domain:cspicenter.com
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
35m ago
Remember the "Muslim Demographics" style videos with unsourced claims that Muslim women would have an average of 7 kids per women? Islam certainly hasn't been much better than other faiths or creeds at preserving fertility once you have a country sufficiently exposed to the modern online world.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarrassed liberal elite
43m ago
Well, the appeal of living in gigantic skyscrapers does diminish a bit when you're living in an earthquake zone.
Tokyo disagrees with you.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarrassed liberal elite
56m ago
I’m willing to believe that they’re so much more dense, but I want to understand the mechanism. Is it heavily mid-rise? Is it the reduced car infrastructure? Has their density trended up or down in the postwar era?
Mostly 6-story residential vs 2 as the default. You don't see many single-family homes with garages in Paris proper.
For comparison, SF proper is 800k people at 19k/square mile, Inner London is 3.4 million at 28k/square mile, Paris proper is 2.1 million at 52k/square mile, and Manhattan is 1.6 million at 75k/square mile. SF is mostly 2-story single-family houses. Inner London is mostly 2-3-story rowhouses. Paris is mostly midrise apartment buildings, Manhattan is a mixture of midrise and highrise. You can see an almost perfect linear relationship between building height and population density.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
32m ago
You're posting this on the wrong forum. The culprit has already been found.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarrassed liberal elite
33m ago
Per Wikipedia:
Notable U.S. cities surrounded by UGBs include Portland, Oregon; Boulder, Colorado; Honolulu, Hawaii; Virginia Beach, Virginia; Lexington, Kentucky; Seattle, Washington; Knoxville, Tennessee;[17] and San Jose, California.
None of those cities are notably famous for their YIMBY attitude to urban infill and densification - Portland, Seattle and Boulder are possibly the three most notoriously NIMBY cities outside California.
hydroacetylene
5m ago
Japan and Italy have very low female labor force participation rates. Israel has a high one.
faceh
27m ago
Yep.
The temptation is to assume its multicausal and there are several inputs all interacting at once to produce the outcome, and some countries have a different mix than others but on net it all puts downward pressure on fertility.
Even so, I FEEL as though there's probably some singular root cause that could be discovered. Discovering still doesn't mean we can address it effectively, though.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
37m ago
Wait, really?
Maybe I’m just making assumptions from my time in the schools here.
BurdensomeCount
Singapore is the only country that learned the correct lessons from the British Empire.
47m ago
Why would you want to stop this? White people should be just as free to decide where they want to live as anyone else.
hydroacetylene
2m ago
I mean, the US is also not going to collect 37% of income either.
pigeonburger
2m ago
This is about Canada, not the US.
Disclaimer: I've used family reunification sponsorship to help my wife move to live with me here. But she's not elderly, she's from a western country and she will contribute to society.
But anyway. I don't think it needs to be steelmanned: it's pretty obviously a nice thing to allow people to move in to live with their family. I think it's up to the other side to demonstrate that we cannot afford it.
I'm not saying that they cannot make that case. Chain migration exists. But I would be more in favor of slowing chain migration at the source, taking it as a granted that an economic migrant is likely a beachhead for a larger group, and thus being (A LOT) more selective in allowing them in. This, rather than changing family reunification, which has a clearer case of being a pro-social, pro-human justification for immigration.
Closedshop
話說天下大勢，分久必合，合久必分
9m ago
South Bay is really rough in terms of nightlife (mostly because the majority are 30s married Asian/Indian programmers). San Francisco is pretty fun if you know where to look.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
18m ago
Presumably to avoid a repeat of the 60's-80's
hydroacetylene
29m ago
This seems like it would have horrendous unintended consequences, in a way ‘the police beat morons who decide to glue themselves to the street and haul them off’ doesn’t. It also seems no more likely:
hydroacetylene
36m ago
Turkey needs to increase its marriage rate. I’m not sure how specifically to do this; presumably, Turkey being a Muslim country, the transition from arranged marriages is relatively recent, but you still have to convince Turks to actually go back to the things they left behind.
2rafa
57m ago
It was by no means extraordinary anywhere. It may seem extraordinary to many youngsters, I suppose, because they compare a world of fancy touchscreens of all sorts, social media, the laptop class lifestyle etc. to a world of stagnant socialism without any of those, and conclude that there must have been a huge improvement in the average quality of life, when in fact there was no such thing, and it's all just self-delusion driven mostly by Russophobia.
There was a huge improvement in average quality of life. The number of Western countries that saw similarly rapid transformations is very small. Ireland is probably the only one that wasn’t communist before 1989.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
2m ago
The market is not perfectly efficient, of course, but I am not sure why I should believe you are more likely to be correct than the people actually making the decision to hire them.
Not OP, but the obvious rejoinder is that the company but outsources all of the opportunity cost to the employees. The real question is why the prospective employee is so heavily discounting the opportunity cost.
johnfabian
12m ago
I think there's a simpler option here. If you get popped with an illegal weapon on you (and you haven't somehow victimized a Canadian in the process), just instant deportation. Why put them in prison? Just kick them out of the country, done.
hydroacetylene
15m ago
Yes. Texas’s schools underspend the national average by a lot and the better districts tend to be on the low side of the average, except for highland-park level eyepoppingly wealthy areas. And even in those cases, the extra money usually goes to athletics.
hydroacetylene
40m ago
Our schools actually spend way less than the national average, in a way that’s not particularly correlated with performance. High property tax revenue is probably not a contributing factor.
TitaniumButterfly
20m ago
Those aren't wants, they're needs, from a genetic and generational standpoint. High-quality mates are positional goods and everyone is in competition with everyone else for those. It's not the bigger house or the nicer car that they want -- not enough to sacrifice all the amazing things only made possible by non-working women -- it's the status which will enable them and their offspring to outcompete others for high-quality mates and thus progeny which will outcompete others in turn. It is survival itself.
Competition for scarce resources is what defines almost every aspect of human reality. It's not somehow decadent for a person to pursue status symbols if that means ensuring a better future for their children, and as I said above, status symbols are positional. These needs cannot be satisfied without fundamentally altering human nature, turning us into something... else.
Within this hellscape, we can coordinate to make things better, c.f. Meditations on Moloch. People want other things, too, such as stable families, well-raised children, healthy food made with love, thriving communities, and so on. Women are the social fabric that enables all of these things, which they can't do if they're working full-time. Just like we coordinate to prevent children from being put to work too early or too rigorously, we could coordinate to protect women and safeguard all the many wonderful things which flow from recognizing that hammering women into masculine-style productivity is putting them to poor use.
faceh
21m ago
There is a complex formula which determines how much of that is allocated to the HSA "pot" (Medisave) but the effect is that most people end up with $1 less in their retirement pot for each $1 they spend on healthcare. This is backstopped by a government-subsidized catastrophic insurance fund (Medishield) and an indigent fund which is made deliberately unpleasant to claim from (Medifund).
There is also a very deliberate class system - if a Singapore citizen stays in a class C ward (nightingale wards with no facilities and deliberately inferior food) the government picks up 65-80% of the bill and if they use a class B2 ward (similar but with 6-bed bays) the government picks up 50-65%. Class A patients get a private room and pay full freight.
These seem like facially reasonable approaches that nonetheless would be politically untenable in the U.S.
Assuming quality of care was comparable, it shouldn't be controversial for the government to maintain lower standards for amenities at the facilities they're paying more for, and people willing to pay for the nicer stay are in contrast agreeing to foot more of the bill.
Now, in practice this is basically how Medicaid works for long term care, and I think we're going to see some massive birfurcation in end-of-life treatment between people who are reliant on Medicaid and people who actually saved up enough to cover cushier facilities. But it seems likely that U.S. citizens would flip their lid if the government declared that was exactly how the system was supposed to work, right on the tin.
MachineElfPaladin
25m ago
Information-theoretic entropy is a measurement of how 'surprising' a message is. A low-entropy wall of text is one where, once you see the first sentence or two - or the poster's name - you pretty much know what all the next ten paragraphs will be.
Lewis2
40m ago
And since no one with power is even willing to hand out 5 year jail sentences, how is it remotely possible that a bill allowing drivers to hit pedestrians would ever be passed? The reason the protestors get away with it is that the powers that be are generally sympathetic to, if not outright supportive of, the protestors and their cause. The minute an anti-immigrant group tried the same tactic, the police and courts would magically stiffen their resolve and start handing out the lengthiest sentences permitted by law. It’s all “who, whom.”
I mean, I think the prima facie case is pretty simple: entities that have an incentive to be profit maximizing have decided that paying these women to do the work they do is, on margin, worth it. The market is not perfectly efficient, of course, but I am not sure why I should believe you are more likely to be correct than the people actually making the decision to hire them.
I think it is, more specifically, technological development. It reduces the amount of labor needed to perform household tasks, freeing that labor up for other uses, and increases economic productivity at various tasks outside the home. Technological development simultaneously increases the benefits and reduces the opportunity cost of working outside the home.
Almost all of them? Even in the heavily male dominated industries you mention women are somewhere between 10 and 30% of all workers. Do you think if 36% of all farmers disappeared no one would notice? What about 10% of all construction workers? Or hell, how about healthcare. Would no one notice if 88% of all nurses disappeared overnight? What about 38% of all physicians?
Yes, hence my proposal. One disparity here is that the value produced outside the home is partially returned to the women in question in the form of money she can use to acquire shelter, food, and all the necessities of life. If she quits working outside the home to raise a child very little of that value comes back to her in a form that can be spent to sustain herself. If the state wants more women to choose raising children then more of the value that action produces needs to come to them in a form they can use to sustain themselves.
More options
Context Copy link