prev <-> next
[2020-08-31 17:07:01] - a: Probably more in tune to politics as well, seeing as it pretty directly affects them. Much easier to ignore the government when they're not your employer and can't send you off to fight. -Paul
[2020-08-31 17:03:42] - my limited experience as a left-leaning person that works with the military: (compared to how i subjectively feel about middle america) most/lots of these people are conservative and smart. so, maybe it shouldn't surprise me that the military is against trump: they are conservative, but they don't fall for his BS. if you're a critical thinker, you'd have an easy time giving trump the thumbs down. (and voting independent or whatever) ~a
[2020-08-31 17:02:53] - i did see that. i considered commenting on it. 13% is much higher than the national average. ~a
[2020-08-31 17:01:33] - a: How about that third party number? I'll bet a lot of those intend to vote libertarian. Libertarian candidates tend to pull heavily from the military for support (possibly because of their relatively non-interventionist foreign policy). -Paul
[2020-08-31 16:58:07] - surprising poll numbers of members of the military. *white* members of the military have an unfavorable view of trump. that seems crazy to me. ~a
[2020-08-31 15:27:59] - yeah, amazon needs to split so badly. i currently hold ONE share. ~a
[2020-08-31 15:14:51] - a: If this is how the market is going to react to stock splits, can I put in a request for Amazon and Shopify and Mercado Libre to split as well? I'll gladly deal with having to modify my past transactions to deal with split adjusted prices. -Paul
[2020-08-31 15:13:56] - a: The crazy thing is, if you only checked every year or so you might not even notice. How much of today's gain is from people not realizing what a stock split is and instead thinking that they're getting a huge discount on Tesla? -Paul
[2020-08-31 14:38:38] - paul: also, i was right about tsla, we missed 420 completely. ~a
[2020-08-31 14:31:08] - i wonder how many people logged into their stock market trading account this morning in a panic after they "lost" most of their money in tsla or aapl. i'll admit, even though i knew about the news (stock split), i momentarily noted tsla's price was a little lower than i remembered it being. ~a
[2020-08-31 13:42:19] - paul/mig: roger. thank you for the replies. ~a
[2020-08-30 19:47:57] - paul: forgetting he endorsed Romney too? - mig
[2020-08-30 15:48:24] - a: There's plenty of things you can legit criticize Rand Paul for and I would be happy to join you. This just happens to be one of like 5 issues where he's actually been pretty principled and pretty good and basically going against the political mainstream so it makes little sense to me to criticize him on that. -Paul
[2020-08-30 15:40:09] - a: But I don't know what the logic would be behind the idea that "he's just a republican [...] who actually doesn't care about breonna". What would be his point in introducing legislation in her name to try to prevent some of the circumstances that lead to her death, then? Do you think it gets him points among his party or his base? -Paul
[2020-08-30 15:38:38] - a: "maybe he's just a republican (LINO) who actually doesn't care about breonna?" I think the LINO aside is accurate. He hasn't been nearly as libertarian as I would like since Trump was elected, and his behavior has often been pretty embarrassing as he tries to cozy up to Trump. -Paul
[2020-08-30 15:37:39] - a: In combination with what happened there and has been going on in DC (and across the country)... I wouldn't necessarily blame him for wanting some security when walking the streets of DC. -Paul
[2020-08-30 15:36:43] - a: "with the suggestion that Republicans need security details to walk on the street" I'm not sure the full context on this, but considering that in the past he was assaulted by his neighbor and had multiple ribs broken and it is very common for people on social media to talk about "Where's Rand Paul's neighbor when we need him?"... -Paul
[2020-08-30 15:34:53] - a: The short answer is I don't know of any, but I suspect that's more due to the unpopularity of his positions (at least among politicians) than unwillingness to cross party lines. He's worked with Cory Booker and others on legislation. -Paul
[2020-08-30 15:33:50] - a: "legislation for one of his causes passed because he crossed party lines to vote with Democrats?" That's a pretty narrow band. I mean, has any of Rand Paul's personal issues really gone anywhere? His pet issues have been government surveillance, foreign wars, and spending. None of those have gone his way. -Paul
[2020-08-29 18:58:11] - a: I mean, after this incident I certainly think recognizable republicans probably need security details. - mig
[2020-08-29 18:06:12] - paul: so what about the other questions? "legislation for one of his causes passed because he crossed party lines to vote with Democrats?" does he agree "with the suggestion that Republicans need security details to walk on the street"? maybe he's just a republican (LINO) who actually doesn't care about breonna? (most of these questions are not sarcastic: i'm not actually up on the pauls' views. i did look up the First Step Act) ~a
[2020-08-29 14:37:16] - first step act? - mig
[2020-08-29 11:56:47] - "do you all know of any examples where rand paul surprisingly got Republicans on board with something that wasn't already a party mainstay?" Off the top of my head? No. The Paul name has long been synonymous with not being able to persuade others to come around to their political beliefs.
-Paul[2020-08-29 03:50:15] - and additionally/alternatively, examples where legislation for one of his causes passed because he crossed party lines to vote with Democrats? - pierce
[2020-08-29 03:47:58] - legit question, do you all know of any examples where rand paul surprisingly got Republicans on board with something that wasn't already a party mainstay? - pierce
[2020-08-29 03:38:22] - does that sound like someone who really wants to curb police overreach? - pierce
[2020-08-29 03:37:27] - watch the fox interview with him (linked from npr). it's gushing about the police, he wants to investigate who's paying protestors' hotel bills, he agrees with the suggestion that Republicans need security details to walk on the street... - pierce
[2020-08-29 03:28:48] - so, in one way that rand paul should theoretically be effective: getting his own party to pass, or even act on, his legislation, not much to report. but in the meantime he's happy to support a president who is positioned firmly against that cause. - pierce
[2020-08-29 03:22:46] - something got mangled there: https://www.npr.org/2020/08/28/907075695/amid-peaceful-protest-crowd-surrounds-rand-paul-after-trump-speech - pierce
[2020-08-29 03:21:44] - meanwhile, "...The video does not show protesters physically touching the Pauls. In an interview Friday morning on Fox News, Paul used the incident to bolster a political argument that Trump made Thursday night — that electing the Democratic ticket would pave the way for chaos in American cities. Paul is calling for an FBI investigation into the people who were in the crowd." (npr)- pierce
[2020-08-29 03:17:38] - I will give rand paul credit where credit is due, he has said her name. he may personally believe in that cause, too. but we're coming up on three months later and his bill has no action in a senate controlled by his party. - pierce
[2020-08-28 20:43:00] - daniel: does seem like a positive result. - mig
[2020-08-28 20:36:38] - https://twitter.com/TheNBPA/status/1299386593908678657/photo/1 Joint statement from the NBA and Players. Not bad as a start from one team just deciding not play one game. -Daniel
[2020-08-28 20:15:53] - mig: At least the cause is just, so we don't have to worry about any Coronavirus transmission even though there were people without masks on.
-Paul[2020-08-28 18:12:14] - But either way, this type of harassment crossed a line. - mig
[2020-08-28 18:06:13] - daniel: I mean it's fine to boo McConnell. He's earned it. I think it's even fine to boo Paul for things he's actually supported that you don't like. Booing the guy though on criminal justice reform when he's probably done more on that than most democrats is something I very much will deride. - mig
[2020-08-28 16:32:11] - Rand Paul vs our Paul makes using the name Paul by itself perhaps a poor choice on my part
-Daniel[2020-08-28 16:04:57] - in regards to "say her name" towards Paul. -Daniel
[2020-08-28 16:04:40] - "Say her name" vs "All Lives Matter" is interesting because "Say her name" literally makes less sense but contextually makes sense vs "All Lives Matter" which literally makes more sense but contextually makes less. -Daniel
[2020-08-28 16:01:37] - Paul: Context and history do matter! -Daniel
[2020-08-28 16:01:21] - Paul: I agree its more non sensical in a literal sense towards Paul. I said that
I think its just one of the two standard chants when it comes to Taylor so mostly its a shrug from me. No Justice No Peace would make more sense in that instance since it would appeal more to the calling for arrests but I'm not sure there is deep analysis happening in the moment. Which maybe is your point so sure? -Daniel[2020-08-28 15:57:54] - Daniel: But "all lives matter" clearly means said person is racist. There's a lot of benefit of the doubt given to one group and a lot of assumptions baked in for the other. -Paul
[2020-08-28 15:56:56] - Daniel: Like, not to bring up old arguments (and I'm actually going to go ahead and say this is the ONLY thing I am going to say on this), but it's weird to me the linguistic gymnastics required to say that chanting "say her name" to the person sponsoring legislation in said person's name might mean they just want him to go further in his legislation... -Paul
[2020-08-28 15:54:01] - 'm talking about? -Paul
[2020-08-28 15:53:55] - Daniel: I mean, if I was heckling... Bernie Sanders about the 1%... I suppose I could technically be saying he isn't going far enough against the 1%, but isn't it more likely I just don't know what I
[2020-08-28 15:53:17] - Daniel: "I mean we're both just making up things about them" Sure, we can't know for sure, but can we at least agree that the "Say her name" chant makes pretty much no sense when directed at a person who is sponsoring legislation named after said person? -Paul
[2020-08-28 15:44:06] - Maybe not like on a plane though? Maybe then I'd just tell him he was a dissapointment and disgrace to the country and should be embarrased and ashamed to try and not take up to much time for everyone else boarding. -Daniel
[2020-08-28 15:42:31] - Probably depends on the harrassment honestly. I'd probably yell and boo at mitch mcconnell if I ever saw him. -Daniel
[2020-08-28 15:42:12] - mig: Honestly I think you are being derisive towards the idea of auto contempt of an R but I'm not super far away from that position myself. I think R's have acquiited themselves EXCEEDINLY poorly in my entire adult lifetime so at this point if someone were to "just saw he has an "R" and says nice things about the Bad Orange Man and therefore he must be shouted at and harassed" I'd probably not be that hard put to agree with them. -Daniel
[2020-08-28 15:36:30] - "Say her name" makes less sense towards Paul but its also a fairly common protest chant with regards to Taylor so maybe just sticking with whats established. /shrug. -Daniel
[2020-08-28 15:34:40] - Paul: Maybe but also maybe they want Rand Paul to call for arrests and do more? I mean we're both just making up things about them. /shrug -Daniel
[2020-08-28 15:27:56] - Daniel: https://reason.com/2020/08/28/rand-paul-breonna-taylor-rnc-protesters-say-her-name/ Considering they were chanting "Say her name", it seems more likely they just didn't know who they were protesting? Or what kind of legislation he has been proposing? -Paul
[2020-08-28 15:26:48] - daniel: Maybe, but I'm pretty sure most of the crowd just is ignorant of his work in that area. They probably just saw he has an "R" and says nice things about the Bad Orange Man and therefore he must be shouted at and harassed. - mig
[2020-08-28 15:20:57] - mig: Maybe they want more? Dealing with no knock warrants is a reform but it doesn't mean they have to be satisfied with it. /shrug -Daniel
[2020-08-28 15:13:38] - mig: https://nypost.com/2020/08/25/blm-protesters-harass-white-diners-for-not-raising-fists-in-dc/ Maybe they mistook him for somebody trying to eat dinner. -Paul
[2020-08-28 15:05:38] - apparently some protesters went after Rand Paul after he was walking home from the RNC convention, shouting about Breonna Taylor. Sure guys, go after the person who is actually trying to accomplish some meaningful reforms. You sure showed him. - mig
[2020-08-27 18:00:22] - paul: maybe we touched on it, but not really in depth. - mig
[2020-08-27 17:17:19] - mig/Xpovos: https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1299015105074561026 Did we address this on the most recent podcast? I thought we discussed whether we thought there would be any debates. Looks like Pelosi is floating the idea that maybe they shouldn't happen. -Paul
[2020-08-27 16:45:34] - https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/27/walmart-is-teaming-up-with-microsoft-on-tiktok-bid.html I thought Microsoft being interested in Tik Tok was weird. Not sure HOW to describe Walmart's interest... -Paul
[2020-08-27 15:59:03] - Daniel: Mostly left. -- Xpovos
[2020-08-27 15:51:30] - mig: I agree that its definitely less likely for NFL but its 2020 and crazy things are happening right and left. -Daniel
[2020-08-27 15:43:02] - xpovos: just read about that. Cancelling practice, though unprecedented, is far removed from not a regular season game, let alone the season. It can happen, though I'd say it's not likely to happen for now. - mig
[2020-08-27 15:31:57] - mig: It's harder, no doubt, but I heard some scuttlebutt that the Detroit Lions are positioning themselves as a team for this kind of move too. -- Xpovos
[2020-08-27 14:01:21] - I doubt this is something that'll carry over to the NFL. NBA players can more or less afford to do this. This is kind of an asterik-y season/playoffs and their contracts are guaranteed. NFL players don't really have that luxury. - mig
[2020-08-27 13:49:52] - paul: it sounds more like there was a vote among teams to end the season, with the lakers and clippers voting affirmative and apparently other teams voting no? - mig
[2020-08-27 13:40:43] - Sorry, "end the season". Used the wrong word. I'm actually not sure what the right word is, since it doesn't seem likely that two teams can technically vote to end the season like that, can they? -Paul
[2020-08-27 13:39:55] - https://www.insider.com/lakers-clippers-lebron-james-boycott-season-meeting-2020-8 Apparently the Clippers and Lakers are thinking of forfeiting the season. -Paul
[2020-08-27 13:38:23] - I really wanted to see Jonathan Isaac come out of the tunnel, alone, and just spend 48 minutes making layups at either end for the playoff game. -Paul
[2020-08-26 21:18:22] - mig: Yes, though to some degree its all related though obviously sports < protests and people shooting. -Daniel
[2020-08-26 21:09:12] - daniel: Evers probably has more important things to worry about then the Buck's playoff series. - mig
[2020-08-26 21:02:29] - Does it spread past basketball? Do baseball players follow suit? College football? NFL? Crazy times... -Daniel
[2020-08-26 20:51:25] - Xpovos: Totally - no idea how this plays out. -Daniel
[2020-08-26 20:38:54] - I feel like that gets awkward fast. How can the Magic respond in that kind of a situation? "We forfeit too"? The Celtics/Raptors make it messier. The Bucks at least can claim it as their local issue. -- Xpovos
[2020-08-26 20:36:54] - Lots of questions now for the rest of the games or if it snowballs and cancels playoffs. Does the gov of WI or mayor get involved because they want a Bucks finals appearance? This will be interesting. -Daniel
[2020-08-26 20:32:37] - Oo good for them. Thats a pretty big step for them. -Daniel
[2020-08-26 20:23:52] - https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/29747523/bucks-not-taking-court-game-5-vs-magic Bucks apparently are forfeiting the game tonight, with the Celtics and Raptors considering as well... -Paul
[2020-08-26 13:30:10] - a: Yes. (other than the segregated space I don't know how much other stuff they would have in common). -Daniel
[2020-08-26 12:14:17] - daniel: "their demands include anti-discrimination policies" aren't you leaving this part out? to pierce's point, you'll find agreement in the two sides of the horeshoe if you look at the problem superficially: if you say "segregated space for black students at NYU" and stop there, then sure, they'll agree. but if you include the other "anti-discrimination policies" won't you have trouble finding agreement with both exreme sides? ~a
[2020-08-26 07:05:38] - I think "the middle" that paul is referring to is a segregated space for black students at NYU and that this would please both racists and the black students but for different reasons. That they could agree on a policy while having wildly different motivations is paul's whole point (as I understand it). -Daniel
[2020-08-26 07:03:02] - Pierce: I'm not sure I'm following your arguement. I think I agree with Paul that you seem to be arguing some other point than Paul. I think Paul is saying in a narrow literal definition they are trying to get a segregated floor. Obviously for different reasons as you've said but still segregated. Which is all Paul is pointing out, thats its weird that we've come around to that even though the motivations are different. -Daniel
[2020-08-26 05:07:57] - but in the other forms of segregation purportedly based on "pure" race, as variously (and inconsistently) described by wallace or farrakhan, where does that leave your family? - pierce
[2020-08-26 05:07:40] - in the version of segregation proposed by the NYU petition, that seems totally compatible (if not ideal). you probably aren't "Black-identifying" (from the petition), and that's fine. your own housing isn't segregated, and if you find yourself experiencing similar systemic discrimination you can make the same petition citing the racism, not the race. - pierce
[2020-08-26 05:07:29] - honestly, stop me if this is too personal, but how do you actually feel about this? if racial segregation is a meaningful concept on its merits, one that you think the extremes converge to, where do you fall? where do your kids? - pierce
[2020-08-26 04:53:38] - but that is not, NOT, the purpose of the NYU petition. it is not pretending that race itself is a meaningful fundamental concept and trying to perpetuate that belief. it is recognizing, accurately, that racism is a real and institutionalized force that has created cultural divides, and it attempts to protect the people and cultures that have grown in the shadow of that idiocy. - pierce
[2020-08-26 04:53:20] - to elaborate: "the races are better off segregated and not mixing," as you characterize it, is an inherently nonsensical concept because "race" does not divide cleanly in any way. racial supremacists pretend otherwise because it allows them to create systems that privilege themselves. - pierce
[2020-08-26 04:53:13] - I don't think you've made a case for the horseshoe theory, because even when you expand the discussion to include black supremacists, no one really believes there's a peaceful version of the world built on the premise of full racial segregation. - pierce
[2020-08-26 04:28:32] - this goes back to my original question, asking what "middle" you were referring to. in this instance, this form of segregation is a means to protect disadvantaged groups. other forms are a means to institutionalize preferential treatment for whites. but the ill-defined generic concept of segregation isn't a "middle" of anything, and the various sides on issues of racial justice don't inevitably converge there and live in harmony. - pierce
[2020-08-26 04:28:11] - their demands include anti-discrimination policies and education for all students, which immediately undermines the claim that segregation is their goal: if it was, then why bother educating students in integrated housing? - pierce
[2020-08-26 04:28:04] - paul: here is the point I'm making... whether the NYU petition is pro-"segregation" is not a meaningful framing. their goal is not segregation, any more than the toothpaste industry's goal is to put liquid in tubes. their goal, in their own petition, is to allow black students to live in NYU housing without the exhausting aura of discrimination and ignorance. - pierce
[2020-08-26 03:33:44] - Pierce: But I don't want to step in something and possibly say something offensive to scare you away from the board (probably too late?) so I'll just let that stand and let you have the last word. -Paul
[2020-08-26 03:32:34] - Pierce: I mean, I don't get how the idea that the NYU students are pro-segregation is controversial at all. They stereotypical example of segregation is when there were "colored only" bathrooms/etc. This is virtually the same thing, except it's the "other side" asking for it now. -Paul
[2020-08-26 03:29:53] - Pierce: It has nothing to do with asymmetrical playing fields or anything. I have no interest in any kind of ranking of races to determine which can be discriminatory (or discriminated against) and which can't. I'm saying it's a fundamental difference in philosophy. I think mixing of races and cultures is good. The extreme ends seem to think it's bad (although probably for different reasons). -Paul
[2020-08-26 03:27:30] - Pierce: I believe both the far right and the far left (when it comes to racial politics at least) disagree with that, and they both seem to think that the races are better off segregated and not mixing. Asians shouldn't have Mexican food trucks. Whites shouldn't be teaching yoga. Schools should offer "blacks only" dorms... -Paul
[2020-08-26 03:23:34] - Pierce: "Farrakhan isn't an NYU student" I never said he was? I think you're arguing against a point I am not trying to make. I am saying that I believe that we are all better off when different races and cultures intermix and we can all enjoy the good things and strengths that different groups of people bring to the table. -Paul
[2020-08-25 21:24:26] - and as a result, "segregation is good" vs. "segregation is bad" is a rhetorical cul-de-sac. the real debate is larger, about equitable and just treatment of all people regardless of race. discussing any particular instance of segregation can only be done constructively within that larger context. - pierce
[2020-08-25 21:17:26] - a: agreed, I was drawing a contrast: if you're white, there was basically no argument you could make against forced integration that didn't boil down to preferential treatment for whites. but if you're black, there are arguments both for and against forced integration that aren't supremacist at their core. - pierce
[2020-08-25 17:54:35] - "meaningful threat to white people" i'm not sure forced integration was meant as a threat. imo it was an attempt to make things better. and if i'm a student of over-simplified-history, i can tell you that, yes, it made things better. seriously, though, i'm pretty sure it wasn't meant as a threat. (imo) the intentions were good, and it was at least a step in the right direction even though it had shit side-effects like you said. ~a
[2020-08-25 17:33:59] - an example: Nina raised an interesting point about the history of integration that I'd never considered. I'd just vaguely pictured the schools merging, but what often happened was that the black kids got bussed to the white schools and the black teachers got fired. one of her podcast guests pointed to that as part of the explanation for the challenges black students faced in integrated schools. the details matter. - pierce
[2020-08-25 17:33:36] - in other words, if you have an imbalanced system, you have to look past the surface-level logic of an argument and to the intent and details in order to determine if it's valid. whites-only infrastructure and blacks-only infrastructure aren't two sides of the same coin, they're fundamentally different because of the imbalances in the system. - pierce
[2020-08-25 17:32:40] - in contrast, being from a minority group still facing systemic disadvantages does represent a threat to black students at integrated schools. they're pressured to assimilate their behavior to the majority (but not the reverse), and the system isn't equipped to adapt to their unique needs (whether it be the economic status at home, or even "I can't join the swim team because there are no caps for black hair") - pierce
[2020-08-25 17:32:18] - a: I think what's lost in that description is that it's an asymmetrical playing field. being in the majority and with institutional power, forced integration did not represent a meaningful threat to white people. insofar as there is such a thing as "white culture" distinct from white supremacy, it was at no risk of being widely suppressed at integrated schools. - pierce
[2020-08-25 17:30:17] - come on paul, Farrakhan isn't an NYU student. it's disingenuous to raise an unrelated extreme figure and pretend he represents the "same side" as this petition. his form of segregation is more similar to wallace's than to that of the NYU students. I'd argue that all three are incompatible in practice, but I'm not going to engage with that debate if the goalposts are moving. - pierce
[2020-08-25 17:07:59] - Pierce: https://www.nytimes.com/1985/10/12/us/white-supremacists-voice-support-of-farrakhan.html It's not an old idea, this goes back awhile. "Although Klan and neo-Nazi groups are antiblack, they share considerable common ground with Mr. Farrakhan and his Black Muslim sect, the Nation of Islam. All believe that blacks and whites should have separate nations and governments" -Paul
[2020-08-25 17:07:15] - Pierce: Sure, there are differences around the edges, but the core philosophy behind both is that the races are better off not inter-mingling and are better off separated. -Paul
[2020-08-25 16:47:52] - if there's no practicable implementation that satisfies both groups' goals, then a superficial commonality (that they both incorporate a form of "segregation" for a simplified definition of that term) doesn't reflect any real convergence of their positions back towards the middle of the horseshoe. toothpaste and hemorrhoid cream don't have the same use or purpose just because they both come out of a tube. - pierce
[2020-08-25 16:47:48] - it is a form of segregation by the dictionary definition, but it is not their end goal and it is fundamentally distinct in both practice and intent from wallace-style mandatory and preferential segregation. I mean come on, this student group obviously would not be okay with NYU adding whites-only housing, and whether or not you think that's fair, it means their goals are incompatible with white-supremacist segregationists. - pierce
[2020-08-25 16:07:18] - Pierce: The first sentence of the petition is: "We, members of the Black student body, demand that NYU implement Black student housing on campus in the vein of themed engagement floors across first-year and upperclassmen residence halls." The first condition is: "Floors completely comprised of Black-identifying students with Black Resident Assistants" -Paul
[2020-08-25 16:06:03] - Pierce: I don't see how you can NOT describe their goal as segregation. They are specifically asking for floors of dorms where only blacks are allowed to live and with only black RAs. Isn't that textbook segregation? -Paul
[2020-08-25 16:04:56] - Pierce: "and it's absurd to say that "housing reserved for black students who would prefer to have that space" is compatible with "mandatory racial segregation for everyone, with whites having better facilities"" Thank God I didn't say that, then.
-Paul[2020-08-25 15:23:03] - pierce: it's interesting that in the 1950s we went from mandatory segregation to mandatory integration. was there no middle ground? where kids (and parents) could choose whether to attend a segregated school or an integrated school? (i know i'm conflating grade school with college, but whatevs) ~a
[2020-08-25 15:19:52] - did you read the petition from the student group? they make it very obvious that their goal is to keep black students safe from discrimination in the residence halls. reserved housing for black students is only one component of their proposal to address that need. - pierce
[2020-08-25 15:14:06] - paul: I think you'd have to disregard virtually all the important context in order to frame the student group's "goal" as segregation, and it's absurd to say that "housing reserved for black students who would prefer to have that space" is compatible with "mandatory racial segregation for everyone, with whites having better facilities" - pierce
[2020-08-25 14:24:11] - So, the "real executable version of this that would please both this student group and george wallace" would be a world where the races are segregated and keep to themselves instead of mixing. -Paul
[2020-08-25 14:23:19] - Pierce: The middle was just a reference to how horseshoes are shaped, and wasn't meant to reference some "centrist" positions or anything. Bad choice of words on my part. The main idea is that, in this case, the racists and the anti-racists in many ways use similar terminology and have many similar goals, especially when compared to the political center. -Paul
[2020-08-25 05:47:48] - or, more meme-ably... - pierce
[2020-08-25 05:33:37] - now, I can believe there are people who hate feeling unsure, and are mostly looking for certainty in a cause or a leader. I feel like that's the root of "horseshoe" theory, that some people "on the ground" at the extremes share that emotional tendency. but I don't think you can usefully translate that into the groups' positions themselves being similar, just based on common implementation details. - pierce
[2020-08-25 04:54:16] - ...but there's no version of reality that satisfies both those groups, despite the characterization that they have a common goal. They don't: what we've highlighted is an implementation detail in wildly disparate systems. - pierce
[2020-08-25 04:53:01] - like, here's a video that talks in depth about tokenization. Now, given a particular "middle", you could say that people on one "extreme" (advocating for meaningful diversity) and those on the other (advocating against minority representation) agree that you shouldn't have shallow minority characters... - pierce
[2020-08-25 00:13:36] - i'm with pierce here. the similarities are poetic. ~a
[2020-08-24 23:17:21] - I'm not a big subscriber to horseshoe theory (anymore? I can't remember if I gave it credibility back in the day). most of the examples I see come down to "the far-left and far-right are similar because they both disagree with the center", while ignoring that they disagree even more strongly with each other on that issue once you dig into the details. - pierce
[2020-08-24 23:11:00] - paul: what is the "middle" to which you're referring, here? you can create a framing in which two vastly different causes have a superficial similarity (in this case, the existence of housing reserved for black people), but that doesn't mean there's a real executable version of this that would please both this student group and george wallace, let alone one that also pleases the people "between" them. - pierce
[2020-08-24 18:32:42] - https://thefederalist.com/2020/08/24/nyu-student-group-advocates-for-racially-segregated-housing/ Some more anecdotal evidence of my horseshoe theory from before about the extreme ends of the political spectrum coming back to meet in the middle. -Paul
[2020-08-24 18:24:40] - paul: "Some of it might be lockdown related" this specific part is pretty small. if it was considerably accounted for by lockdown related changes, the excess death curve wouldn't follow the COVID-death curve, it would instead increase for the lockdown-dates, which def isn't the case. ~a
[2020-08-24 18:22:14] - a: The excess deaths thing will be really interesting. Some of it might be pulling forward of deaths (so maybe we see slightly fewer in 2021 or something). Some of it might be lockdown related (people not getting urgent care because they are afraid of COVID), but obviously the clearest cause might be extra COVID deaths that aren't being counted. -Paul
[2020-08-24 17:20:43] - can we discuss excess deaths (here and internationally)? i'm pretty sure the official count (180k US) is a MAJOR under-count. the number of excess deaths can't all be attributable to coronavirus response directly, obviously. but, if you look a the curve of *excess* deaths, it does follow the coronavirus curve pretty closely. so you can account *most* of the excess deaths to covid or (collaterally) hospitals overrun because of covid. ~a
[2020-08-24 17:19:27] - paul: agreed, the attack ads write themselves. ~a
[2020-08-24 17:18:14] - Paul: I think you are correct that gov's could have done more. I do think Trump sets the tone for a lot of the govs though. The base currently seems to follow Trump so if you are a R gov strong going against Trump can be hard politically. My families opinion of the gov of TX dropped a lot during the pandemic though just as anecdotal data point. -Daniel
[2020-08-24 17:16:15] - https://twitter.com/actdottv/status/1296881001168158720 I get accused of not dumping on Trump (and Republicans) enough, so I'll just say that this here is brilliant and I am surprised there aren't more of these since I am sure there is plenty of material. A complete and utter embarrassment how much basically all of the Republican party has sold out. -Paul
[2020-08-24 17:14:05] - paul: 100k+, sure, maybe? 100k would be nice though. if you look at the deaths per population of other countries, it's SO much smaller. if obama (or biden or bush jr or bush sr's ghost or hrc) was in charge, i don't think the number of deaths would have been zero. i don't even know if it would be smaller than europe (per peopulation). i don't even know if it would be ANY smaller than it is now! i can only imagine. ~a
[2020-08-24 17:09:47] - a: Okay, sure, he's been completely and utterly dismissive and I've no doubt that he has been trying to downplay it in every way both behind the scenes and... uh... in front of the scenes too? On that we agree. Coronavirus should definitely count against him. Having said that, I think even if Obama was president (or whoever we agree would be most competent), we would likely have 100k+ dead as well. -Paul
[2020-08-24 17:02:05] - paul: "The April 2009-10 Swine Flu, where nearly 13,000 people died in the U.S., was poorly handled", "Anybody that wants a test can get a test", "This was unexpected", "The vast majority of Americans, the risk is very, very low", (re masks) "It’s only a recommendation". you said it yourself, trump's response has been all sorts of horrible. that's all i'm saying here. that his response was horrible and it undercut the state responses ~a
[2020-08-24 17:00:27] - paul: "We have it totally under control", "It’s one person coming in from China", "It’s going to be just fine", "the risk to the American public currently is low", "We pretty much shut it down coming in from China", "when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away", "within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done", "they think this is going to be what brings down the president"
[2020-08-24 16:57:18] - a: How has it been undercut? -Paul
[2020-08-24 16:56:48] - but I'm not sure we can point to deaths over a selective 3 month period and definitively say he's the problem. I think there's plenty of blame to spread around. The fact that the media is harping on our bad response isn't hugely compelling to me considering the bias I see in most of the mainstream outlets. -Paul
[2020-08-24 16:56:07] - paul: "Trump's response has been all sorts of horrible..." yeah this is my thesis. sure, the governors control specifics of the lockdown measures, but those measures were continuously and incessantly undercut by the federal government. ~a
[2020-08-24 16:54:01] - Daniel: And, I know I'm the silly libertarian worrying about federalism and whatnot here, but I feel like much of the response isn't on the President, but is on state governors. They are the ones who largely control lockdown measures and stuff, right? Again, Trump's response has been all sorts of horrible... -Paul
[2020-08-24 15:18:39] - both. i agree trump isn't 100% responsible, but I guess that's irrelevant. he made a bad situation much much worse so fuck him. ~a
[2020-08-24 15:03:17] - Like is Trump the cause of the stupidity or just a symptom of the underlying stupidity? Hmm... -Daniel
[2020-08-24 15:02:58] - -Daniel
[2020-08-24 15:02:55] - Its hard for me to separate dumb president vs dumb people when it comes to our poor covid response. Like he did a terrible job and surely helped to share / influence the narrative. But we had a lot of issues with people still going to Florida beaches, colleges having trouble with students partying, people hating masks, etc. Its hard for me to know how much is due to american stubborn / stupid and how much is Trump leading the way. -Danie
[2020-08-24 14:43:28] - the media has been reporting about our bad national response to the virus for four+ months. ~a
[2020-08-24 14:38:36] - ok. ~a
[2020-08-24 14:37:04] - a: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093256/novel-coronavirus-2019ncov-deaths-worldwide-by-country/ If I add the deaths for those countries here together, then it is less than the US, so assuming those population counts were right, it sounds like maybe the US has more deaths per population. -Paul
[2020-08-24 14:34:59] - a: No, I have no idea. I just think it's very suspicious to only be counting deaths from roughly three months, especially when I was pretty sure Europe was hit hardest in the months before June 1st and we discussed how it was odd that many European countries had much higher death rates than the US. -Paul
[2020-08-24 14:32:54] - the US deaths between april 1 and may 31: US=104k (official count). ~a
[2020-08-24 14:25:07] - paul: of course! assuming the virus was seriously a problem in every country at that time. are you sure that the US is significantly lower than europe during that time? lets get some numbers! how does april 1 - may 31 sound? the virus was raging everywhere by april, right? ~a
[2020-08-24 14:21:24] - a: Okay, so if the deaths during that time were partly or mostly due to the president, then what about the deaths during the OTHER time period? Is that partly or mostly due to the actions of the UK / Italy / France / Germany / Spain governments? -Paul
[2020-08-24 14:20:06] - a: Uh, I quoted the parts I was trying to address. You quoted parts of my sentences too.
I assumed you only meant European lockdowns because it sounded like you were trying to dismiss the deaths happening then as occurred during "shitty lockdowns". I don't know why else you would've mentioned that. -Paul[2020-08-24 14:18:50] - paul: anyways, since my point was apparently confusing, i'll argue the 70k vs 7k difference in that time-range is partly (or mostly) due to the presidents actions and inaction. he effectively told everybody to ignore the lockdowns (when he said it wolud go away, when he said he wouldn't wear a mask, when he said there was no worry and there wasn't a problem, when he said kids should get back to school now, etc) ~a
[2020-08-24 14:11:56] - i hear you that the date-range was probably a bit biased. but (!) the date range is HUGE. that's like a whole quarter. ~a
[2020-08-24 14:10:24] - you even only quoted part of my sentence
~a[2020-08-24 14:09:38] - why would you assume i meant the european lockdowns? ~a
[2020-08-24 14:09:09] - huh? i mentioned which lockdowns. ~a
[2020-08-24 14:07:57] - a: "the deaths occurred during shitty-lockdowns" I'm not sure what you mean? Which lockdowns were shitty? All of them? European ones? If the European ones were shitty, doesn't that reflect badly on them? -Paul
[2020-08-24 14:07:13] - a: "i'm not sure i follow that anybody is ignoring deaths were during a lockdown" Well, they only mentioned deaths "after lockdown" and during a specific date range. I wonder what those numbers would look like if we look at all deaths instead of a carefully selected date range. -Paul
[2020-08-24 13:55:49] - paul: "deaths that occurred during the lockdowns". sorry? i'm not sure i follow that anybody is ignoring deaths were during a lockdown. the deaths occurred during shitty-lockdowns: president said it would go away. president said he wouldn't wear a mask. president said there was no worry and it wasn't a problem. president *effectively* said to ignore the lockdowns. ~a
[2020-08-24 13:46:50] - Our initial outbreak was largely centered on NYC, and now we're seeing it spread to other parts of the country that were geographically a lot further away from NYC than one end of Italy is to another. -Paul
[2020-08-24 13:45:58] - That statement is carefully worded to helpfully ignore the deaths that occurred during the lockdowns, where I'm guessing Europe had a lot more than the US. Countries are all different beasts for a number of reasons. I suspect the sheer size of the US (compared to countries like Italy at the UK) could easily play a role in why our curve is different. -Paul
[2020-08-24 13:43:55] - Eh, I'm happy to crap on Trump's handling of the pandemic as much as the next guy, but I'm not convinced we can simply point to differences in countries as say the gap is Trump's fault. Didn't we just discuss how it's weird that the death rate in places like Italy were so much higher and there's no easy way to explain it? -Paul
[2020-08-23 22:25:13] - The virus is not Trump's fault. We cannot blame him for this.
[2020-08-21 18:04:06] - a: I think Biden has already been asked that in some form. I think he said he wouldn't stand in the way of a prosecution against Trump but wouldn't make it happen either. -Daniel
[2020-08-21 17:50:31] - for instance bush didn't get prosecuted for any of the wmd nonsense. and that is probably a good thing. but this seems worse somehow. ~a
[2020-08-21 17:49:27] - would it be appropriate if someone asked biden "assuming you win the presidency, will you instruct the DOJ prosecute illegal behavior made by Donald Trump and his administration?"? would it be appropriate if biden said "yes"? ~a
[2020-08-21 14:13:42] - Paul: Yeah that seems like reaching / lying / trolling to me then. I think it was a solid / good speech. I've seen stuff calling it Biden's best speech but that doesn't really mean much to me since I don't have a strong wealth of his speeches to compare it to. Like if Alex gave a speech it would be her best speech ever, doesn't mean it was a good speech in general
. But yeah I don't think it was bad at all. -Daniel[2020-08-21 14:03:50] - Daniel: Eh, just some random twitter reactions that implied it was bad / embarrassing. There was nothing concrete, though, and I imagined if he HAD made a gaffe, we would be seeing memes immediately, so I figured he must've done okay. -Paul
[2020-08-21 13:57:05] - Biden did mention a national mask mandate which I don't think would be unique to him but I wonder if that freaks out anti maskers and makes it into a thing. Talked about infrastructure which almost seems like a running joke for politicians now. Lot of generic moving towards light / hope / love must struggle against darkness type stuff. -Daniel
[2020-08-21 13:52:44] - Like we all know the policy differences between the parties so somewhat those aren't really what are in question but also things like the way he talks about his wife / family and you can tell that its a more real partnership than Melania or Trump's kids. I mean really I think that Trump just sets the bar so low in any of those type of categories that its refreshing to see literally anyone else in contrast to him. -Daniel
[2020-08-21 13:49:56] - He's definitely a ton more coherent than Trump and things like displaying genuine compassion and connecting to people. Also saying thank you to someone else which seems so small but so different than Trump in my head. -Daniel
[2020-08-21 13:48:32] - Paul: I watched it. It was solid. It had some good moments some just regular political dem stuff. I didn't think it had any bad moments. Andrea was worried he would do something dumb / bad and he avoided that. What negative reactions did you see? I haven't seen any of those but maybe you are looking at a differen source. -Daniel
[2020-08-21 13:41:21] - Anybody watch Biden's speech last night? I missed it. I've heard mixed reactions, but nothing concrete. -Paul
[2020-08-20 17:49:36] - paul: that's fair. no idea what convertible bonds are, but i can guess. as for stock option compensations: stock options turn into money too when the get exercised (but we'd probably have to discount the 40b to something smaller, what with the strike price and whatnot) ~a
[2020-08-20 17:34:14] - a: I'm not so sure that difference represents shares the company are free to sell. If I recall, Musk has an unorthodox compensation package that includes options. Maybe they're being "held" for that? Or maybe it's for convertible bonds? -Paul
[2020-08-20 17:20:42] - (btw, their difference in float and shares outstanding is 40b usd at the current market rate) ~a
[2020-08-20 17:19:26] - paul: they might have shares still held by the company they could sell (their "shares outstanding" is significantly lower than their "float") so i think this means they could get rid of their debt at any time if they wanted to without doing another offering? i'm not 100% sure though. just because their shares outstanding is much lower than their float doesn't necessarily mean that the company holds the remaining . . . ??? ~a
[2020-08-20 17:18:20] - a: Yeah, but what about debt versus cash on hand and cash flows? Apple, Amazon, and Microsoft have a crap-ton of cash and/or positive cash flow that Tesla largely does not. -Paul
[2020-08-20 17:14:24] - paul: what debt. 15b? that's nothing. debt of that size isn't bad. aapl: 100b debt, amzn: 100b debt. msft: 100b debt. nbd, man. ~a
[2020-08-20 15:59:23] - a: Split again! The stock will clearly skyrocket again on the news, right? More seriously, if/when the S&P announces Tesla can join, I wouldn't at all mind them doing another secondary offering to pay off a ton of their debt. -Paul
[2020-08-20 15:40:18] - paul: . . . and now maybe tsla won't hit 420 again. ~a
[2020-08-20 01:15:17] - xpovos: I appreciate that a lot, and likewise. - pierce
[2020-08-20 00:53:40] - If you ever think I'm arguing in bad faith, call me out on it. I doubt i'll agree, but I think I need to hear it. And I promise not to take offense, as long as you're doing it in the spirit of improving the discussion. -- Xpovos
[2020-08-20 00:52:52] - I don't think it's good to be here all of the time. But I wouldn't want it not to be here, or to be empty and have no one smart to listen to explain why and how my ideas are wrong. -- Xpovos
[2020-08-20 00:52:13] - pierce: I'm glad you're here, because more smart voices talking about complex issues is good for me. I like to listen to what people have to say, especially when I don't agree with them. If I'm wrong, I want to know it. And if I'm right, I want to face the hardest arguments I can. But some of this shit is hard, and often multiple views can be held by good people of different mindsets, and it can be exhausting. -- Xpovos
[2020-08-20 00:44:43] - pierce: "my instinct is that those triggers would be more likely to act as a run on the market than to reverse its trajectory" i don't agree or disagree with your instinct here. when a historical or round "number" is hit, the market can go up or down: other than markets changing directions at non-random places, it's (by its nature) hard to predict what will happen at those points. ~a
[2020-08-20 00:37:21] - the longer the period or the bigger the magnitude, the more it costs. markets are fickle, but there are billions holding it "in place". how much it would cost to move it even a little past where it "should" be could be billions of dollars or maybe only a dollar. ~a
[2020-08-20 00:35:23] - "the immediate-to-short term" aren't you talking about over a multi-year period? ~a
[2020-08-20 00:32:57] - pierce: sorry i mean you. yes and yes. ~a
[2020-08-20 00:32:47] - paul: yes and yes. ~a
[2020-08-20 00:32:41] - a: if so, I somewhat agree but might not believe it as strongly as you do (or at least I think "economic reality" isn't as coupled to actual reality as we'd like). but at least in the immediate-to-short term, organizations can most certainly have large effects on the market as a whole. that's arguably the whole point of something like the "Greenspan put". - pierce
[2020-08-20 00:32:09] - a: do you mean above a certain magnitude, or maybe beyond a certain timescale? literally every trade affects "the whole market" to some degree if you're looking at it in aggregate. I'm guessing you mean that no real-world organization is powerful enough to prevent the market from eventually reflecting the economic reality? - pierce
[2020-08-20 00:06:42] - pierce: real or not, i don't think trump could control it, nor do i think anybody would try to control it to promote a pro-trump narrative. real or not. seriously, i have no way of knowing if overall this market shouldn't be (higher or) lower than it is, but moving the whole market is above any one person or one party or even one country. ~a
[2020-08-19 23:12:01] - given Trump's obsession with the market, though, I think there would be a lot of interest in doing anything to maintain the narrative that it improved on his watch. but since I don't know what those things would be, I don't know how uneasy to feel about the continued "recovery" after that date. how much of it is real? - pierce
[2020-08-19 23:09:58] - it's so specific, I find it hard to believe it's a coincidence. now, it could be that investors naturally saw the election as a turning point and had aligned triggers accordingly (though my instinct is that those triggers would be more likely to act as a run on the market than to reverse its trajectory). - pierce
[2020-08-19 23:08:13] - I think it's notable that the S&P 500 and DJIA both bottomed out at almost precisely the values they had the day after the 2016 election. seriously, it's uncanny: on March 23rd they were both trending to close lower than they did on November 9th, 2016 (and the Dow did dip below it, intraday) but managed to rally just enough at the very end of the day. - pierce
[2020-08-19 23:07:12] - a: that's an interesting point about zeroish-interest cash being fed into the market. I have to say that watching the market recover over the last few months has been really unsettling, because it seems so disconnected with the reality "on the ground" - pierce
[2020-08-19 21:22:11] - that's not a black-and-white determination (figuratively speaking) and I'm not always going to be successful, it's just something I'm trying to be more introspective about. - pierce
[2020-08-19 21:20:16] - ...which is why I'm second-guessing myself: as someone who hasn't been hurt by institutional racism I'm less equipped to speak to those experiences. I'm much more comfortable debating the merits of the slogans (I'm an advertising brat, after all). but my comfort doesn't mean it's actually a substantive issue. in other words, I'm trying to avoid policy bikeshedding. - pierce
[2020-08-19 21:05:15] - paul: I was referring to myself, I can't speak to your experiences and you'd have to decide the extent to which it applies to you (if you even agree with my premise in the first place). whiteness is definitely part of it, but I check almost all the boxes for "traits that the system has been set up to promote". and for most of my life I really didn't go out of my way to learn about others' experiences being hurt by those systems. - pierce
[2020-08-19 19:58:57] - a: Yeah, 2020 might be the first year (other than maybe 2018?) where my actual portfolio does better than my fantasy 5 because I have things like SHOP, MELI, TSLA in my actual portfolio (and oftentimes large positions). -Paul
[2020-08-19 19:52:16] - in the 2020 challenge, i'm beating matt and daniel, but i feel like my *actual* portfolio is doing even better. my actual portfolio does have tsla, rdfn, sq, and bynd. ~a
[2020-08-19 19:49:44] - bitcoin def helped me more than it hurt me. but i hear you, it went down a bunch in 2018. yeah 60% per year is pretty crazy-good. though i'm still sad how well i did in 2020 that is totally invisible to the 2020 challenge. ~a
[2020-08-19 19:47:07] - a: Bitcoin's drop really hurt you. So we've been averaging around 60% a year? That seems pretty good! -Paul
[2020-08-19 19:41:14] - paul: there i annualized it (maybe correctly). AND now you're winning. yay! ~a
[2020-08-19 19:29:02] - paul: they're comparable, but not really meaningful. ~a
[2020-08-19 19:28:41] - paul: are they "right"? no. not really. they include "overlap". maybe i should just annualize them. then the numbers would be more "right". ~a
[2020-08-19 19:19:30] - a: Does talk about the stock market count as business? Are the numbers from the stock market challenge (2017, 2018, 2019) spreadsheet right? Is it really Paul (1874%) Adrian (1995%) Daniel (164%)? I really should just stick to my 5 best ideas and not bother with the rest! -Paul
[2020-08-19 19:18:27] - a: I don't mind silly / funny things. /shrug -Daniel
[2020-08-19 19:17:25] - . . . i mean, no. just links to images. there was a short time in ~2001 where you could post images, but those days are long gone. ~a
[2020-08-19 19:16:39] - never! ~a
[2020-08-19 19:16:28] - Can we post images to the message board? -Paul
[2020-08-19 18:35:39] - ignore the text at the top. does anybody feel like it's all business business business on the message board? bring back the silly images / jokes? ~a
[2020-08-19 17:57:44] - a: Buy bitcoin!
-Paul[2020-08-19 17:55:08] - that's an interesting thought. i wonder what the effects are of cash with zero(ish) interest rate being used to buy shares in the stock market. it's totally legal and super common on the order of millions (billions?) of dollars. that can't possibly be healthy. ~a
[2020-08-19 17:53:10] - a: I actually wonder if what we are seeing more reflects the actions of the Federal Reserve (can't get any kind of return worth anything anywhere else, so money is flowing into the stock market) and could almost be considered seeing some "inflation". -Paul
[2020-08-19 17:37:31] - or unemployment. ~a
[2020-08-19 17:37:22] - the stock market has "signaled" that it doesn't give two shits about pandemics. ~a
[2020-08-19 17:20:19] - in other news, it it surprising that the market has done 10%+ per year the last two years. didn't we just have a stock market crash, a global pandemic, and a recession? wtf the stock market is so fucked. ~a
[2020-08-19 17:13:18] - it's so crazy to me. apple first passed 1T on 2018-08-02 and 2T on 2020-08-19. that's a 2.00x ratio (+100%) during which the market has done 1.20x (+20%). those as so starkly different. ~a
[2020-08-19 16:47:55] - https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/19/apple-reaches-2-trillion-market-cap.html Apple is now a $2T company. -Paul
[2020-08-19 14:23:20] - a: "if you're a white person with minimal awareness of institutional racism" But also I feel like that's usually implied with terms like "privilege". But I don't know, it's why I am asking. -Paul
[2020-08-19 14:01:54] - i mean, i'm half joking, because i don't know what that means. but i'm half not joking: pierce didn't say shit about being white. ~a
[2020-08-19 14:00:40] - only if it reflects your privilege. ~a
[2020-08-19 13:59:44] - Pierce: "I'll lastly add that I think it's wrong for someone like me to debate the merits of "black lives matter" vs. "all lives matter" as slogans" I suppose that applies to me as well, and all white people? -Paul
[2020-08-18 21:40:04] - it's hypocritical turtles all the way down for me, today
- pierce[2020-08-18 21:39:13] - and I'll lastly add that I think it's wrong for someone like me to debate the merits of "black lives matter" vs. "all lives matter" as slogans... even if I choose what I think is the "right" side, it reflects my privilege that I think that's a core issue worth our discussion. it sucks the air out of the room from people who have actually been hurt, distracting and making it harder for them to raise more substantial concerns. - pierce
[2020-08-18 21:24:56] - a: right, and thus existing only in contrast to BLM. that's why I probably would've flamed out: I feel that we shouldn't come into a life-and-death topic late in the game, after the terms and their supporters are already established, and then try to debate the marketing as if it existed in a vacuum. that's like getting BlackKklansman action figures in a Happy Meal. - pierce
[2020-08-18 20:25:42] - anyways, i'm not replying to the rest of your stuff because i agree. ~a
[2020-08-18 20:22:06] - sure it will. it's a coded message. ALM = blue lives matter. mega-fund the police. ~a
[2020-08-18 20:20:42] - ...and for the people whose engagement stops at the slogan level, diluting the message like that makes it basically inert. if you're a white person with minimal awareness of institutional racism or police brutality in this country, then a neutral slogan like "everyone matters" doesn't have any meaning and isn't going to drive you to further education or action. - pierce
[2020-08-18 20:09:40] - a: not a perfect analogy, but for the same reason we think of the thirteenth amendment as "freeing the slaves" instead of "freeing everyone". the current policies and practices disproportionately/overwhelmingly affect a particular group, and pretending otherwise serves only to dilute the discussion and prevent meaningful change. - pierce
[2020-08-18 19:59:23] - pierce: "BLM is anti-police-brutality for everyone" so devil's advocate . . . (...big delay because i agree with you...) why call it BLM then? why not call it something more neutral? ~a
[2020-08-18 19:58:45] - you don't have to agree with me on that and I (...yeeeeurgggh...) don't... have... to... convince... you! phew, I did it. - pierce
[2020-08-18 19:57:33] - paul: no, but if I hadn't already been taking a break at the time I probably would've flamed out even harder. without reigniting the debate, my nutshell: the "all lives matter" slogan is a parasite of the "black lives matter" cause, only there because it drains its opponent. the reverse is not true: the "black lives matter" slogan doesn't contrast with the belief that all lives matter. BLM is anti-police-brutality for everyone. - pierce
[2020-08-18 19:29:20] - Pierce: Was it the All Lives Matter vs the Black Lives Matter thing? -Paul
[2020-08-18 19:29:12] - anyway, thanks for the acceptance and patience. - pierce
[2020-08-18 19:27:16] - a: just looked at the archive. I forgot I dropped back in a week later for a few days, but yeah, the (hypocritical, again) poor-taste thing was still eating at me which is why I took a longer break. - pierce
[2020-08-18 19:25:20] - yeah i'll parrot what paul said. apology accepted, but not really warranted. and i apologize, unless one isn't warranted. for real though, unlike paul, i think our bet was insensitive. maybe not horribly so, but like, borderline, at least. ~a
[2020-08-18 19:23:08] - and that's obviously a super-duper-reasonable expectation of you all given your psychic powers and the message board's role as my personal playground. nevertheless, I'm going to try to be a bit better at managing my own involvement and not getting so invested. - pierce
[2020-08-18 19:23:02] - it's a bit of a struggle because I have a lot of pent-up emotional energy about the state of the world, I want to be able to discuss and debate issues with smart people like you all (Nina can only tolerate so much). But I also want precisely the balance of levity and cold theoretical discussion that I'm comfortable with. We can only make light of the topics I take lightly.
- pierce[2020-08-18 19:22:57] - but that's what I was referring to about unfair "tone annoyance". meanwhile, my decade of absence prior to april was in part because I got too frustrated about what I saw as bad-faith positions on important issues just to create debate. in both cases I'm at least a little hypocritical. - pierce
[2020-08-18 19:18:38] - Pierce: The CFR bet? I didn't think it was insensitive, but I also don't recall any behavior from you that warranted an apology (so I guess I am just not sensitive enough all around). So I guess apology accepted, but unnecessary (for me). -Paul
[2020-08-18 19:11:06] - pierce: yes, i remember that. i remember thinking you were right, that our bet was insensitive (and in poor taste). but, you didn't leave when you found out about the bet. you stuck around for weeks after that. ~a
[2020-08-18 19:04:24] - catching up... the last time I'd been here (late april) prior to those last comments (a week ago) I'd had a bad day and took it out on you all by being judgemental about the "bets" you all make about covid numbers or the market. hopefully this wordplay is a worthwhile offering as an apology. - pierce
[2020-08-18 18:56:16] - a possible outcome if we had a challenge (tracked by username, but couples are allowed to play as a team) about making the stock market implode: dweand (Dewey) and Dee Weand do win Dow end - pierce
[2020-08-18 18:50:50] - i won't speak for daniel, but i think the cities of dallas/fort-worth/oklahoma-city are a bit more densely populated, and therefore culturally different. map ~a
[2020-08-18 18:44:50] - So we live in "Bro" country? Why is there a giant hole in Texas for "Dude"? -Paul
[2020-08-18 18:37:44] - a: seems accurate in my experience. Both dude and bro are pretty common here. -Daniel
[2020-08-18 18:11:55] - daniel: hey bro. ~a
[2020-08-18 15:29:07] - (i've been playing a lot of satisfactory. we create a refinery and pipe some of the refined fuel into a gas generator to generate power for the whole operation. clean and simple.) ~a
prev <-> next