671–680 of 918 posts
The greatest thing about tight, upcoming elections is that governments actually start to do a tiny bit of what people want. Great result.
It leaves a bad taste in the mouth, doesn't it? Why haven't they taken action until now? People aren't children to be appeased by such gestures.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Governments actually do a lot of what people want, alas. See https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691138732/th...
Except that author argues for "the market" to be more in charge than governments, which baffles me because the market is also people. I'd be surprised if people pretend the market is still rational: see nfts. Or the modern stock market. Not to mention the market irrationally rewards short term good (or even bad) and long term bad behavior, but it does it consistently, so no long term good behavior can ever win out. S…
NFTs are an entertainment / art product. Them having non-zero value is the same as the original Mona Lisa selling for more than a perfect replica.
What about the stock market are you darkly hinting at?
> Not to mention the market irrationally rewards short term good (or even bad) and long term bad behavior, but it does it consistently, so no long term good behavior can ever win out. See: oil and gas industry.
I'm not sure what you are talking about. Could you be more explicit, please?
> All solutions that try to handwave people out of the equation, which includes market based ones, are the wrong path imo.
Sounds like a straw man? Who is waving people out of the equation and how?
[flagged]
While I would like to see the decriminalization of all drugs, I do not think President should act like an emperor and just pass EOs. EO are not meant for this sort of actions. Remember, next president is going to be Trump and he can pass even worse EOs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, there are some interesting discussions here (sometimes). I don't believe in echo chambers but about talking with people about ideas. I don't advocate for a complete shunning of technology, but rather a cautious approach towards it, somewhat like the Amish but with Christianity replaced with a reverence for nature. We will never stop using basic tools and fire but there has got to be a better optimum somewhere t…
"We will never stop using basic tools and fire but there has got to be a better optimum somewhere that uses less than all the wasteful stuff we're doing now." Yeah, better technology.
The greatest thing about tight, upcoming elections is that governments actually start to do a tiny bit of what people want. Great result.
It leaves a bad taste in the mouth, doesn't it? Why haven't they taken action until now? People aren't children to be appeased by such gestures.
[1] https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/07/biden-weed-executiv...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, there are some interesting discussions here (sometimes). I don't believe in echo chambers but about talking with people about ideas. I don't advocate for a complete shunning of technology, but rather a cautious approach towards it, somewhat like the Amish but with Christianity replaced with a reverence for nature. We will never stop using basic tools and fire but there has got to be a better optimum somewhere t…
Interesting outlook. I don't say you're 100% wrong, but getting enough people to make a difference to support you might be difficult. I think 99% of people never stop to question whether they should do anything, just rush headlong into the new consumable/widget.
I care about animals as much as I care about humans which is why I do not support technological growth, which just exports suffering into the animal world for our comfort.
The greatest thing about tight, upcoming elections is that governments actually start to do a tiny bit of what people want. Great result.
Unfortunately different people often want different things.
(unfortunately everyone doesn't agree on the definition of these terms)
(also: "But apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?")
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think recreational drug use is demonstrably good for society and part of all succesful civilizations. Take caffeine, sugar, alcohol and tobacco as the primary examples. All potent drugs and all taken habitually and en masse by all the most successful societies in the world.
All the most successful societies have tobacco users, therefore tobacco is good for society. Logic checks out.
Having a government which restricts personal freedoms too much for the sake of "societal good" may work in the short term or for specific issues but is clearly a negative in the long and broad terms. See the "west" of today for evidence of personal freedom combined with not-overly-restrictive-legislation being the most successful method of handling these things.
[flagged]
While I would like to see the decriminalization of all drugs, I do not think President should act like an emperor and just pass EOs. EO are not meant for this sort of actions. Remember, next president is going to be Trump and he can pass even worse EOs.
Ultimately they did not do that because they expect this cannabis inevitability to be disruptive and want the rollout to appease the pharmaceutical companies that donate to their campaigns.