#serious-discussion
1 messages · Page 304 of 1
🤦♂️
yeah that wasnt an explosion
don't be silly
this is hilarious
chernobyl isnt a drawback of nuclear energy
you’re completely misinformed on the topic speaking like you’re an authority on it
it didnt happen because nuclear energy is inherently bad as i recall it was because the people who constructed the plant cut corners or didnt do everything properly
thousands more people have died in coal mines or whatever
i dont mean thousands more people i mean THOUSANDS THE AMOUNT
regardless, still. nuclear energy can definitely. cause some serious damage. especially if nit handled right.
TIME BY 1000
good thing we know how to handle it right
with a bunch of redundancies and safety measures
the most serious damage it would cause is to the portfolio of oil tycoons
the most naive thing is to trust it all 100%. due to nuclear waste and such. just cause it builds up over the years
eh
fossil fuels are actively killing the planet mind you
the
I will say it again
being antinuclear is a psyop
by big oil and big gas
its some dumb psyop to make people think there isnt enough energy to go around when in fact there is
iirc theres a legitimate concern about ethical sourcing of uranium
especially on native land
yeah definitely zero moral dilemmas about fossil fuels sourcing
none ever
no wars fought over this
none
I dont think thats what theyre saying
my point is that fossil fuels are so much worse that these concerns pale in comparison, not to mention the fact that we could also try to solve the problem of sourcing it ethically
yeah well
it doesn't work like that
money and all
and yes fossil fuels are worse
just stating that nuclear energy is also bad
never said it was the worst
I want to throttle wael sawan
i mean this is true, i was just responding to the idea that there are no legitimate concerns about nuclear whatsoever
i am, at the end of the day, pro nuclear
nuclear is literally better than all the other options
I was just describing the thought process of another person, and why they didn't like nuclear energy 💀
how are we on this nuclear energy shit again
somebody got pilled by a gas company smh
the only serious concerns with nuclear energy are to do with the costs and liabilities of catastrophic failure of a plant
New method of conceding an argument without losing face just dropped 
😭 💀
I didn't want to waste brain cells on a simple debate
and I didn't really enter the debate. entirely. I just described how the other person most likely thought, as to why nuclear energy was bad. in their eyes
calc 1 textbook at Ohio State 🗣️ 🔥
hi
Ohio state is peak fr
Rossoganda at its peak
I have not been Ross pilled (although two of my roommates have been councilors multiple times)
Become Ross pulled
Pilled
It’s good
Just like propaganda supporting damiocrasy isn’t propoganda cuz it’s true, rossoganda isn’t rossoganda cuz it’s true
You make a valid point
Propoganda* idk which word was supposed to be propoganda but one of them is
Reader exercise
Propaganda isn't false by definition
It's like
I thought propoganda was false stuff to make people support u
Eg the government
Am I stupid
An ad campaign ran by the state
plenty of propaganda is true or at least mostly true
and it doesn't need to be run by state or government actors
Well I mean i only care about the false stuff that’s interesting
If it’s true then isn’t that what they’re supposed to do?
Propaganda has a negative connotation
Atleast for me
That’s stupid
well people often exaggerate or mislead with the truth
Oh right, billionaires and corpos do it too
Oh
or will assemble facts in such a way so as to effectively mislead and propagandize
So ig it's just an ad campaign I don't fucking know
this is interesting because it's much more convincing than just falling for garbage
Fr bruh this is confusing
Hi musicalmather
a propaganda is when a british person takes a good look at something
Brits aren't allowed to take a good look at anything these days unless they want the police at their door
propaganda is material used to influence perception, with a connotation of doing so in a misleading manner
Just like the old days
British shopkeeper visited by police and told to remove sign referring to shoplifters as "scumbags" because "it may offend shoplifters"
Pretty much all media outlets are propagandized. They don't have to ever tell a single lie. They need only choose what truth to tell and/or how to tell it.
Britain went from the land of Orwell to the Orwellian land real quick.
wow a 2-digit opencry this doesnt happen alot
would be 1 digit if it weren't for the self-react
Called out!!!!
I had to add a react now
not to support nG
but to support the option of calling Brits scumbags
Say that now.
I have seen the error of my ways
screams in agony
Peak
Special functions my beloved
I love how there was a period of mathematics when people just wrote entire textbooks about special functions
Hello yamin
Hi
if its still in the free bookshelf do you want me to pick it up for you
Nah
Hi
@deep mango did you know about this result ryc? Fourier transform of surface measure on unit sphere is essentially a bessel function
yes i did! ive used it in the past a little
how about this, would you want thid
wow
Thanks for offering but you don't need to get it for me
guy got books
Where are you finding them?
nyu has a bookshelf for people throwing out old textbooks
in the math dept
usually its not this full but someone is retiring
lu ting
most of the books on there rn are about fluid and sound pdes
and aerodynamics
I love how it says mathematical physics in the title but all of these functions are useful in number theory
i recall seeing something about the hypergeometric functions solving some problem in fluid dynamics
but idr where
looks interesting
@deep mango can we talk about my proof for RH ?
Yes RYC can we please see that
shoot it
just don't ping random people
Send to my email so I can laugh at it
was there anything on real analysis there
I kinda hate old book smell.
have you ever done research before?
Yes.
do you think you could look over a email im sending to one of my professors about their lab
ive never done this sort of thing before so i'm not sure what to say
@latent edge
Kinda crazy that I need exactly this integral in my computation
hypergeo appears as solutions to a lot of pde solutions like schrodingers with coulomb
yes, a couple books
insane
can u show pls
old book smell is nice every once in a while but i feel it can get stale quickly
and turn into what ud generally imagine as "old room smell"
Smells like elderly people.
as an expert on RH, i must say i am skeptical on the veracity of your claims
And the viscosity of your clams.
3,2,1 Integrate !
shocking
Not here🤯
Bessel?
Yep
math is so cool
of course it is, we invented it
im gonna cry bro the first week of school is about to end and the counselors still haven't switched me into ap precalc
have you gone in person to bother them yet? sometimes they magically work faster once you annoy them enough 
if im not switched by thursday ill just go to them atp 💔 i was originally gonna do that but they told us specifically not to reach out because they're "working really hard" NOOO YOU ARE NOOOOT 💔
WAITT WTH YOU'RE TURKISH?
ME TOO
😭
yes 🫡
@wild atlas Hey.
Why are your first messages on this server pinging a user that you, apparently, have never interacted with?
I have, I know her
(technically I do this all the time too
)
OK, sure. We'll see what she has to say about that. As a word of advice, pinging someone once is just fine, on one channel.
No you don't. You've been on the server for years. This person's first ever message is pinging someone.
I meant my mass pinging new users to welcome them 
I understand the difference between welcoming and pinging people randomly, dw
also huh. it's been 2 years 
I'm so used to being a newgen that it never truly struck me that I won't be called one eventually

the first week of school starts in august ??
where tf are you going to school lmao
bro is a veteran nerd
i don't think that's an accomplishment
I love this server, what can I say? 
it starts in September for me!
your country is so weird and inconsistent 😭
true
starting the first week in 11th august lmao
do you guys call it summer break bc thats not even summer break anymore
I know some places that start on the 25th of August
thats just a break
we start September 2nd
I'm in Canada but I'm fairly sure the situation is similar for much of the US
thats what im saying, and i only had about 2-3 weeks anyway cuz i decided to take a class over the summer🥀
LMFAOO BRO YOU DONT GET IT I GOTTA LOCK INN
what year are you in
sophomore 💔
bruh who locks in that much in sophomores 😭
you should leave it late like me
then hate yourself
(hopefully) cook each exam after a torturous final year
this is the way
i dont have that gpa stuff
i get my results in 4 hours
tuff
i need to wake up at 6am to arrive at school by 8am
rn its 4:31am
so idk if i should even sleep 💀💀
good luck!!
not sure if luck will help me now
Lucky bro i have to arrive by 7 so i have to wake up at 5 💔
YES BRO
what kind of shit school do u go to
i get like 3 hours of sleep everyday with this schedule
isnt it a scientific fact that teenagers generally have later circadian rhythms
theyre not supposed to have the same sleep schedule as a 56 year old man 😭
7am is horrible
ONG
schools: you should have 8 hours of sleep everyday
then u have to sleep at 8pm lmao
bruh my school starts at 9 and thats normal
but my secondary school started at 8:30am
7am shouldnt be possible
thats when ur supposed to wake up not arrive at school
sometimes 10:30 cuz we just go when we have lesson 😭
is taking 20-1 hounrs in grade 10 bad?
last year on mondays i started at 12:55pm
and i still came late 😭😭
wdym by hounrs?
Man I gotta wake up at like 6
@last crystal in regards to art being political, generally art is considered to be an expression of one’s self; emotions, beliefs interests and ideology but in the case of art being used as a means to launder money, not express interests etc, that takes out the possibility of it being politically charged as the only incentive for creating that art is monetary gain therefore separating it from the attachment to political ideology. IMO this is a case proof that not all art is political. Although it’s likely the overwhelming majority of art is produced with some kind of political agenda
still at gym
cant read
Art can be produced to practice making art
It’s not about it being created for an express or explicit agenda
The very context of its production is political
Even if you create a piece of art and you’re unaware of this, it’s still true
Only as much as it is philosophical or scientific
Not sure what you meant by this
Also, I’d say that “art being used as a means to launder money” is pretty political
Or for tax write offs for that matter
I mean that sure, in the sense that politics is a backdrop influencing the artists decisions and what they even choose to think about
But in that sense it's also scientific, cultural, philosophical, religious even
I don't find it a very useful sense
Sounds economical to me
You dont think specific policies that allow that to happen aren’t political?
Like "the very context of its production" is a very weak reason to assert that it is therefore political, religious, ...
Or the fact that the crime syndicate exists to begin with
Stretch as fuck
Bruh
That's like saying my clothing choice is political because its a political decision to force me to wear clothes
How exactly is it a stretch?
No, but the fact that you’re able to but cheaply made clothes at retail stores is political
It's a political decision that I'm alive right now, is my life a political statement?
No it isn't
Yes, your life is political
That's economical
No it isn't
If you want to argue there are political aspects, sure, I'll accept that, that's true
It is not political
My blood is red
I am not red
You are conflating a piece with the whole unnecessarily
Why would that be what something being “political” means
Economics is concerned with economics
I am using the word in this way
Politics is only involved as such as it impacts economics
,w political
I'd say that's disingenuous, because that's not what people mean when they say something is "political"
These seem pretty aligned with my usage
When someone says something is political, they mean that politics is a focal subject
Duh? Isn't that what it was from the beginning
Was that not obvious to you
Saying "all art is political" is disingenuous, it reads as "all art is about politics" in most contexts to most people
Because I thought it was understood that I didn’t mean that the entire purpose or reason for being of something was entirely political
Why is this my concern
This is literally just an argument based on people misinterpreting what I’m saying
why would I want to be understood?
Yes, so it would behoove you to not be misinterpreted no?
I’m not really sure I said anything too ambiguous
Evidently
Like this isnt about politics, the policy isnt a focal subject. The focal subject is making money, policies influence how this is done but it's not about them
Especially since we're laundering, we are violating the policies!
Showing we really don't care
It's not political
It could be
But you won't find the argument in the description given
Again, I don’t think the word “political” is commonly used to mean that politics is the entire focus
Not the entire but a main focal subject
And I do think it is
If I look for political X, I expect X but about politics
Every time
This is just you fam
That’s you
If I look up a political podcast and they only mention politics every 5th episode I'll be disappointed
If I look for political comic books and its all Garfield saying "I hate mondays" I'll be confused
Because the meaning of words depend on context…
If you look for a political musician and dont find politics, you'll be quite confused
The adjective political means that its about politics
Focally
,w political
Homie doesn't even know what a nondegenerate bilinear form is
These are not widely different than the ones wolfram gave
And wolfram (specifically ,w) is a particularly terrible source
So in what sense are you using political
Im pretty sure I said this many messages ago
I'm using 1,2,4 here
Here
No you didn't that's circular
Because I used political in that definition
In my specific sense
Ok this is a pretty trite argument that im not interested in pursuing any further
Which you now disagree with
All art is political is just a true statement, art doesn’t just appear out of a vacuum.
If you read that as “all art is about politics” that’s a you issue, because that’s just not at all what was claimed
It's okay, you can be wrong about the definition of political art, I won't hold you
Just don't ask me to be wrong too
Love you too buddy
I entered the domain into my web surfing service and immediately saw two hyperrealistic bleeding eyes. It gave me one hundred million troy viruses and traumatized me. My whole house is now haunted with ghosts trying to murder me.
Sometimes I wanna keep using mathcord but then realize like some of these guys humour codes are absolutely wacly for me to understand
And I realizes some of the other guys might feel the same for me
Yeah I'm totally fine off discussy now
,iam studying
Gave you the studying! selfrole.
idk how to play it lol
my guess was n618 and the correct answer said 3
how does that work I don't get it
"Im nothing like yall" ah
and he's right !!
Im so proud
-# pjsk fan spotted
Hey it’s 8-6+1 =3
So if you see numbers like n618 apply a+-b+-c
Tinyguess.com it’s math plus guessing
Let’s see if someone beats the leaderboard
oh yeah i love guessing games, so fun
Any advice for calc 2-3 and linear algebra?
Read and do problems
Nothing special then?
with this one trick you can learn calculus and linear algebra in two seconds !!!!
It's not mathematics from mars
ya u also play pjsk?
oh ic
that looks a stupid question I've asked lmao
i have been playing the game for 2 months now and i got my 5th fc on expert today 🙂
win is a win
the match was luck lmao




i haven't heard the term "FC" since i was addicted to rock band in like 2010
fc stands for full combo
yeah i know. FC stood for full combo then too

is hentai political
i dont think so
Political hentai... hm... kinky 
in france it is
Math is underrated
amen
@azure bluff welcome to the mathcord 
ty!
To speculate myself and localize to the US since I'm somewhat able to reason there. In principle there are different types of things for which you want the government to step out of the picture. The naive partition is social issues vs economic issues
Republicans classically have been all about propping up big business in America, and as time goes on they go big on the socially conservative angle
- Big businesses benefit from deregulation and fewer taxes, which aligns vaguely with libertarianism
- With fewer taxes come fewer social services, which is also simultaneously a Republican stance and a libertarian stance
- That said, a naive instinct might be to use eg tariffs to attempt to prop up American business at the expense of foreign (the effectiveness is ofc questionable), while libertarianism in principle would be much more firmly laissez-faire
- Social conservativism tends to be not very libertarian, eg banning weed or whatever
So a true firm libertarian kind of agrees with each party "roughly half the time"
Some people who agree with Republicans but wanna go a bit more toward actual libertarianism will call themselves libertarian but not go all the way, and I figure that might be what you're talking about, since you'd think libertarians don't want systemic inequalities and in fact barely want systemic anything. I figure they'd like to be able to use a men in black memory eraser and wipe out the inequality, and hope that government not being much of a thing would make things play out the right way (whether this is true or not is another question, but this would be the concept).
Hahahaha, yeah I have been giving these long extended musings a lot lately
That's alright compared to what maya and I have been doung lol
Based
the word libertarian has been largely co opted by the right, but there are still a lot of left anarchists who call themselves libertarian and draw a distinction between libertarian and anarchocapitalist (what you're referring to)
Yeah that seems to be tied to what I was saying whereby, at least at some point in time libertarian basically meant "Republican but legalize weed"
Oh libertarian socialist
I've heard that before
What does it mean exactly?
idk about hentai but fanservice and misogynist depictions of women/girls in anime is very political. patriarchy reproduces itself through media by creating unrealistic objectified standards of docile, submissive, and "idealized" women (ideal for consumption by men).
Yeah I am with you on this point, a libertarian in the honest sense of the word wouldn't likely be fond of systemic racism and such, in fact would feel that without governments historically promoting these inequalities we wouldn't have them
Yes i understand that i might je confused about the meaning of libertarian. It's kinda hard to understand the real convictions or goals of the modern right imo
Well the reason I went on this long rant is less "You don't understand libertarianism" so much as, there's the idea of what libertarianism probably was supposed to be, and then how it is in practice
What i wanted to say is that i've seen people defend libertarianism is the particular way i described
Which is a thing
But it might indeed be not widespread at all
my unsophisticated understanding is that its the same as a socialist with an emphasis on individual freedoms. its still a very anti capitalist ideology and doesnt believe in markets or any of the usual stuff you associate with libertarians.
I thought I was libertarian 
apparently I'm not.. what am I then?
I very much support social services, welfare etc etc. "even if a few lazy people slip thru". body autonomy, do whatever the fuck u want in bed, marry whoever u want, fuck (almost) whoever u want 
but at the same time I like capitalism 
youre a liberal
but, capitalism
liberals like capitalism
So basically a libertarian is for freedom: on the socialist side it's individual freedom,on the capitalist side it's also freedom of the markets?
Probably a few people who label themselves libertarian are people who want a small government banner to accomplish that which they'd be happy to accomplish without a small government banner. Especially a small federal government
If you're honestly libertarian you might very well want state governments as well to be small. But if you're conservative in a conservative state which wants to disallow abortion, making the federal government small enables you to ban it in your state
Yes, liberals are like a bit social democrats which is still capitalism
ig I'm a superposition of a leftist and a centrist 
i guess so, id caution against trying to find an all encompassing ideology that can be called "libertarianism" because the historical trajectory of the word has not been linear and its come to mean two or more almost entirely different things
So imo that's why libertarianism seems so easy to associate with the right, because the first approximation enables it as long as you hard avoid the second approximation
Democrats and the left kinda can't be too libertarian because... Hmm
In my country thepeoplewho call themselves that are capitalists. But that depend son the country becausecentrists are generally pro status quo, so it might shiftif you country is already socialist
Some democrats are very libertarian lol
Maybe even a lot
Some probably, since you'll have a squadron that's single issue
And if you're libertarian who prioritizes certain single issues, the left will definitely be more your jam
That's the thing with the labels
People often have a fairly incoherent and possibly fluid set of policy positions, maybe certain general principles they care about quite a lot
Seeing how the democrats have been hating mamdani, i think there are a lot of libertarians in there
So they'll align with a party on one matter but not the other
The Democrat Mamdani stuff seems to be less about the "philosophy of the Democratic party" I will say and more a feature of the internal politics of the party
I get the vibe that within the party Democrats really care about seniority and waiting your turn and all
if you mean establishment democrats you're giving them too much credit. most of them don't have enough conviction to even have a well defined ideological stance
To cpunter my own argument a main question for the mamdani election was the support of isreal which is a conservative/liberal topic and not a libertarian/socialist one
mamdani is scary to them because he pushes the standard to the left
Indeed
My impression is that Cuomo is an extreme liability that they'd be willing to overlook that sentiment of seniority at least once, so I'm surprised they cling to him as hard as he does. But maybe yeah they worry Mamdani is a bit too much of a shakeup
Not sure, like bernie sanders pushed for democrat socialist measures and was put aside despite being very popular and old
Since there is def the pro-business wing of the Democratic party and Mamdani isn't gonna be as bueno for them + he might be enough of a proof of concept that many more people get primaried

I mean the seniority stuff in the Democratic party would've harmed Sanders even if the Democratic party was otherwise hyperleft
Since Sanders wasn't quite a member of the party prior as I recall
Oh ye
yeah
And therefore the sentiment was "Okay now it's Clinton's turn"

Oh yeah seniority within the party I meant, very "Wait your turn"
That's a good system if you want people not to vote for you
You gotta give them that
Truth be told I wouldn't be surprised if the wait your turn sentiment is probably the actual reason the Democratic party hesitates to go left on certain economic issues?
Well that + they do have to contend with the US fundamentally being kinda conservative
no its the other way around
Well I'm suggesting it as being not quite a common wisdom suggestion, but I almost wonder if the Democratic party wouldn't mind if the junior folk became old, and started going more left now that they've slowly earned their way to the front
i dont think so
nope. seniority is valued because the leftists get weeded out quickly
weeded out or molded
its not really about that more so than protecting their donors interests
which are corporate
When you look at the party funding system in the us,you realize that dems don't have areal choice but to stay on the economic right
its ontologically necessary for the democrats to push right
the best summary of the national dems platform i heard was that theyre pandering for a type of conservative that only exists on the editorial board of the guardian
yeah lol
Is it ontologically necessary? Tbh my impression of moderate Democrats is that they are very happy with the outcomes the left desires in principle but just think it's a fantasy, at least in the current political state of America
Leftist measures seem to be a very secondary preocupation of the democrats
I mean the party
what if the democrat party got funding instead from overseas markets? 
whatever they pretend to be happy with is just populism. actual policy wise they will necessarily push right because the state exists to suppress the working class at the behest of the ruling class
Comrad you have to hide your theory a bit not for capitalists to feel brutalized, convince them without saying socialist words so that they don't resist the logical reasoning
AIPAC
I be trolling a bit but it's kinda true
🙄
hm

if democrats heavily invested in vietnamese factories and got shares from there and promoted vietnamese items over chinese ones... wouldn't they end up having quite a bit of economic power to wield over the us companies?

They would become a corporation and defend their own interests in policies lol
That's the worst case scenario
bernie sanders the vietnamese factories or smthn (bernie sanders is now a verb)
The way I've seen them describe it, they probably feel the country isn't really "ready"
They'll see the young leftists as having all these ambitions and they love that for them but think that hey, we need to lay a lot more groundwork for your stuff to be a reality. If you try to enact it now you won't have the support and the economics won't work, so just wait your turn while we try to shift the landscape one inch at a time, and by the time it's your turn maybe your vision becomes realistic.
Some of the very left ideas (eg full on socialism) they don't like at all. Partially because it's got a very deep rooted stigma in the minds of many from that era, partially that they are juggling the interests of their sponsors who might be down for... Becoming very liberal but still liberal rather than socialist, let's say.
Rays contends this is a cover, which... I could see it both ways, hard to say.
yeah that doesnt work, thats the end stage of imperialism
im also not sure that campaign funding is the main hurdle here anyways
its not like kamala lost because the dems were too broke
The talk of funding isn't to make Democrats win
It's proposed as why the Democrats aren't as willing to move to the left
trying to give an economic explanation for the election results is proudly ignorant of the actual preferences of the voterbase
i mean you just need to observe the trend in their messaging and policy over the last several decades to see that they have continually pushed right because they are at full liberty to do so
trump's economic policies had a very high disapproval rating prior to the election, much higher than trump himself
but voters vote on culture war issues
thats not the thing we're discussing though
every democratic presidential nominee has been more left-wing than the last
we're not discussing the results of the election, we're discussing the policy of the politicians
you could argue theres more to the party than just the president, which is true
but also much harder to quantify
Well, policy proposals are partially meant to be in response to voterbase preferences
but socialist wings of the party are ascendant in a way they havent been before
especially in dem strongholds like new york
imo this is too charitable of a view of dem party leadership
and the bigger the backlash they get from the senior faction of the party
i dont really care about some random tweets from old senators tbh
I was trying to think of ways to get the dem party to not be so economically reliant on the companies that may or may not want to go against left wing economic policies but idunno. some groundwork to get done i nthe background whilst other cultural issues are worked on
AOC isnt really having practical issues getting her objectives accomplished in the house relative to any other dem
i think the only left-wing politician with power that you can argue is being excluded from the rest of the party is sanders, but he chose to run as an independent so i think he was expecting that
maybe tlaib?
And yeah this is why I'm not entirely disinclined to take a subset of Democrats somewhat at face value. So we may not quite be on the trajectory that perhaps could've been hoped for had the New Deal Coalition gone full steam ahead, but did it not start to fall down because the Southern strategy just worked?
the democratic party is like any other institution
it has its own values and concerns but its members are principally concerned with their own survival and self-interest
they will compromise on their values if they feel their affluence being threatened
this is far from unique to the dems; it is a necessary result of any system in which power is distributed to individuals
That's probably just an excuse, because if the aim was to make the country lean mire towards the left, they'd enact as many left measures as possible before trump get in power and massively tilts the country to the right once again
how?
They'd at least try lol
dems only held all 3 branches for a couple years, and only by the thinnest of possible margins
how do you push any legislation past manchin
Yeah trying if you know you're gonna fail doesn't strike me as productive
biden economic policy was fairly level headed and the economy was doing great on paper
this didnt matter to voters who voted based on vibes
one of biden's first acts was trying to pass student loan forgiveness via executive order, so as to get around needing to go through the senate - this was immediately held up in teh courts and the administration spent the rest of his presidency fighting it
im not pretending biden was some hardcore lefty or anything but like
Biden did as well as he could've on the economic front to my understanding
he did try to lean left on a couple issues and was repeatedly stopped
Ye sure
you could argue that biden should've acted like trump
that is, ignoring the courts and pushing through his policies anyway regardless of whether they're legal
but i feel like the conservative-majority supreme court would've ruled a lot differently if it was biden doing it and not trump
Yeah the left does not have enough political capital in this country to pull stuff off. As far as I can tell they are not doing nearly as good of a job as they could in amassing said political capital
I know this one guy who's a fairly leftist poly sci graduate student and studies a lot of data
well this is where the main split is in the left wing of american policits
the DSA itself is split between those who want to run within the democratic party (Mamdani, AOC, etc) and those who want to run as independents or as a separate left-wing party
and then theres many leftists who reject democratic socialism entirely (hence arent members of the DSA)
and who think that socialist goals can be achieved only by revolution, not democratic incrementalism
I think the democrats would getmore votes if they were more on the left ideologically, which could allow them to very slowly undo the what the republicans have been doing if they wer elected more frequently, that's my readoning
I don't buy it
Democrats didn't lose eg the just recent presidential election because they lost leftist voters
more voters in 2020 said that biden was "far left" than said trump was "far right"
Trump 2024 beat Biden 2020 numbers in swing states
the american media apparatus has created a very hostile climate for left-wing policy
A lot of people just aren't leftist
"liberal" is basically an insult outside of major cities
They didn't loose them, but they could have gotten mire conservatives by doing that
and speaking of which, insulting cities is very common in US political discourse but insulting rural folk is considered a grave insult to American dignity itself
Some people are racist but still want free healthcare
America just has a very conservative-biased self-image right now
In fact apparently a lot of new votes for Trump were people who were basically going to vote against the Democrats no matter what
Because inflation
i think thats overblown as well
us voters will shoot their own foot to own the libs
voters say they vote trump because inflation but they actually vote trump because they hate brown people
or trans people or whatever
i dont want it to be real but it is the truth
Well did those people not already vote for Trump in 2020 and 2016?
trump didnt really convert many voters in 2024
what he did is had increased turnout from non-voters
you can look at the numbers
dem turnout went down, republican turnout went up
wasn't there quite a significant margin between votes from young people (quite a few men voted trump)
the idea of the fence sitter who switches votes in response to policy isnt really backed by evidence
People, even racists, are a bit more complex than that
not really
of course im oversimplifying
Yeah, and those non-voters who come out were the ones that I thought were not hardcore maga folk but the ones who don't even know what the branches of government are and just vote against the incumbent because life got harder
do this irl
That's what I meant by inflation losing the election for Democrats, rather than people who flip based on policy
the common denominator for “why trump” is “vibes”
There’s actually a statistic that given the option white people will most likely always vote republican
I think a lot of people voted for trump because they're racist and he told them he would solve all their problems, but i think that if someone on the left told them about quality of life measure, they could agree as well
hi
then why arent those people winning dem primaries?
Hey clau
like the primary electorate is obviously different from the general electorate
hi may
but i would wager that the average dem primary voter is more sympathetic to left-wing appeals than the average general election voter
so why are only a handful of progressives able to win dem primaries nationally?
and mostly in dem strongholds like new york and california
I think the media and all play a huge role in dems primary
^
you get exceptions like fetterman (he ran as a progressive in the primaries) but uh, then he had a stroke and became a blue dog dem lol
But the same for the global voters
wasn't this debunked
not sure what you mean by debunked
there is a visible gender gap in voting patterns, especially among younger voters
buuuut young men still were like D+10 or something
Media matters and add far as I can tell, one of the things Democrats seem to be underutilizing
its just that young women were like D+20
so theres like a visible gap there
but even young men are still fairly solidly pro-democrat, just not as much as young women are
I have no idea how much this site can be trusted but anyway:https://cawp.rutgers.edu/blog/gender-differences-2024-presidential-vote
As people in power you have something of a platform to try and influence the populace. You cannot will that people subscribe to you but you can work harder
The vibe i get from this convo is that im wrong for having hope for this country
Which might be true
its certainly in a deep hole
I mean, the people are just more conservative than many want to believe
And if the left wants to make progress they need to contend with that fact. Start trying to influence people. Start with the people who are uninformed about politics
Use the media, argue your positions, etc
"the electorate", broadly speaking, wants contradictory things
it wants progress without change
it wants growth without diversity
it wants spending without taxes
seems like a gap difference by 1% ish really, and more so a general trend overall then huh
but yeah a consistent gap
The gaps have increased since 2024
sounds like the same bland strategic thinking the many media managers involved are certainly aware of
you ask a small-town right winger if they want more money brought into their community and theyll say yes, of course; you ask them if they want rich city people to build more factories and bring in immigrant workers and they'll say no, of course not
you ask a big city progressive if they want more housing for the poor and they'll say yes, of course; you ask them if they want to live next to poor people and they'll say no, of course not

I would like to be the person who designs the voting system for Elon Musk's fully-automated, self-sustaining eco-space station
'eco-space' hmmmm
The voting system is already solved and it is basically opposite of electoral college
that hyphen landed different i no
Let's make this even better: not just America
eco space-station
the uk 
yeah american democracy is not uniquely bad
it does have some uniquely bad aspects, like the power of the president
but every democracy - every society, really - faces similar issues
and the senate
Anti-immigration sentiment is on the rise.
The way Democrats lost ground in 2024? So did incumbents in a ton of the developed world, I think basically all of it if I recall correctly
2024 was really bad for incumbents yeah, outside of japan
For now we've only destroyed my hopes for the US, I still have hope for other countries, but ye go ahead and destroy it
😭
(which is basically a 1 party democracy)
perfect
corruption galore
Not every country has a 2 party system fortunately
like, for a comparison, in NYC everyone was paying attention to the democratic primary for mayor between mamdani and cuomo
because the winner of that dem primary is almost guaranteed to become mayor
so the primary is the "real" election
japan doesnt have party primaries but its basically similar
the LDP candidate almost always wins, but who becomes the LDP candidate is a real power struggle
yeah for sure. People would just shift their designations to something more granular
Sure but my point is that, incumbent losing ground everywhere means that Democrats losing in 2024 doesn't even feel like the Democrats messing up so much as... Yeah shit got harder in the last few years, even if Biden did a lot of things right
like ya we're both LDP, but I'm pro-youngs stay and I'm(some other guy here) pro-import youngs
And a subset of people blame who's in power for that
what is causing the global right wing shift anyway?
lol there's a lot right with it
immigration and media
ya sure biden's campaign whipped
If Republicans had the presidency in 2020-2024, and there was inflation (or likely an economic meltdown), Democrats would win now
Capitalism
Nah I don't think it's capitalism
it is very funny though that the person that set up a literal red-beret-wearing paramilitia is the least left-wing person in the NYC mayor race
I'm not sure I immediately buy that, but even if I did, incumbents losing ground is a function of people's views going more to the right
incumbents did lose everywhere but it was mostly to more right-wing parties
i think the UK is the more notable exception
They're being lied to, misinformed and manipulated for a huge part, the background has been set for that to happen
it's like do u want 1. a supercop or 2. a communist?
Capitalism was around before
but that was after 2 decades of blatant tory mismanagement
so i wouldnt really extrapolate from the UK
the tories were uniquely bad and labour was in a better position to capitalize
now that labour is in power, a right wing party is ascendant again.. but its not the tories
Tbh the unfortunate reality seems to be that a lot of the identity politics is just fundamentally what drives people
suggesting that i think that was just the tories being uniquely shit lol
i think people are not content with the cost of living
Like if you go back to the New Deal Coalition era in US history, the southern strategy kicks in not too long after they also start trying to prioritize civil rights and minority groups
but yeah, political affiliation is basically a cultural allegiance, similar almost to a religion
That's when Republicans start winning again big time
this is especially true in the us because of the strength of the 2 party system, but far from unique to it
if your parent voted republican, you almost certainly vote republican yourself
there are exceptions but i think its like <10%
this is less true for dems because dems attract more first-generation higher-educated voters
I wonder what the stats are like here
but its still a matter of cultural identity, just that the dem culture is less tied to family/parenting and more to economic/educational background
which should make sense, as dems are the more educated party in general
Lol i live in a country in which there are like 7 different seemingly "viable" political parties in the election, they change name around every 10 years or even less, they split, ally and do nonlinear stuff, so that kind of allegiance is hard to get
netherlands?
Also I remember hearing something about... You know that one senator who's a Democrat but doesn't wanna get on board with half of what everyone wants? And is why even when Dems have a slim majority they can't do that much?
most of my friends' parents voted conservative in the recent election, while most of my friends themselves voted liberal
No
I think he's from WV but I forget offhand
manchin? he's no longer a senator
but yeah
Right real
I don'thave a long history of voting
I find this random reddit comment more compelling
ah
So i might be lacking the history of the right
in fairness france has 3 like, "wings" to its politics, and the party names just change within those wings
theres the right wingers/le pen branch, the centrists/macron branch, and the leftists
people are pretty unlikely to cross "between" these wings
The number of wings kinda always change imo
But yeah I recall hearing commentary about that guy, namely that really he was winning as a Dem because they had so many people who were religiously Dem
but there is indeed a lot of movement within them
In the same way that many are religiously Republican
But if that group of voters, if you remove the party label, have more Republican vibes than Democrat
if you want to know the real problem with american politics though
its the small business owner
it's gonna be funny when people realize it just doesn't matter. There's no (effective) left wing alternative, the mainstream and conservative alternatives are bad. At least people are trying things.
Maybe it's a me problem to consider the anticapitalist party that makes 2% a branch of its own
the person living in a town of 30k people making $5 million/year off their car dealership
these people are stupidly wealthy relative to their education and cultural influence
and theyre mad about it
coming at small business!
Trump was unironically the worst thing they could have tried
It's a rounding error
they often employ illegal immigrants while themselves wanting mass deportation
the easiest to rule out is the first one to rule o ut!
that kinda thing
they have nothing better to do with their money than to fund culture war issues
Idk what's wrong with rounding up .3% to 2%
they had to rule his ass out twice 
first time they forgot to take notes
and both parties suck up to them because they have money, consistently vote, and get their communities to vote
classic it ain't government unless done twice
and because the idea of the "small business owner creating jobs" is basically mythologized in american culture
(despite the majority of job creation nowadays coming from larger businesses)
Oh... I meant that the entire party is a 2% rounding error off of the empty set
no one will defend big business, people hate amazon and walmart and shit
.3% is even worse
Honestly I can definitely buy that knowing... What I do about small business
I guess I should be a small business owner, will take a small loan of one million dollar to make my small 5 million per year profit
I haven't heard this opinion before, it's interesting.
read this article: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/05/rich-republicans-party-car-dealers-2024-desantis.html if youre interested in hearing about this demographic
its from 2 years ago
All I'm gonna say is, what I know of Texas truck folk is... Quite something LMFAO
I know a bunch of mid ass small business owners (software consultants, legal consultants, shop owners) who do want to pay their employees nothing, but they also aren't making 5 million dollars.
and they've got 1-5 employees
$5 million is the upper echelon, most of them indeed make a lot less
but they still make more than they'd earn working a salaried job
But yeah nah I do kinda think the left wants to attribute everything to capitalism when really... Even if it is inherently a problem, it's by far the only one
if you're half-decent at what you do you can make good money
I've seen this a bit in housing policy
isn't software consultant like ideal job
but not good enough money to be happy, so you start looking to dodge taxes, pay employees less, underpay overtime, etc
Everyone wants to say that the real reason there's a housing shortage is that you have massive landlord companies that hold everything off the market to raise prices
yea but you know it's like they literally get more value out of their employees than they pay, but I don't think it's anywhere near the extant that monopolic corporations are able to get
in big businesses, basically everyone with this sort of decision making power is salaried
like yeah, they'll get a bonus if they drive profits
And once the vacancies are occupied that's it gg housing crisis solved
and they employ way less people
but their income isnt directly tied to "how much is left over after i pay employees"
they get a flat income that's secure for them no matter what
and then maybe bonuses after
like just googling, large corporations are less than .5% of businesses but they employ 25% of everyone in the US
but if you own a small business, that $15/hr you pay that immigrant worker is money out of your bank account directly
its far more directly connected to them
and so naturally youre more incentivized to find ways to underpay them
or to lower your taxes or whatever
But... Yeah that doesn't seem to be the reality.
First off unless keeping half of your homes off the market doubles the rent of the rest, you still lose money by not renting out everything
But also vacancies just don't seem to account for that much of the housing shortage. We actually just need more houses
vacancy stats are misleading since often they dont account for natural turnover
Yup
like if someone leaves an apartment and it goes on the market for a month itll be marked as "vacant"
but like, obviously its gonna be filled soon
its not unused, just going through a change in occupancy
House are also investments, so the money is in the form of houses
They have a kind of exploit there
depends on what you want to do ofc
ikr like the minimum wage is so low and they smh expect the customers to pay tips to account for this?!
housing as an investment is a terrible institution though and it really sucks that its so normalized in "the american dream"
Hmm? You make more money off your investment by renting it than by having it sit (responding to Almond not Namington)
If you're living in your home you can't really treat it like an investment since you can't actually capitalize on it without downsizing
I don't see what's wrong with wanting to own a house
you can, by moving to a less wealthy region
I think for most americans, that represents the majority of their store of value
this isnt the problem, the problem is the expectation that your investment's prices will go up over time
I think it's annoying that for the 1%, buying and flipping, or making a "management company" and just exploitatively purchasing housing during crashes is a bit of an issue
in an ideal world, housing would get cheaper over time, like an old TV
Yeah I count that as downsizing. Even if it doesn't lead to a worst QOL, people have this mental stigma toward neighborhoods
I think you more than double the price by no renting half the market because housing isn't an offer and demand thing, it's just vital and people are ready to see cost climb to get it
this is how the japan market works for example
I think this is the case though
So it might be much mire valuable that way
in japan, housing is built to only last for a few decades before being upgraded, and so it has more of a shelf life
Sure but this is quantitative
I'm not sure how I would compare a tv and a house
and as a result, its treated as an ownable asset, but not an investment
they're definitely different sorts of investments
Not sure whatit means 
yes but the problem is that it creates perverse incentives
like lets say a politician had a magic button that, when pressed, cut all housing prices in half
would they press it?
you might say "obviously yes, thatd be great for young people"
but young people dont vote
suburban homeowners vote
and if their house's value goes from 800k to 400k, theyre gonna worry about their retirement
so they're going to punish the politician at the ballot box
in other words, "housing as an investment" means that people are incentivized to make housing less affordable
What you say indicates that home prices will go up a fair bit with vacancies but the exact number here is relevant
you can make that exact same argument for a lot of things. Investing in, say, a college or a healthcare plan.
those arent resellable assets
healthcare plans are resellable. A college is too.
If I'm a billionaire and I buy a college, I can sell it ten years later just fine
If you keep half the rentals off the market and the rents jump by 1.8, sure that jump reflects homes being necessary, but that makes vacancies not profitable
might be wrong about the healthcare plans
I'm just not sure I fully appreciate your motivation
What?
what's confusing you?
When people talk about investing in college that generally doesn't mean buying the university
Shutting down the real estate market or making it open only to government seems like a funny idea
i really dont see how the argument applies at all?
usually an investment in a college does not actually come with an ownership stake
also thats not really the case with public universities either
If there's less houses than people, people will pay exactly what the richest to be homeless can afford, they will all put the money necessary to ensure it, at least theoretically.
what's a university but just a bunch of houses?
but even if it did, the rest of the argument doesnt apply
oh well you can see how I meant it, it does mean that
a board of trustees and state legislation
and if it did mean that, I'm not sure how the argument wouldn't apply
did u guys know blackstone inc and co apparently don't make a dent in housing prices
Homes are a day to day thing that average people buy and treat like an investment, so they want the value of their investment to go up.
When people pay for a university education, they do not buy the university. They pay tuition to learn and get a degree
If the cost of university goes up, that does not mean you can go to Amazon and sell your degree for more money
well they probably have a nonzero influence but its almost assuredly very small
yeah like .1%
people like to blame big companies or foreign investors or whatever because it deflects blame
but it wont fix the root issue
population is increasing faster than the housing stock is
as long as that is true, prices will go up
so... two child policy?
what is the perverse incentive created by housing as an investment again? I'm not really sure how the magic bullet is relevant
where did you see this 
So increasing costs of university education isn't the same phenomenon as increasing home costs. People who own homes actively want the latter to happen, people who get a college education don't want the former
the increase in population comes largely from migration, and specifically internal migration
i.e. people from smaller communities moving to cities
Including after they have graduated and are no longer paying tuition
its not due to birthrates or foreign immigration
hmm okay that is harder to tackle
indeed, birthrates in most western countries are below replacement
kinda a ramble bro
Build more housing
same energy as just buy a house bro
No
people need houses but people who own houses would like to make a profit
I'm not responding to you
I was hoping namington might answer my last question
sorry to not literally @
Arbitrariness is inevitable—it’s simply a matter of where one navigates next.
Individuals can't do that easily but that is something to work toward as society, and is much more realistic
And that seems to be the answer to the problem
Or part of it
okay so people are immigrating to big cities for better educations and jobs, so what if rural lands were made to have equally good education, or better yet, the uneducated labour wasn't hold in such disdain
people expect to be able to resell their house to afford retirement or whatever
people therefore expect their house price to go up over time, at least in line with a "general investment" (say 5%/yr, like SPY)
these people are disproportionately influential on politics since they're both proportionately wealthy (most homeowners, while not upper class, are richer than renters) and very politically engaged (they actually vote in elections)
therefore, if youre a politician and you want to make housing more affordable, you risk pissing off this politically influential class if you make their houses more affordable as well
Zoning seems to be a barrier toward building more and higher density housing
since then you're making them lose money
Ah all good then
Those things are typically centralized, so that's why it happens in big cities
according to blackstone, black stone doesn't negatively affect teh market 
one thing some politicians have tried is basically making suburban homes into a luxury asset while trying to lower rental prices
this is enforced, for example, through rent controls on apartments
You sure it was blackstone and not another news source
but this just makes homeownership unobtainable for most people

okay I saw that shit somewhere else with none of their grubby hands on it
oh yeah I'm familiar with this, due to the political interplay rather than intrinsically
"Single-family rentals are not the cause of home price appreciation in recent years. Even prior to the Global
Financial Crisis, there were roughly 12 million single-family homes for rent.(2)
Blackstone owns only 0.06% of the 106 million single-family homes in the US, and institutions own only 0.5% of
all single-family homes in the United States.(3) Institutional owners acquired only 0.3% of the $2 trillion of US
homes sold in 2024, down ~90% since 2022 and at lowest levels since 2012. (4) Therefore, it is virtually impossible
for Blackstone to move the market." according to blackstone
oh goodness
By 2030, institutional investors could control 40% of U.S. single-family homes according to MetLife Investment Management.
yeah the process basically pushes housing policies to favor the wealthy anyways.
im seeing numbers ~274k homes owned by blackstone on multiple diff sources rn
apparently it seems like there are sources that say it helps, and ones that says it hurts
That would be a dramatic upscale if that figure provided by blackstone is true
blackrock/stone is atm a bit of a red herring
the issue is systemic like how namington described
indeed, but blackstone is only one of the investors
but vibez win out
I've read some stuff about utilization which has suggested that the housing market would be significantly chilled out if there were just more vacancy taxes
agreed
the phenomenon of the top 1% owning 5-10 homes and the top 5% owning 2-3
this is probably true, but assessing vacancy is actually more difficult than youd think
I'm the bottom owning none.
you can say "well, just tell people to declare a primary residence, and then tax any additional properties they own"
but then the husband declares House 1 his primary residence, and the wife declares House 2 hers
or whatever
its not an unsolvable problem but its complicated
Greeks somehow invovled drones to address their tax dodging problems
and whenever you have complicated issues regarding the enforcement of legislation, thats prime space for special interest groups to creep their way in and take advantage
Which is deeply funny
if a big company comes out against [obviously good policy], thats a bad PR look
they wont do that
instead, they'll show up to the committee in charge of implementing it, and give "suggestions"
and those "suggestions" just happen to exempt them from most of the consequences
Lift the house and attach numerous of wheels -- then it's no longer a "house" or a "home"...nor is it a property onto the land.
and that doesnt even make the papers
hm im trying to find actualy vacancy rates, because the 15mil figure seems to actually include homes that are already but but are seconds homes as well
so not really vacant imo
A lot of countries use google earth to see if people have pools to be taxed, so in rich neighboorhoods, you see all the houses blank to avoid that
Personal property vs Private Property
which drones circumvented apparently
I find it actually rather broad-minded and conceptual of the elderly rich to be able to look at, say, a home construction aid program from the government and say "well that's gonna depress the value of my home"
beautiful in a way
well usually they dont think of it like that
instead they might think "this will bring increased traffic and disrupt the neighbourhood character"
Politicians say the aim is to decrease prices so they don't have to actually use braincells
wdym? homes that are already what? and second homes?
dang that's significantly less beautiful
"i mean, the new building comes with a laundromat! imagine living next to the kind of person who uses a laundromat. I just don't want that in Skyview Springs"
"A housing unit is vacant if no one is living in it at the time of the interview, unless its occupants are only temporarily absent. In addition, a vacant unit may be one which is entirely occupied by persons who have a usual residence elsewhere. New units not yet occupied are classified as vacant housing units if construction has reached a point where all exterior windows and doors are installed and final usable floors are in place."
but I'd guess more likely
according to us census bearau
if im reading right
again, this is the kind of group who states that they want more affordable housing in the abstract, but they dont actually want to live next to poor people
so if i live in new york, but i have a house in maine, that maine is is listed as vacant
"yes yes, it'd be great to have fewer homeless people. they can all live in one neighbourhood on the opposite side of the city from me"
Lmao but also sad
i wonder how many of the 16 mil homes are actually second homes or smthn 
ima grind james brown spaceout
They can't be owned by corporations but wealthy people of that caliber can't be too common either
Going purely by vibes it gotta be around 14%
a second home is doable for upper middle class, given that you have a nest egg, I know a few people who havve a crappy main house, but a nice ass beach house
I felt bad for a dude once cuz his house was the worst i'd ever seen
until the beach house

tho yeah one of the people was lookin to sell off their beach house due to costs so idunno 
And goes back to normal self for vacations
I mean if you're upper middle, you're incentivized to have your second home and a rental or Airbnb or smth
pretty much
generally I would classify it as not having like a mansion, but a pretty big house and/or being able to take trips to italy each year, multiple trips
so uh, not me
most of the ones I know of have old money from prior generations that they're keeping the next egg from
and that most life expenses will not really be a worry
healthcare, car maintenance, home renovation, etc.
has anyone taken AP seminar and if so can you tell me about the course description and how it was for you
I’m Larry
hi Larry
hi, sly fox ✨
@steady cedar welcome to the mathcord! 
Konnichiwa









embed fail ahhahah
i'm doing good as well, i just finished eating lunch, watching youtube but downstairs to keep an eye on my puppy
he usually holds plenty of energy but with the heat he's resting a lot
what time zone
not even 12 for em lol
It’s 4pm now, CEST time zone
oh
Central Europe Summer Time
W