site banner
Goodguy  2d ago (text post)   Edited 2d ago   9068 thread views

Midterms Megathread

Cause otherwise midterms discussion will be scattered around a bunch of separate Culture War thread posts. And it's nice to have more off-the-cuff rapid reactions in a dedicated megathread.

The first thing I've noticed so far: if the exit polls are correct, Americans are very pessimistic about AI.

13
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

One unexpected winner of yesterday's elections: The State of California. Not only did the wealth tax fail but Prop 42 banned future wealth taxes and also retroactive taxes.

As California staved off the worst, Texas seems destined to start its own decline. Just like everyone said would happen, all the Californians who fled to Texas brought their politics with them. Now they can enjoy high taxes and dismal weather at the same time! I hope you're happy, Joe Rogan.

Personally, I never got the appeal of Texas. California, though. Losing that one to the communists hurts.

Even if the worst outcome was avoided, CA ballot propositions are still the biggest institutional mistake in the history of organized democracy.

Prop 38 was one guy giving himself $4billion in taxpayer funding because he knew voters would see the word immunology and think "COVID=BAD" while ignoring the bizarrely specific qualifications in the proposition text.

Ah, that's why the recommendation to vote no on it! I wondered, because generally "immunology research" seems like the kind of thing Scott etc. would recommend? But if it was "kindly inflate my bank account, and mine only" then yeah, now I get it.

Not only did the wealth tax fail but Prop 42 banned future wealth taxes and also retroactive taxes.

I am not happy about it. Since I don't live in California, I derive no benefit from it, but that means California is not going 100% crazy but will remain like 80% crazy. Which is making people think being California is not that bad. Which supports turning other states into California. By the time Texans realized they goofed up and 80% crazy is not that nice, it'd be too late to fix anything.

California is actually possibly better placed than a lot of other states; boomer greed has made a lot of socialist initiatives hard to implement, Mexicans are more centrist than FOB Guatemalans, Haitians and Hondurans, and the demographics of the three big cities are better than a lot of big East Coast cities. Local governments are powerful, even LA has cities like Beverly Hills and Irvine where they actually enforce the law.

They also have, like Illinois and Michigan, a Democratic machine that is so corrupt that it actually serves as a kind of bulwark against the DSA / socialist lobby.

Corruption can be negotiated with. True believers are who you have to worry about.

Which class Newsom and the CDP fall into left as an exercise for the reader.

I was seriously thinking of moving from Florida to Texas because it is the only state that is building housing and the rent is going down in Austin, Dallas, and Houston.

After last night, however, I am glad I stayed.

because it is the only state that is building housing

A policy that just ended last night. Housing will still be cheap for a while, but nothing else will be built. Yes, that stabs the Hispanic vote in the back, since they were the ones doing most of that building, but who needs their support now that you have a more powerful bloc: landowners?

Especially if you think the support's only temporary.

Conversely if Texas keeps this up over the next few years it would go very high up my list of states to move to if I ever immigrate to the US (very unlikely, I know). No extra income tax is amazing and like you say, at least they are making an effort to build housing.

Isn’t this saying you want “Texas to do Texas things” but swap their politicians from “Old Money white Texas to California Democrats”? Something tells me it’s unlikely both can be true at the same time.

Why not? Texas things are good, but they can be done just as well by a different cadre of people. Nothing forces a California Democrat to be a NIMBY for example or raise taxes massively.

Nothing forces a California Democrat to be a NIMBY

I guess if you consider the voting public "nothing", sure.

In theory nothing. In practice the wealthy large states have adopted similar Democratic machines. NY and Cali seem to be similar. Illinois tries to do it to without the super rich high margin tech/finance.

California will rise again: it's the land of Reagan and the shining glory of American capitalism. LA moderates fended off a challenge from a Bernie associated socialist for mayor; SF's moderate mayor got his slate of policies and preferred candidates elected. Wealth tax defeated and banned for the future. Some bad with the good, of course, but it's a better direction than Oregon or Washington. (Republicans should go for accomplished tech CEOs as a governor candidate instead of people like Tory refugee Hilton.)

Maybe Vivek Ramaswany will move there and take a crack at it in 2030.

That dude is done as a political force.

Done? When was he ever a political force?

Running against a drunk for an open seat in a Trump +13 state wasn’t a bad idea for him. Might have worked in a normal year. Obviously he has zero base of followers.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats