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 -
Throwing more fuel on the bonfire of "women: what is the matter with them?"
On the one hand, this should hearten those who like to leave comments regarding feminism with "why aren't they fighting for the right to work in coal mines?" (disregarding that there was a history of women working in coal mines, this was considered terrible, and it was made illegal for women to work down mines).
On the other hand, it will dishearten those who think the solution to the TFR problem is "just encourage girls to get married and start having babies straight out of high school, don't go to college, don't be career-focused".
Right now, the way most economies in the developed world work, if you want a reasonable standard of living, you need two people working full-time jobs (and as good salaries in those jobs as you can get). Want a mortgage for a house so you finally can have those two kids? Both of you better be working your little behinds off or the banks won't even look at the application form (and I fill in financial details on said application forms for our staff who are applying for mortgages, so I can speak on this).
Want a good enough career to get those salaries? Better go to college and get qualifications, as this newspaper columnist says in his article about his teenage son having a work experience placement:
And that last is the important part: for a decent job, you need qualifications. For qualifications, you need college. If college, no early marriages and child-bearing. And the current economic structure is, as I said, both of you better be working or forget it.
So all the neat solutions about 'get women back into the home' aren't that neat or practical when it comes down to it. I'd love for women to be free to be homemakers, wives and mothers instead of "the only value in your life is work, and the only valuable work is paid work, so get a job outside the home". But it takes two to tango, and it's not all down to "if only women weren't so uppity, problem solved!" Businesses are pushing to get more women into work. Maybe the promised AI future will mean "robots do all the jobs, AI makes the economy so productive nobody has to work, UBI means you can stay at home and have three babies and raise them yourself".
Or maybe not, and it will be "if you're not working some kind of job, you are on the breadline, and if you want a good job in the increasingly AI-dominated economy, you better have super skills and super qualifications, so more college, more everything, personal life? who needs that?".
This is the underlying problem, not a functional constraint. We easily have enough wealth in the Western world to afford a one-worker household. The problem is that wealth is being siphoned off into a boomer class of homeowners who got in under the old scheme and demand house price appreciation/free medicine, a migrant class that soaks up welfare/scams and a giant bureaucratic class that chokes the productive economy with idiotic rules.
This is the result of a lack of patriotism and virtue. Greedy boomers demand more welfare and fewer taxes (to hell with investment and science if it pays off after they're dead!) Treacherous politicians invite in low-performing populations to prop up their voter base (and drive more productive, sceptical, informed voters out of their electorates), aided by short-termist business lobbies looking for cheap labour. They set up huge DEI infrastructure that complicates and worsens everything with quotas, they let criminals out onto the streets. Bureaucrats do empire building and feel-good wrecking of energy infrastructure for the climate, they wreck national defence while the politicians start stupid wars. Everything is far more expensive than it needs to be.
Voters and sensible people generally get disillusioned with politics, leaving the corrupt and stupid to become leaders. Everything compounds on everything else, metastasizing.
Take housing. Housing is easy to build, you can build the pieces in a factory and assemble on site. Yet productivity has actually been falling because unions and lobbies refuse to allow superior methods, because imported labour does a shoddy job, because the bureaucrats drown everything in idiotic regulations, because there's woeful planning and administration of infrastructure projects needed to go alongside housing... In the UK they actually employ humans to wander around buildings checking for fires. It's retarded. They have de-automated the fire alarm. They stupidly built flammable cladding, stupidly adhered to a policy of 'have people stay in their apartments and burn', realized that was bad and mandated a 24/7 'waking watch' instead. A system run by this kind of intellect isn't going to produce good outcomes.
Much of the West is in a multi-causal social death spiral that technology and the industrial economy have been heroically outpacing, most of the time.
It's dubious that prefabrication offers any savings to building in-situ for SFH. It turns out it's really expensive to ship a bunch of stuff that needs to get assembled anyway.
It's true that there are issues with low volume and transportation. Prefabrication works best for bigger projects like multi-family houses or apartments. Even so there are still some gains from prefabrication and related but distinct techniques like panelization: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877705816301734
This case study compares panelization and modularization for a single house. It does not compare either technique to conventional building methods. I'd recommend reading the link I posted.
The link you posted just looks at Sweden and America and finds no clear evidence of overall construction productivity gains, despite them being wholly different countries with different regulations, environment, scale and market dynamics. It's not very useful, which is why I didn't address it.
My link is also, on reflection, not particularly helpful.
Prefabrication is not a silver bullet, it's just one part of a series of improvements that should be made. There should be prefabrication (especially in the larger projects where it's most helpful), consolidation of the construction sector, planning reform, expert management of large infrastructure projects and cost-efficient safety and environmental regulation.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link