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

Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

washingtonstatestandard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 355 posts

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#331

Post by simne »

hmmm-i-wonder wrote: post #324
simne wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Actual untrained civilian forces with nothing but rifles This is myth. Ukrainian war began in 2014 and all adequate Ukrainians learned books about war or have some training, and this was very respectful form of pastime. Plus, many Ukrainians just served in military from 2014 consciously, this was great patriotic boom. To be honest, I think, if Ukrainian science and education was reformed before war 2022, we would b…

My point is untrained, inexperienced and under-equipped civilians have little chance against a military. Once you start giving them training, organizing and arming them with a logistics arm backing them the discussion completely changes. Ukraine is an example of reserve/partially trained and backed forces being able to make a significant difference, but its also an example of how unorganized civilian resistance on it…

Mostly agree. Ukraine lost territories mostly before 2022, because population there was mostly anti-Ukrainian (what interest me, many refugees from Ukrainian east, become more pro-Ukrainian than people in center of country, where nearly not seen occupation).

I would be agree about non-trained people before 2014, but from 2014 we have even experience of self-defense, because in February 2014 government just not paid money to militia (soviet analogue for police), and they just avoid to maintain law.

2014 was not full-scale war in standard understanding, it was more like war against terrorists, but it was very serious, with many cases of terrorists used military weapons and military equipment.

Many people participated in self-defense after 2014 joined military, others participated in trainings, and yes, businesses and civilians supported these trainings, and government don't resisted.

So, on 2022, really many people on territory controlled by government have participated in trainings and even was experienced in real battles.

Mariupol, and other cities now occupied (after 2022), because there was anti-Ukrainian population and they believed will live better under Russia.

Also few border cities occupied (Kherson, Energodar, where Nuclear Power Plant placed), because Ukrainian military avoid to conduct serious city battles, to avoid huge civilian casualties.

And I must admit, Ukrainian military before approx Summer 2023, suffered from shortage of heavy weapons and air support, but now forces are nearly balanced. BTW what also interesting, huge part of Ukrainian weapons used on zero are now FPV drones made in Ukraine.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#332

Post by rayiner »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #327
buyucu wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for a few years only, and with tiny surpluses compared to deficits that came before and after. and the deficits exploded again. I can hold my breath for a few seconds, but not for a 10 minutes. it is like that. and that is only the federal deficit. local governments are also running massive deficits.

I mean, the CBO has a range of policies for fixing the federal deficit, most of which are pretty reasonable. I'm a fan of taxing the better off more (but I'm not a US citizen or taxpayer so that's easy for me to say).

Define "the better off?" I also agree with you in principle, but you're overlooking an important fact about American politics. The mainstream "left" in the U.S. is dominated by affluent professionals who hate paying taxes as much as any Reagan Republican. They pay lip service to the idea of "taxing the better off more," but by that they mean "billionaires." That's not a big enough tax base to raise the $1-2 trillion we would need to fix the deficit.

That's why you get a ridiculous situation where even the center-left party is promising not to raise taxes on people making under $400k/year. In reality, such a tax plan wouldn't even meaningfully raise taxes on people making $1 million a year. You can't solve the deficit by raising taxes if you're unwilling to tax 99.5% of the population.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#333

Post by riku_iki »

acdha wrote: post #326
riku_iki wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

half of the country supports him, so he is not really dictator.

It’s a third, but also that’s not a criteria for “dictator” – the term refers to unchecked power, and while over time that tends to build resentment it’s not a given. This is especially true when they favor certain religious or ethnic groups where the beneficiaries like the dictator and everyone else does not.

Its up to discussion if current president's power is really unchecked.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#334

Post by buyucu »

rayiner wrote: post #332
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, the CBO has a range of policies for fixing the federal deficit, most of which are pretty reasonable. I'm a fan of taxing the better off more (but I'm not a US citizen or taxpayer so that's easy for me to say).

Define "the better off?" I also agree with you in principle, but you're overlooking an important fact about American politics. The mainstream "left" in the U.S. is dominated by affluent professionals who hate paying taxes as much as any Reagan Republican. They pay lip service to the idea of "taxing the better off more," but by that they mean "billionaires." That's not a big enough tax base to raise the $1-2 trillion…

How much smaller would the US deficit be if America wasn't invading multiple countries at the same time?

Taxes are only one side of this problem. The other side is expenses. Empires are expensive.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#335

Post by mindslight »

rayiner wrote: post #317
mindslight wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being able to trade arbitrarily-devaluable IOUs from a future America for real goods today is a fantastic deal. Putting it in the kid terms that seem to be necessary for this dynamic of endless "questioning" - if Bobby can get ice cream treats from the corner store by giving them pieces of paper with his picture on them, that's pretty awesome for Bobby. In the bigger picture - the reserve currency dynamic has allowed…

> In the bigger picture - the reserve currency dynamic has allowed many things to grow detached from reality, and those things are in dire need of reform (eg the everything bubble) It seems like you don’t even disagree about the problem, you just think we should chip away at the symptoms instead of getting at root causes. Free ice cream is bad! Bobby is going to not learn how to work for a living, and he’s going to g…

The root causes are stability and general wealth. Working to "fix" those is abjectly retarded.

If letting our industrial base wither is a problem, then spend some of the resources we get for merely exporting our currency on explicitly building it back up. Those IOU's can be traded for machine tools just as easily as disposable "fast fashion".

If the all-asset bubble is a problem, then stop letting the Federal Reserve drop interest rates to the point that wild or highly-leveraged speculation makes sense.

If the churn of cheap non-repairable throwaway crap is a problem, then ban it and/or mandate repairability outright.

If the proliferation of do-nothing middle managers in government/academic/industry is a problem, then figure out how to increase accountability, actual meritocracy, and general nimbleness. Turning the financial and authoritarian screws mostly hurts people who are focused on doing their jobs rather than focused on keeping them.

Humans are not wild animals. Free ice cream is an unequivocally good thing - it can always not be eaten. If little Bobby is eating unhealthy amounts of ice cream, then his parents should stop him from doing that independent of financial constraints.

If little Bobby is not developing a work ethic, then teach him to work hard directly and teach him how to save his money for larger goals. Certainly don't think that teaching him to live hand to mouth for ice cream treats is doing him some kind of service.

These are all problems of abundance. The destructionist movement seems to be based on wanting to revert to some idyllic version of the past with a struggle we understood. Whereas we really need to be solving the new problems we face.

As it stands, the destructionist approach is going to leave us without financial wealth or industrial wealth. Tariffs and allowing increased corporate externalities are basically the economic equivalent of "thoughts and prayers" .

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#336

Post by 0xffff2 »

buyucu wrote: post #334
rayiner wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define "the better off?" I also agree with you in principle, but you're overlooking an important fact about American politics. The mainstream "left" in the U.S. is dominated by affluent professionals who hate paying taxes as much as any Reagan Republican. They pay lip service to the idea of "taxing the better off more," but by that they mean "billionaires." That's not a big enough tax base to raise the $1-2 trillion…

How much smaller would the US deficit be if America wasn't invading multiple countries at the same time? Taxes are only one side of this problem. The other side is expenses. Empires are expensive.

Which countries are we currently invading? Regardless, in the 2023 budget Social security far outstrips defense, Medicare is just a shade higher, and Medicaid is not far behind. I'm entirely in favor of slimming down the US military industrial complex, but doing so isn't going to fix the deficit. You could 0 out the defense budget entirely and there would still be another trillion dollars of deficit to deal with.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#337

Post by acdha »

riku_iki wrote: post #333
acdha wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a third, but also that’s not a criteria for “dictator” – the term refers to unchecked power, and while over time that tends to build resentment it’s not a given. This is especially true when they favor certain religious or ethnic groups where the beneficiaries like the dictator and everyone else does not.

Its up to discussion if current president's power is really unchecked.

Sure, but that’s what makes someone a dictator, not whether they poll well.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#338

Post by hmmm-i-wonder »

riku_iki wrote: post #330
hmmm-i-wonder wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't think this is true. They were formed at the day of invasion (or few days before) with those who voluntarily enlisted(very many people), they received some old AK with bullets, and then moved to frontline to dig tranches, and that's what stopped advancements, because it is still extremely difficult to clear infantry which dug into the ground. Read your own wiki link I guess? There was multiple losses before t…

> a bunch of untrained and unorganized civilians with only rifles significantly hold back the russian advance on their own I didn't say anything like that, though many were untrained and with only rifles. I said that in urban environment it is still soldier on foot is deciding factor, and in Ukraine freshly enlisted territorial defense units dug into the ground and stopped invasion. > More like 70 million+ loyalists…

We're talking about the average citizen with a rifle and no training against a dictator/tyrant.

In Ukraines case, that civilian group was not initially effective at stopping the attack, but your example of the defence force is an example of a supported reserve force digging in backed by logistics and support from a military/country.

Those are 2 different things. My contention is that unrestricted access to arms doesn't in any way turn an untrained populace into a reserve force.

You're attempt to frame it as "dictator + small loyalist military" as well as focusing solely on urban settings are a fun hypotheticals, but that's all they are. The reality is that actions like that in a developed nation result in an almost certain war if external or fracturing of countries internally in any real scenario with civilians supporting militaries/militias on the various sides.

There is no reasonable assumption that unrestricted access to arms will stop a tyrant from destroying the country and tossing it into some form of civil war. The accompanying fact those people aren't trained, organized, or supported by logistics is the fundamental reason why they will fail to be effective. (I could also digress into the well organized militia and if we want to get all originalist about the interpretation but this has been unproductive enough)

What we are really discussing is whether gun regulations make sense. Extreme edge cases like your hypotheticals fail to make a convincing argument they are a negative for society, especially when contrasted against the harms lack of regulations has been shown to cause society.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#339

Post by riku_iki »

hmmm-i-wonder wrote: post #338
riku_iki wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a bunch of untrained and unorganized civilians with only rifles significantly hold back the russian advance on their own I didn't say anything like that, though many were untrained and with only rifles. I said that in urban environment it is still soldier on foot is deciding factor, and in Ukraine freshly enlisted territorial defense units dug into the ground and stopped invasion. > More like 70 million+ loyalists…

We're talking about the average citizen with a rifle and no training against a dictator/tyrant. In Ukraines case, that civilian group was not initially effective at stopping the attack, but your example of the defence force is an example of a supported reserve force digging in backed by logistics and support from a military/country. Those are 2 different things. My contention is that unrestricted access to arms doesn…

> a supported reserve force

my observation is that they were not reserve. They were patriotic citizens who voluntarily enlisted at the day of invasion. Gun ownership and hence training was much lower in Ukraine compared to US. And wiki says about the same: they were some semi-organized units before invasion, and during invasion 100k people volunteered and joined them, and they were absorbed by army.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#340

Post by wwweston »

rayiner wrote: post #134
wwweston wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full franchise democracy in the US is arguably younger than living memory. So are a lot of things we take for granted as civil rights (and some of powers that be seem determined to roll those back). But even assuming the premise, it’s not hard to see how generations who’ve enjoyed a privilege might be more likely to take it for granted than societies that have more recently gained it, and are within living memory of…

Civil rights is orthogonal to democracy. Creating a democratic country like the U.S. is the real achievement. Most countries never come close to accomplishing that.

The founding of the US is absolutely a remarkable achievement. A group of colonies successfully broke from global imperial power to successfully establish a society heavily influenced by the best enlightenment thinking and classical civil philosophy. It's really something. Looking at some populist reactionary movements that happened in the early 19th century, one wonders if the outcome could have been as good as the US constitution even 30 years later.

That said:

* it existed in a historic and cultural context of states that had already made significant movements in that direction -- it was a big leap, but it wasn't simple 0-1. More like a 0.4 with a lot of the relevant ideals and institutions (elections, representation, courts, legislative bodies, executive authority, rule of law , etc) fairly well developed and demonstrated in various ways pulled together into a coherent 0.75 and woven in with enlightenment ideals as expressed in documents like the declaration of independence.

* There is at least a partial linear dependence between civil rights and democracy. The franchise relationship is where it's strongest. Democracy is effective, principled, & honored ballot access. Without any effective franchise what you have instead is an opinion poll. And mere fractional access to the franchise walks elections & representation down from "1" -- it is literally the coefficient you have to multiple a "1" democracy by in order to arrive at its effective democratic nature.

That's just the start, though. It's a bit like that old Churchill/Shaw/Twain/whoever story where Clever Guy™ is having a conversation with a woman:

    “Would you sleep with a stranger if he paid you £1,000,000?” 

    “Yes.” 

    “And if he paid you £5?”

    “£5? What do you think I am?”

    “We’ve already established that, now we're just haggling over the price.”
Ha-ha! A country without a universal franchise has already established that some people don't get a democratic say, it's just haggling over who those people are. And that means it can haggle over whether you get to be one of those people. And even eventually over whether anyone gets to be one of those people, over whether it is democratic at all.

This generalizes to other rights. In order to have them guaranteed to anyone, they must be guaranteed to everyone. It's why constitutional guarantees tend to be features of constitutional representative democracies since the enlightenment, imperfect leap though the US is.

The big question is if the US (among others) can finish climbing the ladder when the political headwinds seem to be against "guaranteed to everyone."

Post reply on HN