They would solve the problem if it weren't so valuable.
You write the wrong word, which is phonetically different (so a completely different word), but you write it "the same" (so you write the right word)?
"i hit be for the first time last week, but im a mid C at best"
"be" should be "B" in this case.
(the "different" in my previous post was "strike through" in markdown with the ~~'s. That didnt come across)
I am sorry - - I will try to proofread more often. English is hard enough without having to go through homonym-like substitutions to figure out what we mean!
Why have enough housing when rents go up during scarcity?
Why make life better for your working class citizens when you can import fresh ones to exploit?
Seems like there is a systemic problem that is causing the same issues in many countries.
Pharmaceutical, hospitals, equipment manufacturers.
Not everyone profits maximally from healthy people.
Lobbying and regulatory capture have led to a less than free market, that people expect to function as a free market, but the government intervention has been too great.
First, it use to be the case that companies provide jobs for life and they were more tuned to helping society rather than just looking at the bottom line. That has changed over the years.
Healthcare in the US has been on a steady decline. HMO middlemen and insurance companies with a deny claims profit model are only making it worse. Luigi event comes to mind. Hospitals in other countries offer same if not superior service for a fraction of your US copay. The ICE article on Medicaid data https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44605618 seems to has some ulterior motive to reduce the Medicaid usage by non-citizens.
The two tiered system of justice has always existed, we just have better ways to highlight it with mobile devices and social media. If we look at how the Arab Spring was enabled by Twitter, more of this is happening. But at the same time deepfakes are offering a new way to discredit truth tellers.
Large entrenched monopolies love new regulation as it builds a regulatory moat that prevents new, smaller competitors from entering the market. This will only drive people to markets outside of the US or to find ways to use AI to reduce the number of human jobs needed.
AI whether we reach AGI or not is already good enough to replace a good chunk of jobs. Larger companies that are not model companies move a little slower and it will take a year or two to catch up before people realize what happened. Education has not adapted slow enough, so there will be a large number of college grads in debt who will not be able to find jobs.
The US 35 trillion debt is not helping car loan rates and mortgage rates. There will be a whole generation of young people who will not be able to afford a house, part of the American dream. This will further push the divide between the Elite and boomers and the younger generations.
The current administration seems to have the goal of acceleration of that end.
Not reform, not improvement-- destruction.
They have literally written down, stated in interviews, repeatedly, that these are what their goals are.
They want to cripple the government, neuter every check on their power, and use the ensuing chaos to reshape the United States into a series of neofeudal states where "accountable monarchs" (tech billionaires who think they're gods) rule over the masses.
This isn't hyperbole.
And they are using the bloated, dementia-addled, shambling corpse of a god-king to do it while half of everyone stands around refusing to believe that they are doing what they stated and wrote down they were going to and the other half cheers them on because they're "sticking it to the dirty Mexicans, DEI welfare queens, and trannies".
"Unintended consequence" my ass.
What is happening, and will continue to happen, is by active conscious choice and design.
Something I find baffling - even disturbing - is the number of apparently intelligent, reasonable people who hear what these bad actors say, read what these bad actors write, but repeatedly construct alternative interpretations that amount to "when they say they to want break our society, they actually mean something else"
bell-cot•6mo ago
roenxi•6mo ago
The issue seems to be that the US voting public is overwhelmed by the complexity of understanding what a good idea looks like or what is in their own interests. A lot of that can be laid at the feet of the Boomers though. Hopefully they pull through, the US has historically had a remarkable ability to lurch out of disaster and sort of shamble on into accidental prosperity.
cool_dude85•6mo ago
I can't agree. The highest profile elections we are offered have, in the recent past, been choices between absolutely terrible options. In 2016 we could choose between a largely reviled Iraq War supporter and Trump, in 2020 the senile Biden and Trump, and in 2024 a continuation of Biden's term, represented by a poor politician hand-picked by the party and Trump, the one-term loser.
In my adult life, the best candidate I have been able to vote for is a guy whose signature achievement in office was passing a heritage foundation Healthcare bill centered around fining me for not bolstering Blue Cross' bottom line. How am I supposed to vote in my interests?
bigstrat2003•6mo ago
cool_dude85•6mo ago
amanaplanacanal•6mo ago
DerArzt•6mo ago
amanaplanacanal•6mo ago
yifanl•6mo ago
no_wizard•6mo ago
How are these equivalent to each other? That’s such false statement I don’t know how anyone can give it a pass at this point
cool_dude85•6mo ago
Maybe you might feel that Harris was herself an objectively good option, one who would successfully solve some of the problems brought up in the article. I personally find that very hard to believe.
wpm•6mo ago
Because those very same "sane" economic policies didn't actually do much perceivable improvement to the lives of most Americans. TFA even mentioned that Harris probably would've fired Lina Khan because "number must go up". Sure, being able to cancel Netflix with a button is nice but people want fucking healthcare and for there to be a shred of dignity in working an honest living.
People in 2020 were suffering, so they voted for change. People in 2024 were suffering, so they voted for change. People in 2026 will be suffering, so they'll probably vote for change...people in 2028....
no_wizard•6mo ago
Whether they were applicable to the day to day realities of many Americans is beside the point I'm making. It of course matters and goes a long way to explain how the Democrats lost the election in 2024, however, the policies weren't going to intentionally lead the US economy into a recession and promote economic uncertainty, shatter trust with our historic allies etc.
ndiddy•6mo ago
Of course if you're looking at things purely from a logical, calculating, "lesser-evil" perspective Harris is the better candidate, but a lot of people can plainly see that their quality of life has gotten worse compared to how their parents and grandparents were doing at their age. A large amount of people who see things getting worse and feel like they have nothing to lose is how you get political extremism and candidates like Trump winning elections.
bloomca•6mo ago
motorest•6mo ago
I am perplexed by this blend of comments. It reads like a desperate attempt to whitewash and normalize the trainwreck that is the Trump administration. Trump is not in the same category as any other president in terms of utter destruction and dismantlement of social safety nets available to US citizens. They are not the same.
It's baffling and completely unserious to even insinuate Harris, by extrapolating Biden's work and legacy, would be equivalent or comparable to the hostility the Trump administration exhibited towards the working class and low income families. Biden fought hard to push forward policies like the student debt forgiveness program, which Trump-supporting republicans did everything in their reach to eliminate and revert. They are not the same. Even suggesting they are is insulting to everyone's intelligence.
ndiddy•6mo ago
I dislike the mentality that if someone criticizes one party, it means they must automatically support the other. Those are two different things! Personally I think this administration is the worst for America since the Reagan administration.
> I am perplexed by this blend of comments. It reads like a desperate attempt to whitewash and normalize the trainwreck that is the Trump administration. Trump is not in the same category as any other president in terms of utter destruction and dismantlement of social safety nets available to US citizens. They are not the same.
The point I was trying to make is that US-style capitalism, where the government exists to serve large corporations and the people who run them, inherently results in social and political instability. Ignoring the average person in favor of stock market gains creates a large number of people who are hopeless, see things getting worse, and feel like they have nothing to lose, which is when you start seeing right-wing populists winning elections.
> It's baffling and completely unserious to even insinuate Harris, by extrapolating Biden's work and legacy, would be equivalent or comparable to the hostility the Trump administration exhibited towards the working class and low income families. Biden fought hard to push forward policies like the student debt forgiveness program, which Trump-supporting republicans did everything in their reach to eliminate and revert. They are not the same. Even suggesting they are is insulting to everyone's intelligence.
The Democrats have shown time and time again that they don't care about earning people's votes. Even the gains the Biden administration had made for things like antitrust law and consumer protection were set to get rolled back under the Harris administration. "At least we're not Trump" is not an inspiring message. I think it's been telling that when the Democrats had a narrow majority in Congress during the Biden administration, over and over they threw up their hands saying "we don't have the votes" and let the Republicans stop Biden from implementing his agenda, but now that the Republicans have a narrow majority suddenly Trump has all the power in the world to dismantle the government piece by piece. After what happened with David Hogg getting forced out of the party for saying that maybe we should have some younger people representing us (note that 3 Democrat representatives have died in office this year), I genuinely believe that party leadership would rather keep losing elections than give an inch to even the most milquetoast reforms. We're left with a party of septuagenarians whose skills are in clinging to power, not delivering positive results for their constituents.
ndiddy•6mo ago
queenkjuul•6mo ago
Where's the Senate parliamentarian nowadays? Sure doesn't seem to stand in Trump's way
no_wizard•6mo ago
[0]: https://www.unitedforalice.org/essentials-index
queenkjuul•6mo ago
no_wizard•6mo ago
They aren't equivalent as you said, and thats what I am solely discussing
motorest•6mo ago
Pause. Even though I'm not a US citizen, it is very hard to try to spin Biden's term as anything other than one of US's best governments in decades.
Comparing Biden's term to any of Trump's terms, specially the utter pyrrhic trainwreck that is the current term, and proclaim they are comparable is simply something not rooted in reality.
Try to be serious.
cool_dude85•6mo ago
Concretely, I lost real pay under Biden; at the same time, buying a house where I live probably is half again as expensive as it had been. Even my most narrow economic interest is that both these problems get fixed. Do you think Harris would have done that?
motorest•6mo ago
I beg you to pause, take a deep breath, look at any of Trump's terms, and compare it with the output of Biden's administration.
Do that, and you simply cannot say with a straight face that there was no choice or difference in outcomes. Not even as a joke.
If you are honest with yourself and with everyone, you will acknowledge how outlandish that idea is.
Let's be serious.
cool_dude85•6mo ago
motorest•6mo ago
queenkjuul•6mo ago
Biden let hundreds of thousands continue to die not taking serious action about COVID (Trump of course did the same, and they both did it previously for Line Go Up reasons). He crushed strikes, he failed to pass promised reforms despite congressional majorities.
Nobody here has said they're equivalent. Nobody. Biden not being as bad as Trump does not mean Biden was working for the interests of the working class, is what is being said. If your political project refuses to engage with the working class, you can't blame them for not voting for you.
queenkjuul•6mo ago
bell-cot•6mo ago
True. But the ever-upward cost of housing is obviously a major locus of one-way asset prices, and The Number Go Up Rule.
queenkjuul•6mo ago