of The Motte. Why not just let people use whatever pronouns they want to use for other people, and if there's confusion then other users can ask for clarification?
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
Where Winegard's argument falls apart
Hold on, how do you even know which side (if any) Winegard himself takes on this position? I found the two characters in the dialogue to be immaculate representations of their respective positions. I believe advocates of either side would enthusiastically approve of their side's character in this dialogue. The ideological Turing tests pass with flying colors here.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
I have absolutely no idea what this means and wish you would just use normal language.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
I concede!
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
I don't see how that addresses what I said.
People recognize that large, booming cities have high housing prices despite huge amounts of stock, so of course they'll respond to such a poll with that in mind. The median respondent isn't analyzing this question in the way economists or even just people on a rationalist forum would. They don't assume "ceteris paribus" the way it's become second nature for economists and generally educated people. They don't recognize what the question is "getting at".
They read that poll question and call upon their general knowledge of what they know happens to housing prices when a city is booming. And they're right insofar as housing prices in booming cities increase more than housing prices in non-booming cities. That the poll has difficulty herding them into the thought experiment the poll wishes to herd them into does not mean they're imbeciles who don't think supply and demand is a thing, for housing or otherwise.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
According to one survey, two-thirds of people in the US believe that the law of supply and demand does not apply to housing.
Or perhaps they're correctly noticing that the places with the most supply are often the places with the highest prices.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
they're a bunch of weirdos who think being French or German is determined by whether your ancestors were peasants dying for some Lord who wasn't even from that area 1,000 years ago.
Is a nation nothing but an economic zone?
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
I don't think you're correct. My understanding is that only speech which advocates imminent lawless action is illegal in the United States. You can absolutely advocate for genocide, say that a celebrity should be executed, and that someone should bomb this particular building, and no one will arrest you.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
Okay, I appreciate the clarification. I think we're in agreement after all. As a very frugal person in a single-income household that's struggling financially, I am frequently shocked and disgusted by the spending habits of people who make almost twice as much as my household and have the gall to say they can't afford a setback of a few thousand dollars. Motherfucker, you go on two cruises a year, just bought a pool, and go out to eat twice a week.
It's because of people like that - and I think that describes the median person quite well - that, despite my financial struggles, I am so deeply skeptical of government financial assistance programs.
I just lament that a lot of people, and apparently some commenters around here, seem to struggle to imagine common scenarios where someone could genuinely be making sound decisions all around and still struggle.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
You don't seem to recognize the incoherence of the implication that everyone can be a manager (who are they managing if everyone is a manager?)
Anyway, I would simply suggest that you keep in mind that many people have struggles and limitations that you seemingly don't/can't even fathom. There are lot of physical and mental health issues that can preclude the life path you're sketching out. But even aside from that, people can get stuck in a subsistence trap that's very hard to break out of.
For example, let's say you're currently employed in a contract job with a temp agency and you want to get a better job. That requires physically going to interviews. But those interviews happen during business hours, when you're working. Your contract gives you no paid time off and you're unable to change your shift schedule to get time off during the day to attend interviews. What are you supposed to do? If you take a day off, that's a couple hundred dollars of foregone wages you simply cannot afford because your cashflow is already razor thin. And realistically you'll have to take a lot of days off to take enough job interviews to finally get accepted somewhere else.
Let's just say I speak from experience.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
Very few common expenses are truly nondiscretionary. One can easily live on like 8k a year.
I'm fully with you on how most people spend way more on frivolities than they think they do, and that most people living paycheck to paycheck are just spending irresponsibly. But I think you vastly underestimate how expensive nondiscretionary expenses are. Let's just take rent as an illustrative example. Typically people pay 1/3 of their income on housing. At $8k/yr, that's $222/mo. There's no way you're going to be able to spend $222/mo on rent without roommates. Indeed, an income of $8k for a family of four is 1/4 of the federal poverty level.
Your estimation of the expenses of living are so astronomically far from reality that I am a little vicariously embarrassed that you're suggesting them. You seem to act like bills practically don't exist - that a $5k expense is trivial because one can "shuffle fries around for a while, and [McDonald's] will give you the 5k". Frankly, it's like a child's imagination of where income goes ("Woah, you make $5k in a year?!?! Think of all the toys I could get for that!!")
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
Being broke indicates… a severe inability to exercise financial discipline and planning.
young kids
Perhaps this couple had a higher paying job when the kids were younger but has since been laid off. Perhaps this couple used to be able to afford things but haven't gotten raises despite inflation. Perhaps the female was in her mid 30s and they decided to have kids despite not being financially stable because it was now or never. Should people who don't make enough money be effectively consigned to end their genetic line because you (or the other commenter I was responding to) "don't have much respect" for their decision to have children?
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
You can just walk into a mcD’s, shuffle some fries around for a while, and they will give you the 5k. I don’t understand the drama 5k represents to these people
Because of nondiscretionary expenses. If that $5k has to go to food, rent, utilities, healthcare, car insurance, gas, etc., then you're basically just working that McDonald's job to exist and not actually accumulating money you can use to pay off a $5k gambling debt (or, y'know, buy a laptop or a couch or something).
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
I generally don't have much respect for people beyond a certain age that would have trouble coming up with $5K.
Being broke indicates either a lack of ability or interest in earning a decent wage
You don't have much respect for people who lack the ability to earn a decent wage? What about a hard-working dad whose wife stays home to take care of young kids and who just doesn't happen to have marketable skills beyond $20-25/hr low-skill labor sorts of jobs? In today's economy, I doubt those wages would be enough to escape living from paycheck to paycheck.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
Apparently it's been verified as legit.
The National Desk has verified the authenticity of the leaked images through its Nashville affiliate, FOX 17 News.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
The problem is that you may not be a perfect judge of when someone needs to know your intention to turn. What if someone sees that your turn signal is off and thus assumes you intend to stay in your lane, so they think it's fine if they accelerate? Now you've just increased the risk of a collision if you happen to try to merge into his lane coincidentally simultaneously to his acceleration, as well as increasing the likelihood that both of you think the other guy is an asshole, doing your small part to further enshittify the driving culture wherever you live.
And lane changing wasn't even what I was thinking of when I mentioned the turn signal. I had in mind turns at intersections and going into and out of parking lots, driveways, etc.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
There are payroll taxes and income taxes at the local, state, and federal level. Payroll taxes are split equally between the employee (7.65% of income capped at first 100k income) and the employer and cover programs like social security and health insurance for the poor/old.
This is a very important point for people who aren't already familiar with the US income tax system. As someone who recently moved to the US and assumed that my income taxes were my fucking income taxes (imagine that!), I was furious when I saw that payroll taxes were this whole other thing that isn't even on the fucking IRS tax transcript (seriously!!) and was literally greater than my supposed "income tax".
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
I struggle to think of what the Russell conjugations could even be for things like not using the turn signal or driving slowly in the passing lane on a two-lane highway for miles. I experience virtually no road rage at all even when another driver does something exceedingly dangerous, because I can usually imagine an innocent explanation and I've made those mistakes myself on occasion. But inconsiderate actions which are not plausibly the result of some mistake or lapse of attention make my blood boil and, if my wife's not in the car, profanity fly.
Use your fucking turn signal.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
I moved to the US a few months ago when I married my American wife. Now that healthcare.gov plans for 2024 have been revealed, we have to choose one because she works for a temp agency that does not offer an ACA-compliant plan. Because our income is low enough, we'll apparently get about $500/mo in premium tax subsidies.
As a former Canadian whose experience with healthcare has always been to swipe a government health card and never see a bill (except indirectly as it came out of taxes), choosing an American healthcare plan is really daunting. My wife knows perhaps even less about it, since she's always been on her parents' plan until just recently.
The thing is, she's also pregnant (due in June), and her temp agency contract ends next August. After her contract ends, she'll likely get a normal job with proper employer-offered insurance. But until then, since pregnancy and its associated costs are very expensive, doesn't it make sense to get a plan with the lowest deductible possible, since it's almost guaranteed we're going to use $10k+ in healthcare in 2024 due to pregnancy and delivery?
It feels a little bit like cheating to know my healthcare costs will be high and then choose a low-deductible plan. How do they allow this? This is like getting home insurance knowing your home will suffer fire damage in the next year. It makes no sense for the insurer! But if those are the rules...
On the other end, high-deductible plans are confusing. I pay a premium and I have to pay the entire cost up until the out-of-pocket max of, say, $15,000? What am I even paying for then? Just hedging against the small possibility that I'll be charged $100k+ in some fluke accident? If so, then why are they even involved in quotidian care like doctor's visits and bloodwork? Why wouldn't they just keep premiums to a minimum and cover only catastrophic care?
I'm sure I'll get the hang of this, and I'm even inclined to prefer the American system over the Canadian one, but... gosh, I feel like I've been dropped into the middle of a game and have to figure out the rules and the "meta" in very quick order.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
Out of curiosity, how much stock do you put in the polls of economists that IGM Chicago puts out? Presumably such polls dilute out individual cranks and their idiosyncrasies all come out in the wash, but it would still be of limited use if there's systematic biases and blind spots.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
The anecdotal evidence, even as supported by black activists like Ta-Nehisi Coates, corroborate the FBI numbers. Personally, I don't believe that blacks have a higher crime rate solely because of the FBI data, I believe it because of lots of anecdotes and from what I see with my own eyes.
The best rebuttal against the argument that black arrest rates aren't reflective of actual crime rates is the government's own National Crime Victimization Survey, which, as I understand it, corroborates FBI offender data.
HelmedHorror
Still sane, exile?
6mo ago
Some people are only attracted to certain races.
Unless I'm misunderstanding, "You must adhere to progressive orthodoxy on pronouns or avoid them altogether" does not sound to me like the middle compromise position you're making it out to be.
Not that you should particularly care what I think, but I will say: in all my years here, I've never until now been surprised or disappointed by your decisions pertaining to the rules and administration of this community. Hell, I'm not even sure I've seen a modhat decision by you that I've disagreed with. You've always had an uncanny ability to impartially administrate and to advocate the sort of truly neutral principles that are essential to the flourishing of a community like this. And I'm not at all saying this take of your ruins all that.
I hope, for my unblemished account's sake, that some story about a trans person doesn't become the culture war topic du jour any time soon. I also think that you'd see immense pushback from the community if those rules you propose were actually enforced. I suspect people just haven't read your comment above because it's buried in the previous week's culture war roundup thread.
More options
Context Copy link