domain:youtu.be
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
1d ago
True, though there is a precedent in the recent handover of the Chagos islands.
hydroacetylene
1d ago
Major Protests in Las Angeles
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/paramount-california-home-depot-protest-rcna211650
Earlier the LAPD had to rescue a group of federal agents surrounded by, ahem, 'boisterous' protestors.
The Los Angeles Police Department today responded to a claim by ICE acting Director Todd Lyons that officers took two hours to respond to help calls from federal agents who faced boisterous protesters yesterday.
Lyons said it took LAPD officers more than two hours to come to the aid of federal agents downtown after help was requested multiple times. He said agents were surrounded by more than 1,000 protesters following federal immigration raids on three locations in L.A.
In response, the feds are federalizing the national guard to deploy to LA:
Border czar Tom Homan said authorities are mobilizing to deploy the National Guard in Los Angeles amid protests over immigration raids this weekend.
Gov. Newsom doesn't like the idea:
The federal government is "moving to take over" the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers, Gov. Gavin Newsom said today.
“That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions,” he said in a statement. “LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment’s notice.”
Of course, that last bit is patently false- see above- but the current situation on the ground is very much fog of war.
So why this protest now? As far as I can tell, this all started when federal agents arrested David Huerta for obstructing an ICE raid(https://ktla.com/news/local-news/union-president-among-44-arrested-in-los-angeles-ice-raids/). David Huerta, for those of you who don't know, is president of the SEIU, America's more aggressively left wing federation of labor unions(the AFL-CIO is moderately pro-Trump). He released the following statement:
“What happened to me is not about me; This is about something much bigger. This is about how we as a community stand together and resist the injustice that’s happening. Hard-working people, and members of our family and our community, are being treated like criminals. We all collectively have to object to this madness because this is not justice. This is injustice. And we all have to stand on the right side of justice.”
Maybe-maybe not a call to arms, but the SEIU absolutely does not play around when it comes to protests, so put two and two together- and the union released its own statement, separately, which is more clearly combative:
In a post on X, SEIU California wrote: “ICE picked the wrong side. The wrong state. The wrong person. and the wrong union. David Huerta stood up. And 750,000 SEIU workers are standing with him.”
Again, not unlawful incitement. But most people would interpret that as mildly threatening. Newsom is maintaining that this was an arrest for 'observing'- patently a lie, given video evidence.
This has the potential to be a domestic test of Trump. I'm of the impression that the SEIU, like most unions, Does Not Play By The Rules when it would mean not getting their way, so selective prosecution under RICO is possible, but more than likely Trump will just make himself look strong and Newsom weak by cracking down on LA protestors. This is a pretty core federal power and assaulting a federal law enforcement officer is almost definitionally something with federal jurisdiction for prosecution; presumably the feds can access the database of everyone who clashed with the LAPD to charge them too.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
1d ago
The Russian economy basically disintegrated and the country was looted by oligarchs, democracy was snuffed out and massively discredited for decades. Now this was a semi-deliberate wrecking of the country to prevent the communists getting back into power, so not just a bankruptcy... but it bodes ill for the US doing the same thing.
Also the US could extend bailouts to Russia and did so to a certain extent, again trying to keep communists out of power.
Trump certainly wouldn't be capable of fiscal rectitude, that much is clear. But the status quo can't be maintained indefinitely.
Tree
1d ago
People disagree with him because of partisan considerations, and they downvote him because they disagree with him. They shouldn't be doing that, they're already in the wrong. But using those illegitimate downvotes to argue he's wrong is even worse, because it encourages them. Now they will think that by clicking harder they can win the argument.
What if people refuse to use your currency to trade goods and services? What if they tell you to fuck off when you ask them to pay you your own fun bucks? And I'm not just talking about Americans that you have over the barrel of your gun. I'm talking about the rest of the world.
This entire scenario is specifically about what happens when your power to enforce the privilege of exchanging debt for ressources ends.
What happens when US treasuries are no longer viewed as the most risk free investment vehicle in the world and are replaced by something else and demand craters?
The answer is usually that you'll have to dip into foreign currency reserves or sell hard assets, but what do you do when you run out?
What if I start paying your military men in the new harder currency to loot your country?
New Yorker isn't free to read anymore? Boo.
Anyways: https://old.reddit.com/r/copypasta/comments/jbff9q/libertarian_police/
Of course, but you have to find those first.
All the recent darknet busts I know of are either down to some human element flipping or stupid accounting from the bad guys. Like actually having similar amounts as inputs and outputs.
It's (almost) never fancy cryptographic acumen, just boring police work. Even Ross just got social engineered.
LateMechanic
1d ago
"It says here in this history book that luckily, the good guys have won every single time. What are the odds?”
Not sure you're following the point, that was saying that we have a goofy system precisely because different people have been trading off who wins & loses all the time. Especially in the 19th century the winners didn't exactly know what they were doing (constant boom & bust cycles with many severe depressions).
"Primary dealers" of monopoly money can surely not fail in delivering it to the US government, but how exactly does that translate into food rations for GI?
The government prints up some IOUs called treasury securities, and swaps them for some other government IOUs called central bank reserves, in a primary dealer auction completely unencumbered by "people choosing to buy debt". Then they use those IOUs (widely called 'money') to spend and/or give to people out in the economy, who are willing to trade goods & services for those IOUs. These government IOUs are valuable because they're the only way to settle your taxes that the government declared that you owe.
If that sounded like gibberish to you, well I already said most people don't understand the monetary system and never learned about it. If you think there's "a" world reserve currency conferring special status to a single country, that does explain where you're at, but the basic logic I just laid out also applies to other countries that issue their own currency.
chooky
1d ago
I personally prefer Brotherhood (the continually building climax of the final dozen episodes is just very compelling for me), though I do like both and can see preferring either one. I think I recall liking the Brotherhood dub a lot more than 2003. One great thing about FMA is that both are very good so you can always go back for more by watching the remix.
LateMechanic
1d ago
The point of me saying this was that in that situation you should put more effort on justification.
Yep fair enough, my initial 2nd paragraph was kind of declaring things outside the point of the rest of it. That was trying to punch up what people might 'know' which I think are incontrovertible, without going into subjective policy implications.
None of this describes an actual problem with inflation. It says that inflation will automatically regulate away any excess borrowings. Why then not set taxes to 0, and just let the inflation run its course?
Having some amount of taxes is what gives the currency an initial anchor value. Those taxes being levied broadly and reoccurring every year is what makes the money universally accepted and used even in the private economy. The currency is an IOU where the only thing 'owed' upon redemption is tax relief. If you levy no taxes, then inflation definitely will regulate the value automatically to the desired savings amount of 0 (give or take some inertia).
Is there any reason this is unique to the government? Or is my deficit also literally the same thing as rest-of-the-economy surplus? Because if it is, then it seems noone else should have objections to me borrowing indefinitely, either - it just makes you better of!
The only thing unique to government is the ability to levy taxes (backed up by force). That's what allows them to indefinitely print up IOUs that promise to pay nothing but an abstract amount of value in a unit of measurement they make up, and people will still line up to earn those IOUs (working in the army or wherever).
The generalized logic is: "you will always value your creditor's own debt". Because you can cancel out the debts with each other. The government can decree that it's a universal creditor to everyone (everyone owes taxes, abstract amounts of value payable in nothing). Thus enabling it to actually simultaneously be a universal debtor to everyone (issuing IOUs far exceeding the tax liabilities, if people are willing to save some for a rainy day).
You can write any number of IOUs that say "I owe the bearer of this note 1 apple", and use that new money to pay for things. Maybe only people in your neighborhood will accept it (also helps if they know you have an apple tree in your yard, and that there aren't too many outstanding notes to enable a run on your apples). If you write "I owe the bearer of this note $1", then some people (particularly banks) may accept it as valuable if they trust your creditworthiness. Your deficit is indeed definitely everyone else's surplus, if splitting the economy into those 2 sectors is useful to any analysis. So we (in the non-Lykurg sector of the economy) do benefit. The only problem is you run out of creditworthiness before we get very stimulated.
Why would they not want more? You demand that I explain why we would ever want non-government surplus to be less, but now you just assert that it will be the case.
Well, would you be happy holding millions/billions in checking/saving/bond accounts, or would you be tempted at some point to start buying stocks, yachts, and islands instead? It seems that most people tend to have savings targets to hit, after which they feel more free to spend any excess income. And their preferred asset allocation of savings maxes out at some desired amount of monetary savings.
But indeed, the government deficit could certainly be eleventy zillion dollars, if it were to end up in someone's account that has an infinite savings desire who wouldn't touch it. In the MV=PQ identity, that would be money increasing but velocity falling off a cliff, causing no effect on output or price level.
And I didn't say that there's no reason to want to shrink the government deficit, just that it does take an explanation. I could say that I do want to shrink the non-government surplus in hypothetical situations, if we're having obnoxious levels of inflation, maybe caused by too much government spending being indexed against the price level (causing a positive feedback loop that prevents automatic stabilization).
Finally, we indeed have basically never had much demand-pull inflation in the modern era of democracies with proper central banks using fiat currency (since the early 20th century at least). The bouts of inflation are usually better explained as cost-push, often from energy price shocks. The central bankers take credit for being wizards and steering the economies well, but it's probably those fiscal automatic stabilizers doing the work.
erwgv3g34
1d ago
The 2003 version is better.
orangecat
1d ago
Saying "denial" is something that has gotten me warned by the mods in the past, and I was only using it in a vague general sense. You're using it as a personal attack.
I don't think you know what a personal attack is.
You spent the entire thread talking past someone... And judging by votes, most people disagree with you.
At what point do you examine your own biases?
campfireSmoresEaten
1d ago
But since then, there have been few obviously pro-social successes of his.
Starlink is cool. I have higher willingness to support Ukraine than Musk, but Musk has done a lot more to support Ukraine than I have.
The continued achievements of SpaceX.
The continued rollout of electric cars.
His record on AI is mixed, but he has spoken out about the dangers. Including directly to some very high ranking politicians. I think it's weird he's not doing more. But if humanity is going to die, I would rather we die with someone having brought this to the attention of various powerful people directly. It's "dignity points", I guess.
He has acted as a sort of grey-tribe wing of the republican party with respect to things like the deficit, which is probably a good thing. And arguably he's sort of a moderate on immigration? I haven't really followed that.
HighResolutionSleep
1d ago
The damage isn't done by money simply being created or spent. It's done when it's used to Dig Up and Fill Holes Again, or worse, paid to my political enemies to actively undermine my interests. The money is then "backed" by holes dug up and filled again, or hit pieces against Twitter nobodies.
These things probably don't generate as much real wealth as what the private sector would back it with instead, if it was allowed to create the money instead.
Anyone else having fun with image generators? Or more generally, doing anything fun and non-programmer with generative llms? I like skimming Zvi's updates but so much of supposed usefulness is for programmers, where do I find the normie's guide to interesting things to do?
Most of what I use LLMs for is creating bespoke fanfiction. For example, let's say I have the following scenario in my head: an Evangelion AU where Shinji, Asuka, and Rei are working at a hotel (Shinji is the night auditor, Asuka is the security guard, and Rei is the housekeeper) when the world ends and they are stranded inside (think The Mist). This is specific enough that we can be reasonably confident nobody on the internet has ever written anything like it; without LLMs, my only choices are to write it myself or to commission somebody to write it for me. But with LLMs... and with the right jailbreak, you can use them for smut, too.
Of course, this depends on how good LLMs are at writing fiction. Most of them are pretty bad, but some are surprisingly decent. That riveroaks model that was floating around the LMArena two months ago was incredible.
I wasn't talking of Canadian perceptions. Are you playing for pity now with this ridiculous «nuh-uh»? Yes it was.
But Canadians were endlessly preening about their moral superiority and greater civility and safety, too, much to the consternation of Americans. Still are, to an extent. This is very easy to observe in the wild.
It's always funny to watch a person unravel like this. You want to prove me stupid and ignorant on every turn, even when it's completely beside the point and your attack is not very tenable. I didn't want to get this result, you could have simply been content with me refusing to elaborate on the genius of American deep state.
Hajnali mentality is not that deep, scratch and there's the same rabid animal underneath.
P.S. I don't remember what I was taught in the geography class about Canada. It's not been heavy on politics. Probably just oil sands and climate, stuff like that.
chooky
1d ago
Full Metal Alchemist Brotherhood is excellent - I have no idea on sub vs dub, but dub seemed fine. If you havent watched Avatar TLA, its original version is English. I adored Baccano!!
Why has the tech sector revolutionized work without dramatical increases in productivity
Is this true? Granted, it's hard to measure productivity. But US GDP per capita, adjusted for inflation, has increased by about 40% since the tech boom began in the mid-1990s.
I wonder what are some good metrics of productivity.
doglatine
1d ago
China has seen a massive increase in GDP and quality of life, as has the small segment of American society that has leveraged integration of new technology either directly into their industries or been able to exploit its integration elsewhere. And everyday American consumers have also seen a big increase in purchasing power thanks to cheap manufactured goods from China; the cost of textiles, consumer electronics, and household appliances has absolutely plummeted in real terms. However, lots of American industries have remained extremely stagnant in terms of productivity because they didn't/couldn't/wouldn't integrate new methods, so their purchasing power relative to the rest of the country and the rest of the world has declined.
SkoomaDentist
1d ago
Have you looked at how much China’s GDP has risen?
Goodguy
1d ago
Granted, I don't understand economics very well. That said, I doubt that the amount of government spending as a fraction of the total economy is going to decrease, barring a collapse of the United States. The US federal budget as a fraction of the US GDP has actually been rather constant since the 1950s, with a slight but not huge upward trend: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYONGDA188S.
If we assume that government spending as a fraction of the economy is very unlikely to substantially decrease, which it probably will not since the political will for that simply does not exist on a large scale, then I figure that the government running a deficit is actually a good thing for me. Sure, they are spending a lot of money on stuff I do not want them to fund. But they are very unlikely to significantly reduce how much they spend, so for me at least having lower taxes seems beneficial, as opposed to having the government spend just as much money as now, but also fix the budget deficit by taxing me more.
This does not mean that we should stop trying to get the government to spend money on different things than it currently is. I'm just saying that, even if less government spending would be beneficial (a complex question), I don't see any realistic political pathway to making it happen.
What am I missing?
greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
1d ago
what do you mean? by almost every metric life has gotten better the past century? GDP keep chugging along too
Russia is crappier than the US or Mexico, but it's not that bad as to be NK.
More options
Context Copy link