Anyone who is eligible to vote, and chooses not to, implicitly throws their support behind whoever wins.
On 2024-11-05, ⅔ of US citizens who were eligible to vote told the rest of the world they don’t want to be taken seriously for at least 2 years.
nonentity
joined 9 months ago
A society which charges its students to acquire knowledge values neither.
A healthy and broadly educated population, which feels safe and secure, is incompatible with, and toxic to, conservative ideologies.
Either she knows something novel, where processing data using voice coils is somehow beneficial, or is someone who calls their computer a ‘hard drive’, which summarily negates any legitimacy of technical competence.
Any meaningful suppression or removal of ideological bias is an ideological bias.
I propose a necessary precursor to the development of artificial intelligence is the discovery and identification of a natural instance.
A skilled operator could easily use it as a deli slicer. One could even use fancy blades for flare and variety.
The only appropriate tool to test whether billionaires are made of cake.
I’m not at all a fan of the ketamine clown, but it’s literally just a dumb pipe.
If you’re truly concerned about the integrity of data passed over it, treat it as one of many multiplexed channels, and use out-of-band cryptographic validation, which any serious voting system design should include regardless.
This is a part of a broader thesis, which also argues the ‘comfortable subsistence’ should be treated as a right.
The taxation wouldn’t be required to pay for anything, its primary purpose is to constrain inequality, and incentivise continual elevation of the social floor.
I’d like to see ‘wealth’ accumulation and persistence as a legitimate proxy of how much someone has contributed to and supported the society they participate within, as opposed to its current form of how much they’ve extracted from and damaged it.
It should be progressively more expensive to remain rich.
Figure out a baseline of what’s required to provide comfortable subsistence.
Set a tax rate of 0.01% for income above 10x the baseline.
Set the tax brackets to:
- 0.1% for >100x
- 1% for >1,000x
- 10% for >10,000x
- 100% for >100,000x
If you want to earn more and pay less tax, you work toward raising the baseline.
An economy is a construct provided by the society to help facilitate its function. Hoarding wealth denominated in its currency is intrinsically sociopathic, and societies which tolerate it are suicidal.
This isn’t a trade war, it’s a Stupid Economic Operation.
Trump is just tracing from Pitin’s playbook.
Australia is a colony of convicts which grew up with aspirations of becoming a nation of wardens. Being a landlord is a socially sanctioned proxy of this desire.
Profit from any sector which interfaces with housing should only ever be tolerated when the social housing wait lists are measured in weeks and months, instead of the years and decades they’ve currently ballooned to. Property owners and their enablers should hurt until it’s no longer a problem.
This country also needs to actively acknowledge that luck and camping equipment are structural, load-bearing elements of this nation’s housing policies, and work to remove them from these roles. Involuntary homelessness and precarious housing should be indefensible outcomes.
Further, the classification of affordable housing needs to be annihilated. The first 100% of the housing supply should, by definition, be affordable for the function of providing appropriate primary residences. The existence of the concept helps permit the general real estate industry to abdicate what should be its primary function of housing the population, and artificially inflates the legitimacy of perpetual charitable organisations.
Short-term, seasonal, emergency, premium, etc. housing should only be tenable uses for residential dwellings when the initial 100% demand for primary residences has been met.
A strategically deployed hamberder in the next 1000 days will ensure Trump is president for life.