Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 342 posts

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#331

Post by fexecve »

0dayz wrote: post #180
denton-scratch wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really; I refuse to vote for evil politicians (it keeps my karma nice and shiny). Unless voting is mandatory, you can simply not vote for anyone. My practice is to vote for someone that won't win, like the Greens, but for whom my vote might save them their deposit.

Sure, but then you can't either act surprised when the more evil politicians are elected and blame people for either not voting or voting for better politicians. You get what you vote or don't vote for

If you were already going to get what you didn't vote for, what's the difference?

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#332

Post by fexecve »

62346136 wrote: post #188
denton-scratch wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really; I refuse to vote for evil politicians (it keeps my karma nice and shiny). Unless voting is mandatory, you can simply not vote for anyone. My practice is to vote for someone that won't win, like the Greens, but for whom my vote might save them their deposit.

Refusing to vote doesn't change the outcome if the only choices are bad ones. If anything it means you effectively voted for whoever had the majority in the end and are still guilty of supporting the greater evil if they turn out to be such.

More importantly, not voting sends a message. A very important message. When no one votes (as is the case in Russia), it makes it clear to everyone that everyone else thinks that the system is corrupt. The government can still say "99% of people voted! WOohoo! Democracy!" but everyone knows that it's fake, because nobody they know voted. That's why some of the most corrupt countries on earth have mandatory voting.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#333

Post by dragonwriter »

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #329
dragonwriter wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A referendum is structurally incapable of enacting policies with minority support, for good or for bad. With a single-subject rule, that’s often (but not always) true; without it, it is less true, because policies can be packaged to achieve a combined majority, so long as there isn’t a majority that thinks it is important enough to defeat any part to overcome any support within that majority for other parts. (Even…

Even without a single-subject rule, there's zero enforcement mechanism to prevent other interest groups from reneging on the packaging agreement and defeating one or more parts in detail. There's no stable point you can get via referenda if (policy A + policy B), (policy not-A), and (policy not-B) all would garner majority votes.

> Even without a single-subject rule, there’s zero enforcement mechanism to prevent other interest groups from reneging on the packaging agreement and defeating one or more parts in detail.

Sure, after the package passes, groups can try to form separate coalitions to pick things out of it; there are methods to protect them, generally (such as putting together a similar coalition to put up a trigger bill that deletes the parts the other groups want to protect conditioned on the other repeal passing, undermining its support.)

> There’s no stable point

Yeah, real world politics is generally not about finding stable equilibria, as much are the things most easily amenable to theoretical analysis.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#334

Post by [deleted] »

xwdv wrote: post #231
butlerm wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airlines did not qualify for PPP loans. They did receive substantial direct support from the federal government however. PPP "loans" were reserved for businesses with less than five hundred employees that weren't worth very much (relatively speaking) either.

So even better than PPP loans??

[deleted]

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#335

Post by butlerm »

xwdv wrote: post #231
butlerm wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airlines did not qualify for PPP loans. They did receive substantial direct support from the federal government however. PPP "loans" were reserved for businesses with less than five hundred employees that weren't worth very much (relatively speaking) either.

So even better than PPP loans??

Probably. All told the government basically covered 18 months of airline payroll expenses but the airlines had to pay about 25% of that back. PPP "loans" were intended as payroll support for a shorter period with 100% forgiveness in most cases.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#337

Post by Sakos »

noisy_boy wrote: post #190
Sakos wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We accidentally dropped a screw in your pizza and had to cancel it as a safety issue. Sorry, no refunds. Brilliant!

I think the response to that would be (based on the assumption that this safety clause is being routinely thrown around), "why do you keep dropping screws in so many pizzas?"

Based on our non-biased investigation, our rate of screws in pizzas isn't any higher than that of our competitors. (subtext: Financial incentive)

If you want less screws in pizzas, maybe you should petition your representatives in government [who we've paid off to ignore the issue]

In fact, we'd support any legislative action to subsidize investment into improving the rates of screws in pizzas across the industry because we care about your well-being so much [as long as there's no oversight over how those funds are actually used, papa needs a new Ford F150]

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#338

Post by adaml_623 »

college_physics wrote: post #179
adaml_623 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really unclear comment. Who are you talking about

its been revealed by other comments. it might be a bit unfair to single out any particular person as responsible for providing intellectual cover to a manifestly inaquate ideology. he is basically just the convenient reference for an entire school of thought. had he not existed somebody else would have had that role.

So you're refusing to name the "convenient reference for an entire school of thought"??

I guess I'll see if Google can enlighten me

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#339

Post by esarbe »

trinsic2 wrote: post #311
esarbe wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you make it too easy for yourself to drop responsibility. "Both parties are corrupt, everything is corrupt, the system is corrupt" is just a cope out. There are efforts to introduce alternative voting systems that make 3rd party systems viable. There are efforts to get ~~corruption~~ lobbying out of the system, ... If you really think that the system is "totally corrupt"; do something to fix it.

Im not AT ALL responsible for a system that is not controlled by the people. That has been as clear as day for the past 50 years. If you are supporting it, you are the problem. You are supporting corruption by playing its game. Yes my "do something" is focusing on supporting grassroots people and efforts that we have direct control over. I have no interest in supporting systems that are not backed up by common indivi…

> Im not AT ALL responsible for a system that is not controlled by the people.

In the US system all power - nominally - derives from the people. And it still is controlled by the people, as the balance-of-power upset in 2016 - when Trump was elected GOP candidate despite the GOP leadership disfavoring him - showed. But yes; most of the time the two party system is doing a laudable job keeping the the people disunited over petty squabbles, while the moneyed class is poking the fire. And you feeling that "the system [..] is not controlled by the people" is just part of the strategy; you are still an actor in the system and as such you bear responsibility.

> You are supporting corruption by playing its game.

I'm not permitted to participate in US American politics. I'm just an observer. The system I'm living in is a semi-direct democracy with federal, regional and local levels, on each of which I do participate. It's pretty much "by the people, for the people". Still; not without flaws.

> Yes my "do something" is focusing on supporting grassroots people and efforts that we have direct control over.

That's a laudable effort, I congratulate you. Are you aware of other grassroot movements that try to break up the two-party system and to get money out of politics?

What are "common individuals"?

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#340

Post by jjav »

ericmay wrote: post #207
xg15 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The free market at work. "Do you want me to provide plain bad service or bad service that also puts the customers' lives at risk? The choice is yours, dear regulator!" But more seriously, I think the sibling posts are right here: A plane crash is more than a monetary risk: In the worst case, managers of the airline could be criminally liable for lost lives.

The free market at work also generated the airlines and travel industry that so many enjoy. We created the FAA and other entities to regulate the market participants to make sure we get the outcome we desire while balancing generating economic activity. If something isn’t working right, it’s the responsibility of regulators to fix the problem, or ultimately the people to elect representatives who will. This casual cy…

> The free market at work also generated the airlines and travel industry that so many enjoy.

Not so sure about that. Remember, the airline industry used to be very regulated and it was an absolutely wonderful experience.

The very young might not have experienced it, but flying was really great. No extra fees for anything, everything was included. Service and food for the whole plane was better than one gets in business class today. Flights were not jam packed full all the time, there was plenty of space to stretch and always space for your luggage. Plenty of knee room even in the cheapest seats. Flying was great.

Then it got deregulated and it has been a race to the bottom ever since. Less and less amenities, less space, even less space, every little thing is an extra fee, every flight is jam packed full, seats are within inches of each other, no room for your carryon because every square inch of space has been oversold, passengers getting bumped regularly due to oversold flights. Flying is miserable and I'd rather never do it again.

Post reply on HN