whoops i didn't mean to bump this lol

lock plox?...

And I suppose you think you can change it?

maybe not me specifically, but yes, the cause that i'm a part of can potentially change it

So why care that the system is wrong? Who are you to judge this system?

what do you mean

if i realize that the game i'm playing is rigged or broken in some fashion, i shouldn't care about that?

why can't i judge the system? i see bad stuff happening everywhere--i'm not just gonna accept it

See this is where i find the idea of morality a little silly. Survival should really be your number 1 goal. This idea that it's "morally wrong" to survive makes absolutely no sense to me.

it's not that it's morally wrong to survive--it's futile to survive
there's no point in survival--you're gonna die either way

and whether you die when you're eighty or when you're forty, it doesn't really make that much of a difference

the only thing that's "wrong" by any measure is the system itself

Seeing as we don't consider a lion immoral for eating a wild gazelle

i do

lions are repugnant and evil and useless

just because they're biologically too stupid to realize what they're doing, doesn't make what they're doing okay

that is my question

They sucked.

They were fired over a lake near this ore dock that we have, and 60% of the fireworks hit the underside of the dock <_<

Same exact thing happened last year. At one point, it started making this BOOM--BOOM--BOOM noise, a little too harsh-sounding to be a simple detonation, at which point we left, because we didn't want to die.

Hopefully they didn't completely nuke that ore dock, though. Thing's kind of a landmark <_<

i guess i've been invited to watch a bunch of people fire a load of toxic chemicals into the sky tonight

so i guess that's what's up

I'm guessing that with "generation 1-6" you mean old stuff like SNES N64 etc. Am I correct?

yeah

i have all those crazy rare consoles from the early generations that crashed the market in '83
i suppose they're all mostly my dad's, but we're both collectors

Wait? Wii U? What about the 3ds? Where do people on this site usually play smash bros/pokémon on? Where did people get the legendary 4 or w/e title it was?

i have a 3DS, too

i lose track of all these handhelds, so i don't really ever tend to factor them in

everything from generations 1-6 (and i mean everything)

plus the PS3, Wii, and Wii U

neat

The point is that rebuilding what is currently perfectly-serviceable infrastructure would be a gross mis-allocation of resources.

Fair enough.

But this is fallacious precisely because of that mis-allocation I mentioned above. You'd be essentially forcing resources into an endeavour that you've only managed to make productive by your prior destruction. You're creating a need for something unnecessarily, and then arguing it promotes growth.

I'll have to remember this fallacy for anti-natalist discussions...

But yeah, I see what you mean now. Just, when you say "growth", I think you mean "net growth". Fixing a problem is growth, incontrovertibly. Whether it's a net growth is a different story, and I'm sure that's what you meant there...

I think whether or not it's a good use of money comes down to opinion, so...

Sure, but I'd hardly call thinking Sanders would be a regulation/subsidy man "speculation". He did, for instance, vote to bar a website promoting Yucca Mountain as a potential nuclear waste site. I don't know about your priors on nuclear energy, but that seems heavy handed to me.

I haven't been paying attention to the nuclear debate, really. From what I understand... those against it believe its too potentially dangerous, and those for it think they're uneducated and don't understand how it works. Personally, I've been taught that nuclear energy is too dangerous to be playing with and that it isn't being taken seriously as a source of energy (courtesy of middle school science education), so as a result, I haven't really delved into it. I guess I should, now that it's a hot button...

Anyways...

Quote

In what ways?

Are you asking how trade unions misbehave, or about the benefits of works councils?

The former.

Republicans generally have a bias to raising the EITC before raising the MW. But, as you said earlier when I "speculated" about Bernie's platform, details are ubiquitously in short supply. Doing nothing at the federal level isn't entirely infeasible as a solution, either; if the EITC isn't going to be expanded, then it'd be better to allow the states and cities to determine their minimum wage. Doing nothing, and leaving it at $7.25/hr, it better than hiking it across the country to $15/hr which both Clinton and Sanders support.

... agree to disagree

Well my main point was that Sanders' contention that college is unaffordable is mostly incorrect, but if you're asking if I think less people should go to university then yeah, I do. Tertiary education is supposed to separate the wheat from the chaff at the end of high school (or in my case, sixth form) and it's clearly failing in that regard if half of all the US's graduates are over-educated for their jobs. And, not to mention, it harms those who do get an appropriate degree by inflating the supply of degrees across the economy.

in my opinion, it's not that less people should be getting degrees--it's that getting a degree shouldn't be essentially mandated by the state if you want to be well-off in your society

so to that end, i guess i would be opposed to making college "affordable", if it would essentially turn a college degree into a requirement--however, it's hard for me to say that, considering that i still highly value education

i don't believe that the main function of schooling should be to land somebody a well-paying job in the future
it should be to educate the public, period

and if that's what you want to do--be educated, then yeah, i think they have the right to do so without spending a lifetime's worth of money

Quote

Why would there be?

I think you're underestimating the capacity for mainstream economics to reach a consensus.

perhaps

I mean, the US has a fucking high standard of living. Inequality obviously hasn't brought that crashing to the ground.

Well, relative to what? Bangladesh? Sure, but I don't think that's a terribly fair comparison. You speak of misperceptions--how can we be sure that your perception is objective?

When I look at the 46 million people on food stamps in this country, I question our standard of living a little bit.

Or, at least, I would say you're applying the word in too static a context. It's perfectly reasonable to be content with how far a country has come and still desire change.

I'm far too cynical for that. Am I elated that gays have the right to marry in this country, now? Yes. Am I proud of it?... No. Not only is this an issue that we should have resolved decades ago, it should have never been a social issue in the first place.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is just that--the civil rights act of 1964. Within my grandparents' lifetimes, it was okay to discriminate based on race, color, etc. I'm not at all proud of that. Frankly, I'm ashamed. I'm ashamed that it's only been fifty years since then. It hasn't even been 150 years since slavery was abolished in this country (granted, the 150th anniversary of its ratification is come December). That's a source of shame for me.

There's not much good that we've done that doesn't involve
1. Undoing a bad
2. Something we should have sorted out decades ago

So maybe I'm just a cynic, but it's really difficult for me to be proud of someone because they don't smear excrement all over the walls anymore, especially when they've graduated to smearing it on other people's faces instead.

idc