This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Zoning laws are more bipartisan than you let on, and, given that most local governments are saddled with many state and federal mandates, are unfortunately necessary. In a more libertarian world you might be right, but I can't say I've ever lived in that world.
But consider this, town of 20k people with mostly or all high income single family units plus a quaint downtown. Now, the school district is "awesome" (in other words it contains children who are intelligent and nonviolent/disruptive). Some developer decides to knock down 10 houses and build a 40 story slum. This just absolutely blows up the finances for the town. They now need a whole new plumbing system, double the cops, and, most expensively, their school now sucks. These kids pay way less per capita in taxes, plus they run around stabbing other kids. Libertarianism has many good aspects, but far too many on that side dont understand you need to do things in order. You cant have no zoning laws without repealing the CRA and eliminating the public school system. It just doesn't make sense.
Tariffs are another similar case. When you think about it, it is objectively unfair to American workers that we have the FDA, EPA, NLRB, OSHA, etc and then they have to compete against someone who can burn coal and dump arsenic into rivers.
I'd be very interested in your patent law take. I've worked in it extensively and it mostly works well outside of pharmaceuticals and a few "innovative" patent categories (which IMO the patent acts as written shouldn't ever have applied to. To get an idea of those categories of what IMO are fake/illegal patent categories see Bilski v. Kappos, Mayo v. Prometheus, and Alice Corp.
I don't actually think I, or anyone actually knows what the Jones act does. It outwardly seems fairly stupid.
Having them is necessary. Enforcing them isn't. At the very minimum Imagine a regulatory framework that has a shall-issue mandate on any kind of permit, but then your local community can sue you if you end up violating codes.
Consider this: if adding poor people makes things worse, why not take them away instead? Just bulldoze the houses of the poorest 10% and kick them out every year. With each decimation your schools and infrastructure would get even better!
Possible counterargument: the town is in a state of economic equilibrium, such that it can't spare even one garbage man without providing fewer services per dollar.
counter-counterargument: if the system is already in economic equilibrium, no one new will be incentivized to move in.
I don't feel like it's unfair that my boss can't abuse me. If workers in other countries want to die on the job and deal with arsenic-rivers then more power to them, though. In fact I view it as pretty much a strict good that we've outsourced the most polluting industries to other nations. Why would I want a lithium mine poisoning our rivers, when with the magic of globalization I can get bolivians to poison their own rivers instead?
All intellectual property law should be abolished with the exception of trademarks. If a sufficiently liquid free market demands a particular good, the free market will find a way to fund that good. Maybe at one point the market wasn't liquid enough, thanks to travel times and difficulty with communication, but thanks to modern technology we no longer live in such a benighted age. Intellectual property law doesn't encourage innovation, it just provides for a class of middlemen that can financialize and profit off of ideas. For example: The vast majority of J.K. Rowling's wealth doesn't come from sales of Harry Potter, it comes from her monopoly over the Harry Potter universe, which she uses to extract rent from the creative efforts of product designers, screenwriters, filmmakers, actors, cover-art designers, etcetera.
Trademarks are cool though.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link