@sliders1234's banner p

sliders1234


				

				

				
2 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 19:00:22 UTC

				

User ID: 685

sliders1234


				
				
				

				
2 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 19:00:22 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 685

We do not know the West limits on escalation. We saw the US dither on aid until it felt like Ukraine was losing and Putin would eventually break thru and maybe take Kiev again.

If Ukranian lines got to a point of collapse the West would still have options. An imminent breakthrough does put things like Anduril tech as suggested in play, Poland entering with a superior fresh army, trad American AirPower. The west may not care much about Ukranian lives, but the closer it comes to threatening core Europe which Poland may be changes a lot of calculus.

The Biden administration has clearly been anti-winning the war but when we hit losing the war points things get done. It’s almost like inflation where 3% inflation the fed is suppose to hike and 1% inflation they are suppose to ease but the 2% line is keeping the war in no one winning position.

If Ukraine cared about their men’s lives they may be wise to lose a few battles at minimal causalities.

Which could be workable if you were say Singapore and only allowed immigration to citizens of means.

But if you were say somewhere desirable with open immigration say Venice Beach you can’t build infinite amount of housing. Though maybe if say you could do whatever you wanted as long as you had one spare bedroom in somewhere not desirable like Detroit to send them to. At which point I guess it would be a choice to be homeless in Venice Beach instead of housed in Detroit.

Negotiating peace is certainly not outside the Overton window especially if that peace is essentially Korea along the current military lines. My guess is Biden would accept those terms immediately, the GOP would cancel all military aid under those terms.

Peace that is Russia annexing all of Ukraine with Putin as the President over the region I guess is but no one from either side even discusses that.

You specifically cited anti-semitism of the right three times and accused Elon Musks of it but the only evidence was GOP votes against an Israel aid bill.

I have no idea what you mean be anti-semitism on the right (I can take some guesses). And then there is the ADL definition which seems like anything they don’t like is antisemitism. You did make a specific reference to Columbia protests so I have an idea what you are accusing the left of.

Blocking $26 billion in aid to an extremely wealthy country that also has the wealthiest per capita diaspora community is now anti-semitism? When the country sending the money has a $1.5 trillion budget deficit?

I’m pro sending money to Ukraine because they are a poor country fighting out geopolitical enemies but I don’t understand sending money to a wealthy nation like Israel especially not when we are essentially funding both sides.

Brainwashing has you know a Wikipedia with a defined meaning: “Brainwashing (also known as mind control, menticide, coercive persuasion, thought control, thought reform, and forced re-education) is the concept that the human mind can be altered or controlled by certain psychological techniques. Brainwashing is said to reduce its subject's ability to think critically or independently, to allow the introduction of new, unwanted thoughts and ideas into their minds,[1] as well as to change their attitudes, values, and beliefs“

Which is exactly how you used the word. This just seems like boo outgroup to me.

Or are you saying you used brainwashing in a positive way as in removing ideas that are proven wrong? Did you use brainwashing as in “the round earthers brainwashed the flat earthers who now see the errors in the old models”?

I have no idea why “the majority of whites are against” even means anything. Many things that eventually become accepted by society were unpopular at one point. Once upon a time I believed in Santa Claus.

I consider myself a white nationalist at least adjacent. I’m against killing Jews. I’m pro-English style colonization as a great good. I’m pro-police. I’m pro-western values and civilization as better. I think ethnostates often have a lot of beneficial features.

Jews are just a white ethnicity now. Sacredness is gone.

What they do have is power.

Hasn’t climate protest worked because the earth has actually gotten warmer the last 20 years so it feels true?

PETA hasn’t taken off. The only real change in that space is picking up some rationalists.

And environmentalist have benefited from tech costs curves while nothing like that has kicked in for PETA (cheap lab meat).

It doesn’t seem very fair to call WN as “brainwashing” or “propaganda”. A lot of their ideas seem very truthful to me. It’s probably impractical to make the US Sweden today, but a society like that with low crime and a far larger percent of their population being able to function in the modern world and therefore a higher trust society and a larger capability for a welfare state feels truthy to me. It’s not like they are just making stuff which brainwashing or propaganda seems to apply to me.

It’s definitely an honest debate on whether the US should move in a white nationalist direction (limit immigration, promote western civ, meritocracy, expect minorities to live by white standards, etc). And very honest for Europe to turn anti-immigrant so they do not develop similar problems as the USA.

I spent a few minutes trying to come up with a replacement level athlete with name notoriety. Got excited when he hit me.

I bet he runs in 2028. Perhaps it’s officially Donny Jr. But the old man is the one giving the stump speeches.

I will give you Thomas. Though part of Thomas is he’s great at pissing off the left and it’s not only thru legal reasoning but being a player in the federalist society and his wife being intimately involved in 1/6.

More likely than not at this point though Sotomayor is who she is. I think the left could make a strong case for replacing her on her merits alone and not her age. If you have 3 SC justices I don’t think you can claim she is one of your top 3 liberal legal minds. If you are going to lose a lot of cases it still makes sense to have your best writing you le disagreements.

That is obviously the Latino versus black debate. It appears the IQ gaps are relative small but the criminality eventually seems to disappear in Hispanic populations but not black populations.

I think this analysis has a fatal flaw in it. Sotomayor is an affirmative action appointment and hence her ability is no greater than a generic democrat. If Sotomayor was essentially Michael Jordan than all the arguments for keeping her on the bench would be in play. But she’s basically Javale McGee and a replacement level justice.

It’s definitely an interesting thought experience that it can be beneficial to keep a justice on the court but I can’t agree with the actionable part of it and basically view Sotomayor as low IQ (relatively) without the talent to be great.

Is it even good to remove Iranian nuclear capabilities? Part of the geopolitics for Iran is if shit ever hits the fan they can get nukes fairly quickly to prevent an attack on the homeland. You change a lot of security arrangements if that is not true.

Russia having nukes is a big reason why the US could enter the Ukraine war and it wouldn’t existential to Russia because they guarantee the war would never come to Moscow.

Looks performative for now.

I’ve seen reports Iran gave the US flight paths for prior attacks to make sure everything was shot down.

The funny thing to me is there is some Air Force pilot somewhere whose highlight of his career is shooting down missiles the enemy gave him intel on just begging for someone to fuck up and give him a real mission like engaging some Iranian pilots and bombing a nuclear base.

What do you mean by “not well understood”. Do you mean economists do not understand why or the average guy doesn’t understand why.

I think economists would easily cite things like land restrictions, failure to build infrastructure, zone restrictions etc as the cause of high home prices.

Definitely possible. I would say maybe 33% from this hypothesis. And the rest is liberals just take more of these positions and slowly move the foundation into their taste.

People seem to be indicating that NPR was closer to the middle back when she died and left them money. And the change in NPR occurred 10-15 years later.

Probably a good job hunting search for clearly right people to look into these sort of jobs. If an old dude is like 80 and you are mid-career 40 there are likely a lot of opportunities in being the head of the foundation with clear right side traits.

I also want to point out Bezos seems to be going the opposite way with his wife. Old wife spending on leftist causes. I don’t know Lauren Sanchez current politics but they just bought a huge house in Palm Beach. Rich Latin women in Southern Florida screams conservative. Her friends will be. I feel confident predicting the Bezos will be solid GOP donors within about 10 years.

The he annexed these places thing has already been violated without nuclear war. I believe Kherson was after annexation plus Ukraine has been attacking annexed land for over a year. So no line their for Russian nuclear options.

It’s an idealized thought experiment. But I would say it’s largely true for Buffett, Musks, and a few others. You wouldn’t be taxing them directly. Carnegie is an interesting example. You wouldn’t for the most part be taxing him, but what you would have taxed is what he did with the money. The government would get more money and it would be real but what your taxing is what he did with his money which is buy a lot of libraries, science, and cultural centers in the US. Maybe that is a net gain. But you are not taxing the rich guy.

I do not believe Musks owns a home anymore. He probably does own a private jet or two. But his consumption would be way below his means. Any taxes on him isn’t going to change his jet ownership so no consumption change. You would be taxing something else besides Elon Musks. Not sure what it is.

It’s not a laffer curve element. That’s for raising tax revenue alone. It includes other indirect costs like government interest costs.

https://www.thebigquestions.com/2011/04/18/the-man-who-cant-be-taxed/

This thought experiment was popular on econ blogosphere back then. It seems roughly right to me.

Now someone above mentioned they consume capital gains and quit working. The story gets a bit different then since higher cap gains taxes or full consumption would lead to him entering the labor market producing more goods and services for others to consume.

But in general without causing a change in behavior (rich consuming less, getting people to work more) there would be no net gain in government fiscal position.

Elon Musks for example can’t be taxed. If you took $100 billion from him it’s not changing his lifestyle. Just numbers on a bank account. He would still work and he consumes so little compared to his net worth consumption changes would be meaningless.

A good econ piece for a good researcher would be to figure out why the costs of construction increased so much between 2019 to 2024. It seems like Texas could atleast print 3k sq ft at 500-600k new back then. With then older 3k sq ft homes going for 400k.

WFH killing construction costs doesn’t vibe right to me. Construction workers and lumberjacks aren’t the people afraid of COVID or the people who ever could do WFH. We have had general inflation probably totaling 20-25% but it still feels harder to build now.

The traditional economics is that taxing capital doesn’t raise any net tax revenue.

A short summary is all this stuff goes thru the capital markets. A country with high saved wealth has more money sitting in financial assets. A huge amount of financial assets causes money to bid up the price of financial assets. The reverse of a securities price is its yield. Hence a lot of saved assets ends up leading to things like lower real interest rates (or negative real rates). So cheap mortgages and cheap government borrowing. What the government gains in tax revenue is offset by increases in their interest expense. All sums up to 0 net government revenue.

Roughly correct.

We just disagree. Geopolitics is bigger than what the masses shout.

The Jews controlling territory in the Middle East is an eyesore for many Iranians but it’s a small piece to the bigger regional hegemony.

I had to look up Ray Kroc because there was something I was guessing that has a good culture war angle not discussed. Foundations and donations over the long term seem to always end up in the left camp.

Ray Kroc my intuition was telling me he would not be a leftist. To no one’s surprise a small business owners political philosophy is described in Wikipedia as

“A lifelong Republican, Kroc believed firmly in self-reliance and staunchly opposed government welfare and the New Deal. Kroc donated $255,000 to Richard Nixon's reelection campaign in 1972”

I guess it was actually his widowed wife’s estate that donated $200 million to NPR, but still seems there is a conservative can create a foundation and 30 years after their death the money ends up supporting everything they were opposed to.