@alchemist's banner p




0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 18:23:45 UTC


User ID: 61



0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 18:23:45 UTC


No bio...


User ID: 61

While I'm not sure your exact proposal is the way, I do think inheritance taxes are both a good way to reduce inequality, and are also, honestly, democratic (even playing field). That said, they do go against human nature to give something to your kids, so I think you need to be careful. (Yes, I know trusts are a standard way to work around them; it seems like if this is known, a counter-play should be possible). I say this as someone intending to leave something (but not too much :D) to his kids.

Agreement on the expensive real estate. Also, especially anything more than a single home should be hit fairly hard, IMO.

For what it's worth, when I last saw this, the gap had grown immensely in the last 10 or 15 years. It was quite surprising, as I haven't really noticed it in German society (where I live, but I'm in a rich city).

Although I think I saw income inequality. The hope would be that it's somewhat reversible, as I think (too much) inequality is bad for a society. OTOH, I pay quite a lot in taxes already, so it's not too clear to me how thing will improve. Higher minimum wage / whatever Harz-4 is called now?

I thought that had to be intentional, and snuck in by the one competent writer on the crew. It was so blatant.

The short form for me (okay, happily married, not in the dating pool, but reasonably charismatic), is that you can't trust / believe what 95% of women say. The saying is "Ask a fisherman, not fish, how to catch fish".

Most women seem generally unwilling or unable to introspect when it comes to attraction, or feel they can't be honest about it. So they say the usual platitudes like "be yourself!" "don't try, it'll happen!" "don't try to treat me differently" "just be nice!". Hollywood is just awful.

I was a late bloomer. My success took off when I just started going for it -- leaning in for the kiss, just making things happen, taking things a step further. I admit, this is all a while ago, so it's possible it's all changed, but I think it's human nature, so I rather doubt it.

In terms of your "how much interest to show", I think the answer is, show interest -- you want this -- but don't be creepy, i.e. if she's not interested, no big deal, you'll move onto the next thing.

My take -- be genuinely interested in her, and make her feel special. Do interesting things, and be willing to be a bit traditionally masculine (be competent, show initiative, be strong).

Good luck -- modern dating seems like a messed-up, sad, confused scene. Try to straighten it, and not get sucked in by the bullshit that's been painted on top recently.

I'm reasonably on the inside, and this does not seem to be the case. HR (and DEI) was hit harder than most other areas, for example.

While I mostly agree with you, I think there are also tipping points that are bad -- things like the great depression, which fucked up the whole world for a decade, the oil crisis in the 70s, and the financial crisis in 2008. It does seem like we've gotten better at handling things, but part of me worries that we've been lulled into a false sense of security.

Minor related note -- I'd say only now, a good year after the initial Ukraine invasion, has the product offering in supermarkets mostly levelled out. Until recently, it seemed like there was always something out -- sunflower oil, catfood, dijon senf (that was something else), what have you. So my sense is that we are more connected, and have less resilience, so an unexpected shock can have surprising ripples.

I still tend towards optimism, but I don't think we can just rely on things working out.

There are claims that men interrupt women more than vice versa. The only 'study' I know was a self-reported single write-up, and the person didn't control for power, e.g. that it's likely the boss interrupts the intern more than vice versa. Even though, in the study, the person who interrupted most was a female vice president.

I would even find it okay to let current loans be dischargeable in bankruptcy. Maybe you could have some kind of federal support. Changing that incentive seems key to the whole extortion.

I mean, it's mono sodium glutamate. That's like, one sodium.

(But seriously, I fail to see how MSG is saltier than salt, or has more sodium. Given glutamate is fairly complex / heavy vs Chlorine, I would assume that it has less Na than NaCl by weight. (But I haven't checked the math))

But that could be thinking about just about anyone ;)

Amen, brother. I just so don't give a shit. I realize that's a luxury that some don't have (gotta check that privilege), but where I live, there are no masks, no vaccine requirement, you can get one if you want. Yes, it was bad for a while, but they never actually forced it (except maybe for healthcare workers, which was something of an own-goal, and also reasonably understandable to me).

I think Covid broke people's brains in both direction (Bill Gates is implanting chips, and if you don't double-mask outdoors you want to kill my Grandma and give me long Covid).

But can you believe what they say? In dating topics, the answer is usually "no," although I agree, I suspect men are over-estimating the attraction here.

I learned this around various DEI claims. Every single one I investigated more deeply fell apart (interruptions, benefits of diversity, women on the board, insignificant differences in interests, implicit bias test, growth mindset, pay gap, names on resumes) and sadly just about anything in relation to historical women in tech (Lovelace first algorithm, Hopper creating Cobol, women 'used to be the majority of computer scientists' ("programmers" in a historical, different sense, yes), Margaret Hamilton wrote all this code, etc. Most of the women involved were plenty awesome without inflating their claims to fame!)

It's sadly at the point that my first instinct is to disbelieve pretty much any psych or sociology 'study', especially if it points in a way the current narrative wants.

This all seems a bit overdone to me. I'd say women and the left probably don't think that they are letting in primarily criminals, and even if they do let in a few, it's not their fault/they can fix them/it's because of their unfair environment. So they see themselves mainly as helping some poor oppressed folk, which to some degree they actually are.

What if you don't think Black people are inferior, but the particular person in front of you, who happens to be black, is inferior?

You're making sense and The Blade Itself from Abercrombie is also a good grimdark world and trilogy.

This seems like the strongest argument. Attraction isn't something that you choose, so you don't need to follow current year's obligations.

I'm sure he means the NIH people are revealing the secret bad opinions they hold. If they didn't hold them, they wouldn't be worried about the data getting out. /s ;)

It is the UN (Women's) official tweet. That gives it some gravity_.

Yes, I know that channel has posted other braindead things (is it weird that I can probably write that on reddit, but not 'retarded'?), but it's still kind of shocking to me that something so clearly bad got posted.

Apparently there are some that live solely in the Tube tunnels, as it stays nice and warm there, year round....

Also, I commend you in your killing of mosquitoes. They and ticks deserve nothing but a swift death!

This is exactly the conclusion I came to as well. tailcalled seems more interested in obfuscating and claiming we can't know anything than clarifying and getting closer to the truth (despite occasional protestations of the opposite).

Really? It makes sense, so to speak, from an evolutionary standpoint, in that one male can impregnate many females, so a species can afford to produce a bunch of 'waste' men, as long as some turn out well. It's like VC investing in companies. Women, on the other hand, cannot be easily replaced -- if a tribe loses half its women, it loses half its next generation, more or less. If it loses half its men, it has labour and fighting problems, but no problems producing enough children.

There's also the detail that women have two XX chromosomes, but men have an X & Y. That's why many diseases hit men more frequently (e.g. color blindness), because they only need one defective X chromosome for it to hit. Similarly, if they get a helpful mutation, it isn't drowned out by the partner gene.

And for what it's worth, apparently you do see more male variance in the world, although I think in the mental domains it's not as clear-cut.

Interesting. I don't consider fare skipping as bad, as there is almost not cost to be made up by everyone else. The train would still run if I weren't on it. My taxes are significantly subsidizing it. I guess there might be a small increase in crowding. Prices (in terms of zones and such where I live) also feel a bit arbitrary. There are also fairly byzantine rules about what counts as one trip (e.g. transfers and such).

I assume you don't consider it fare-skipping if I have a monthly pass, but forget it at home? Or, a classic when when I used to commute -- I got a monthly pass each month, but would sometimes miss the start of the month. Is it fare skipping if I buy a monthly pass for the month, but only Nov 2, and I ride on Nov 1st? Is it fare skipping if I buy a daily pass from someone else? Is it fare skipping if I ask strangers if I can be on their group ticket (which covers up to five people)? Basically, I agree there is some harm, but it's considerably smaller than that caused by littering.

Anyway, I tend not to do it because (1) it makes me unpleasantly nervous on the ride and (2) if everyone did it we'd have a problem. But I don't see it as having a negative effect in the same way that littering does. Similarly, I see a difference between, e.g., leaving your McDonald's garbage in the train (or on the ground at the train station) vs throwing an orange into the woods beside a trail. The latter is mostly not seen, and will disappear in the not too distant future, so has almost no cost (but if everyone did it, and there were a lot of them, would also be something of a problem).

Ha! Well, I also consider theft clearly and considerably worse. But I thought it was being put in with fare-skipping and jaywalking, both of which I consider near non-issues. Maybe close to shoplifting, although that has a bit more clear victim.

Yeah, that shocked me to read. I consider fare-skipping and other crimes that don't cause any obvious negativity much better than littering, which makes everything shitty, just because you're a lazy shit.

I find it depressing when I visit areas with a lot of garbage around. It's like animals shitting in their own cage.