TrickstaPriest

This is the actual weapon, if you are wondering.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CQgpPqor1v6/

1 minute ago, Tom said:

I saw this story the other day on the BBC. I’m a gun owner and I still cannot fathom the level of stupid behind this…

I saw this a bit ago.

Grr.

My apologies on losing my temper, though.

13 minutes ago, Lectryk said:

But the system as a system (incentivation to provide certain outcomes/functions from a government or else) is working just fine.  And saying that it doesn't work is just isn't a supportable or defensible position.  

I wouldn't agree with that in totality, but I brought up the question because I think that financial representation from major donors has a lot more influence on policy than much else.  There are exceptions, but I'm not proposing a fundamentally different government, merely soliciting suggestions on mitigations.

22 minutes ago, Lectryk said:

But the system as a system (incentivation to provide certain outcomes/functions from a government or else) is working just fine.  And saying that it doesn't work is just isn't a supportable or defensible position.  

I haven't seen a serious attempt to push environmental agendas on either side that are sufficient in preventing our demise.  I have zero people to expect action for, even when I do consistently vote for an environmental agenda. 

The system works but is killing us is like a medical system saying surgeries are successful but the patient died from them.

If you want a coherent edit:researched and thorough argument from me, you will have to wait until I have the time.

edit:  I just disagree fundamentally that a system is working if it the system's stated goals are to support a society when that system's extensively exploited to the effect of killing that society.  It will take a long time for me to break down on every instance of corruption, deception, and how parts of the economic system are rigged to continue it extensively and protecting those that do it, however.

On 7/4/2021 at 1:09 PM, Lectryk said:

For not working properly, they certainly seemed to be effective at meeting the goals (and paying my salary) that were set for them by the government in response to citizens demands for service

edit: then again, I've been an environmental advocate for my entire life because I expected this outcome.

13 hours ago, Tom said:

The part which really irritates me the most is that (judging by the politics being expressed) these are mostly the same type of people who “back in the day” would be getting all lathered up about the need for an amendment to protect the flag from being burned and here the flag is being treated like another piece of poster board for politics and profit. 

It's not a surprise - Trumpism is basically a drug.  It's self validation, and people will get drunk on that for the express purpose of forgetting everything else they supposedly care about.

This got published recently.  Some disturbing footage, but I saw most of it shortly after the 6th anyway

7 hours ago, Lectryk said:

How is it not incentivized by the people?  We just had an election, and changed government.  I'd say the former administration didn't do a proper job, and the people made their choice and lack of happiness clear - they fired the group they weren't happy with.  If Trump wasn't incentivized by the upcoming election, why did he do everything he did to curry favor with his voters?  If our system doesn't incentivize politicans in general, why do they work so hard and boast so much about everything they do for their constituency?  Why do they do so many non-explicitly job related activities to get re-elected?  Why do administrations try for big wins on initiatives/laws/whatever?   Why is there so much pork doled out to states and districts if there's no incentive?  The reward (incentive, if you will) for politicans here would be re-election and being able to continue running/leading the government

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html

30% approval of Congress has held improved recently, but it's a horribly low approval rating.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_inequality

Global inequality has decreased, but a massive gulf widened in the US in the last 50 years.  Even my ex-coworkers, all cybersecurity professionals, are struggling under stress, income, healthcare, in one of the hottest growth technical fields in the world.

I don't have the time to break down how much pork actually makes a difference in terms of mouths fed, I'm studying for my third cert in a row this summer to try and incentivize my continued employment. 😕

edit: I feel like our politicians are more incentivized to work with lobbyists of major businesses, regardless of the harm or conflict of interest.  Recent news brings it to mind.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/07/02/exxon-climate-change-video-leaked/

I don't disagree that politicians spend a lot of time trying to get big wins passed to encourage citizenry, but we are still literally dying as a species and almost everyone I know and have ever met is struggling to keep things together financially... so I take those big wins with a grain of salt.  I've waited literally my entire life to see a politician start to take Global Warming at all seriously.  I'm still not certain if the current administration does.

So I guess that is the question then?   How does one demonstrate that our current government structure is incentivized to help its citizens?  Or that it is not?  I can't compile the amount of bills and the comparison of relative effects of such bills, weighted against things like Citizens United.  And those are soft value comparisons sometimes, so how do you want to weigh it?

Maybe when I have time again... some year, I'll compile the big gains and big losses in laws and actions over the last 60-80 years.  Until then...

9 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

Representative governments are obliged to deliver necessary services to all their citizens, and to protect them from harm, and to be accountable to their citizens if they fail to do so. In principle, profitability is not a factor, beyond assuring that incoming revenue balances expenditures. The goal of democratic government is supposed to be the greatest practical beneficence to the greatest number of people, "practical" of course being subject to much interpretation.

 

I wonder if that's what representative governments are actually incentivized to do.  The fact that our government does not illustrates some of the problems with this assumption, and to even talk about it I guess we have to understand what would incentivize a government to function 'properly' to begin with.

46 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

In other industries, utilities being a major example, the fundamental barrier is the initial infrastructure investment.  If more than one company tries to work its way into an entire, larger market (say the greater El Paso area) then each is having to amortize their infrastructure costs over only a fraction of the populace...which means probably both higher prices to consumers and slower rollout.  Whether it's one or several companies...as the rollout does happen, the window for another company narrows.  Their chance to create an alternative...they'd have to build yet another backbone structure, and their potential customer base has been reduced...shrinks rapidly.

 

The more I think about this the more it drives me crazy.

Literally the only way the lightbulb market (that was self restricting lightbulbs to 1000 hrs of lifespan, deliberately creating an inferior product) was 'disrupted' was by inventing an entirely new technology - LED bulbs.  Windows - it's only being replaced because the entire desktop machine is being replaced... by the phone market.

Phone market.  We are seeing the smartphone market eliminate the ability to replace batteries in their phones across the board.  I had to buy a new phone and almost none of them allow you to replace batteries anymore.  The remaining marketshare is too small, obscure, and of questionable quality, incentivizing/forcing the average consumer to buy new phones twice as often instead of replacing old batteries.

Internet.  Not even Google has been able to disrupt that market with new and superior technology... it exists across town from me, but I literally cannot get those lines from where I am.  It only exists across town because there was no houses there...  I may never be able to get those lines this decade without moving where I live.

Hospitals you don't generally choose, that gets chosen for you.  Friends of mine literally had to do research to figure out which hospital nearby is covered by their insurance - it wasn't the closest one!  ...Plus the health infrastructure itself is insane.  When I asked my doctor to run some bloodwork another person requested, no one told me (or probably knew) that the insurance company wouldn't cover it.  I had to pay $800 out of pocket for bloodwork done out of the same lab by the same people I always get my bloodwork done, literally at the same time I got other bloodwork done that -was- covered by my insurance.

Tractor companies have literally fought to prevent repairs to their own products, forcing farmers to hack the tractor software to conduct repairs on the tractors they owned.  If they didn't do this, they'd be waiting for weeks to get a tractor repair done, which is the same as shutting down their income for weeks.

We haven't even included entertainment - does Star Wardz count as a market substitute to Star Wars?  If you can only get Star Wars on Disney+, then you can only ever get Star Wars from Disney... do market substitutes apply to entertainment products?

Companies are actively incentivized to play obstructionist and bury complaints, buy and scrap competitors, bribe governors, and that's them being nice.  Big companies buy literal death squads, arbitrarily deny energy to drive up electricity prices, or just take things like water.  How does rigging the tax code factor into the market? 

It's a long rant, but this is what I mean (in general, not to anyone in particular) when I say I need to see the research.  I just literally don't believe what people say "about the market" anymore.  I've literally seen too much abuse.  It's all illegal, but it's only illegal because we say so.  We can just as arbitrarily say "it'll get handled eventually", and I just don't believe that any more.

edit: Definitely as pinecone says, the government is a necessity at some times to tackle issues with the market, but i wonder how much our 'wisdom about the free market' is just bunk?

And what other examples can we collate of this blatant kind of abuse of corporate power?  I'm interested in things beyond what I already know, beyond Enron, Coca Cola, and lightbulbs.

I honestly wouldn't mind hearing more about economics and what can be said about the market in general - I use incidents to inform me about a subject, but that doesn't teach anything positive in this subject.

I've heard from others saying something to the effect of:

"The market" requires a fast turn around time on a definable take-home product in a non-critical situation. 

It doesn't apply to a number of situations I think:

• life-or-death products (my mother flew off a highway, her car tumbled.  insurance claims it was human error, but one of the new Firestone tires exploded)
• any services (handymen, doctors, dentists, car repair)
• a company controlling a platform environment (Windows dominating PCs, Amazon dominating shipping)
• nor does it apply if you would find out about a problem a decade later (see all the issues with contamination - plus I have problems taking supplements because they don't list their actual real ingredients)
• Plus long-term products - you can't really complain much about cars until you become an expert in them, or have multiple bad experiences with the same type of vehicle... which could take 20-30 years to actually pass.  It could take ~100 years to 'adjust the market', where everyone responsible for the initial issues is literally dead and buried.
• And of course deliberate market collusion to make inferior products.  like the lightbulb example I had posted

I think it generally takes multiple "generations of product abuse from a definable abuser" for enough purchasers to create enough pressure to change the market to begin with.  But a lot of the time it's hard to say "how bad is my doctor, really?", "I need a new electrician but I don't know any of these guys", "my new tires should be fine, they won't explode or anything", and "well I guess I am stuck with an X phone because I really don't have the time to learn how to use these weird 'other software' phones".

What kind of soft factors weigh against the power of the market to rectify a problem?

The problem is I can't take "market forces apply" at it's word.  It's just a general statement if there isn't research and evidence provided.

As an avid environmentalist, the idea that "society eventually does something about it a century too late" is cold comfort to our collective demise.

Then again, I'm just not interested in arguing markets right now.

56 minutes ago, pinecone said:

My take from my own reading was they want "Ethical gangsterism" more or less. If the Black swallow mob sells bad meat, the "Blue Dahlia" Mob can make a move....

Why would the 'Blue Dahlia Mob' care?  I mean, profit is always higher when you deliver a subpar product across the market.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel

2 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

CNN is reporting that the Arizona Republic has published an article detailing that Trump et al pressured Maricopa County election officials, a la his Georgia actions.  CNN played 3 calls to election officials, 2 from the Court Jester and one from Kelli Ward, the Trump sycophant who is the chairman of the Arizona Republican Party.  They're pretty bad.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/02/politics/donald-trump-rudy-giuliani-calls-maricopa-county-election-supervisors/index.html

 

Can't link to the original article;  it's for Arizona Republic subscribers only.  

When the Georgia call came out, I kind of figured.  The only way they'd swing this is to do this everywhere.

13 hours ago, Pariah said:

What's it gonna take to restore normality to this country?

 

Trump supporter warns CNN reporter of 'civil war' if former president not reinstated 'soon'

Complete capitulation and the whole world providing affirmation of their most rash beliefs and feelings. 

To be even less charitable, essentially being treated as princesses regardless of what reality is.

edit: I wonder what their plan is for climate change, given the southwest is running out of water.

36 minutes ago, DShomshak said:

Personally, I think there's a strong likelihood of significant armed insurrection -- bombings, massacres, Middle East-level semi-organized violence -- within 5 years. But not civil war, as such.

I was trying to avoid saying "X-ian Caliphate" but...

Yes, this is more or less what I've been trying to warn about.  This follows with the pattern of increased attacks following the pandemic - these shootings and attacks go up because of desperate circumstances.  The real question is whether there will be other significant emergencies over the next few years.

45 minutes ago, Dr. MID-Nite said:

By this I take it you believe armed conflict is inevitable?

I at least don't think so.  But a lot depends around what happens over the next few years around Trump and around the various... 'news casters' in the US.

It also depends a lot on whether the Biden admin can and will effectively address the severe poverty issues growing in this country.

deleted my line.

This isn't going away, and I'm honestly expecting a lot more violence.  And a lot, lot more religiously/politically motivated actions, and more public voices encouraging it.

😕

We, the rest of the public, have to start thinking about what kind of positive (and hopefully de-escalating) things that have to be done to deal with this.

3 hours ago, Hermit said:

How can the State Govt of Tennessee, make other states look saner than us?

I KNOW, let's threaten to disband the department of Health because they're promoting the vaccine to teenagers

 

 

I feel the need to apologize to Florida

 

Just skim the comments threads.

This video is restricted for language.  Listen at your own risk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgRs1X4hUvY

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/17/secret-recording-florida-republican-threat-hit-squad-494976

2 hours ago, DShomshak said:

I can only hope that I am living in reality. Logically, though, I must consider the possibility that I too am deluded. Or, you know, I'd see the fnords.

 

News coverage and politicians is core to blame for that.  At least to me.

17 minutes ago, DShomshak said:

If you're really rich, you can have "concierge medicine" with a private doctor. All part of a trend toward the "concierge society" where the super-rich don't have to care about maintianing roads because they go everywhere by private helicopter, or (for the less exorbitantly wealthy) pay to drive in the carpool lane while the wage slaves creep along in the other lanes. Or. rock used to be the music of the people, but now only the rich can go to concerts: Computers buy most of the tickets the instant they go on sale, for resale at 10 times the price. Skyboxes at sports stadiums: games are for corporate officers to entertain foreign guests while they cut deals, while the plebes watch on TV. And so on.

 

Granted, naked plutocracy has a certain refreshing honesty compared to concealed plutocracy.

 

Dean Shomshak

Yeah, and this (building schools,hospitals,roads,infrastructure) is one of the things that separates a democratic free society from a dictatorship.  As in, as long as the upper class actually need the lower class, they have to invest in them... 😕

Looking back at the past
 

deleted for dumb rant

4 minutes ago, BarretWallace said:

I wonder if they scream about the "liberal left cancel culture" specifically to provide a distraction from their own shenanigans.

I mean, as far as family goes, they don't have much shenanigans.  I just don't think they weigh the literal politically-motivated overhaul of our elections as 'dangerous' as 'shitty online culture'.

I think people are taking for granted the idea that 'there's political corruption in our government and election system' anyway, and don't realize that yes, it actually can get much worse than it is.  And that the worsening of it will have terrible consequences for people's everyday lives, especially in the context of the de-powerment of employees, voters, etc.

Just now, archer said:

The Georgia Republican Party passed a resolution on Saturday to censure the official for not going along with Trump's scheme.

 

Really.

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/557141-georgia-gop-censures-state-official-who-criticized-trump

 

I'd think any sane organization would wait to see whether Trump was indicted for his actions before censuring the victim of his actions.

This right here is why I'm so done.

I know way too many people who are essentially only talking about 'the liberal left cancel culture making the world like China' who can't see what the eff is going on in front of their face.  If I stopped talking to people who talked like that I'd have no friends I see face-to-face anymore, and half a family.

This is really not good.