We are all Slave now.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

the senate even with the seats distributed between the states based upon population is not representative. LA and the Bay Area control x% of the house seats in Cali but 100% of the senate seats. We should give LA/SF control of 10 senate seats even though that mean 30 or 40% of the state is not represented (as they are not now but maybe represented by the Montanas of the Union?). We’ve created these meaningless state lines, and those boundaries have nothing to do with where is population.

Arguing with you is only a step above arguing with Sebby. What are you talking about?

You talk about why the current system of senate representation works to protect smaller states from being ignored by larger states in one breath and then respond to me that the system of representation is meaningless anyway? Hell, it sounds like you want to apportion senate seats in a similar way we apportion House seats. Okay with me.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Thurgreed 2008 would have realizedI was just fucking with him on the Trump reference:sad. Your lumbago acting up?

Sorry. If it were funny it might have had the intended effect.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

except every time the lesser vote getter became Prez it was because of lib dimwits voting third party. W won (hi ty!!!) Fla because of Nader voters for fucks sakes. You don’t throw out a system that gas functioned fairly well to try something no one does because some space fucks can’t think straight. To quote someone - fuck outta here

I'm only going to say this one last time. W and Trump didn't win because of third party voters. They won because idiots voted for them. Your constant refrain that this is all the fault of libs who wouldn't vote for Hillary is tiresome. I agree that they were really fucking stupid. But it is the fault of the millions of people who ignored Trump's idiocy, sexism, racism, lack of qualifications, etc., or found it appealing that he is in office. People who refused to vote for Hillary can take their share of the blame, but you assigning it all to them is fucking stupid.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Speaking of SF liberals, maybe we could ban Aaron Peskin from having beds in his home so that he has to spend money on a hotel to boost the economy.

I actually think this is a good idea.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

And it doesn't count the structural changes. If we turn someone away when they come to buy our stuff, and they have to guy buy it next door, they're going to start next door the next time they have to buy something.

Yup. That's even worse over the long term.

Since we're piling on the ugly consequences of this silly trade war, it's also worth noting that, while Trump has alienated foreign infrastructure investment, he's also failed to provide solid guidance for domestic infrastructure investment.

We can argue whether private investment in infrastructure is good or bad in terms of abrogating govt services to the private sector. But right now, from a bricks and mortar perspective (planes don't crash into each other due to antiquated air traffic control systems and clogged airports, bridges don't fall, ancient power plants don't fail, etc.) the need for infrastructure is acute. Trump promised he'd find a way to drive private money into infrastructure development. And I think the outline of his plan was a decent framework to do so. It could have been improved upon. He could have promised and delivered more specifics to give investors some comfort and guidance. He could have given a fucking speech on national television talking about the subject to give it the traction it needs.

He hasn't done shit.

Instead of working on infrastructure, he's fought with the NFL, done photo ops with Kim Jong Un and Putin, and tweeted endlessly about any and every affront to his deluded self image.

Putting that asinine tax cut in front of infrastructure was unforgivable. Throwing a trade war on top of it, which ended foreign investment in sorely needed infrastructure, is fucking his base.

But you know what? None of this will mean shit. Because his base is with him no matter what - even while he's shooting them on 5th Av-- err, Pennsylvania Avenue.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

You are being particularly confusing about this. You talk about how you weren't that impressed with the article and ask why I was. I tell you and I get, "Ok. I said there was some stuff I liked." I don't understand what's going on in your head. If what impresses me you agree with, but doesn't impress you, fine. But don't ask me the question and act so dismissive. Maybe this is one of those instances that would go differently if we were standing across from each other, because, at the very least, you would temper your comments based on the look on my face.

You gave the article very high praise. I don't get it. I agree with a lot of it. I have seen white people talk and act in the way described and I think it's a real and important thing. What did I say that is "dismissive"? I suspect you are right that if we were talking in person we wouldn't be talking past each other.

I'm not sure why you're surprised. I'm pretty sure I explained it very clearly. And given the fact that I have been working in diversity for 20 years and watched how D&I efforts have had to contort itself and struggle to make any headway at all by making white people comfortable enough in their own feelings to even consider addressing the underlying problems (that lay squarely at their own feet), it was nice to see the issue so eloquently set forth in this piece. Your continual explanation of how unimpressed you are is meaningless to me.

To be clear, I completely get what you are saying about D&I efforts and white people. I have been involved in those efforts too, though not to the extent you have. I have heard white people say those things. Some of my friends are black. (That was a joke.) I'm in a somewhat different position vis-a-vis my current employer than you are, but this topic is something I'm working on. I am with you on everything you say in this paragraph except that while I found the piece good and right, I didn't think it was so eloquently set forth. And I say that not in the spirit of trying to crap on good work -- yours, the reviewer's, the author's. I agree that most white people want to think of racism as something that other, bad people do, not as something in which they are complicit and from which they benefit. I think that's absolutely a thing. But that idea is not new to me, and I can't believe it was new to you.

This is one of you dumbest comments ever.

First, society is most definitely set up. White people set it up over the course of hundreds of years and they set it up and maintain it to benefit themselves. Period. Pointing that fact out does absolutely no damage whatsoever.

No damage at all, but nor does it add anything.

And I'm so glad you told me what you want to hear. What a disingenuous, bullshit thing to say. You pull one sentence out and say it's too big a generalization while simultaneously ignoring the specifics about how and why white people shut off when it comes to any discussion of racism. I'm starting to wonder whether your entire response is a more complicated example of exactly what the author is talking about.

What specifics? I would like to see more specifics. That would be interesting.

I addressed this in my response to Ferrets.

And I in my response to GGG.

The way you are characterizing the point in this piece is reductive and insulting. You have taken an analogy out of context and assigned it a meaning completely detached from the point of the article.

Racism isn't an independent agent that goes around infecting people.

And yet that's what the author said, comparing it to a pathogen. I'm not saying I reject the whole article, I just said that it was an idea in the piece that I didn't like.

The fact that you can read what I read and reach a conclusion that it somehow lets people off the hook is fucking ridiculous. The problem with racism, whether whites benefit from intentionally or simply as a byproduct of being white, is that there is very little incentive to fight those benefits if you are white. If you are born white, you automatically achieve a certain status in this country. Stating that doesn't let people off the hook. Stating that white people continue to enjoy the benefits of that status and will not act to endanger that status does the exact opposite.

Agree. White people have agency, and make choices, and are responsible for their choices, such as avoiding dealing with uncomfortable truths and doing nothing.

The problem I have with the "racism as pathogen" idea -- not with the larger piece -- is that it diminishes that agency. You seem to think I'm saying white people should be let off the hook. I'm saying the opposite.

?

Allport describes prejudice as a product of the way ordinary people think, not as something external and anomalous (a "pathogen"). If you want people to accept how pervasive prejudice, it seems to me a better path is to explain how it is integral to everyone's psychology.

Seems like you're trying to force everything into the conclusion box of your college thesis and if it doesn't fit, you toss it aside.

My thesis was about the post-war occupation of Japan, so that would be a good trick. Come to SF for a beer and I will tell you about it.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

My point is that once California gets 10 senate seats they'll all go to liberal dems because LA/SF will outweigh the rest of the state. Last actual senate race the R got 37%* of the vote- can you live with 3.7 of the 10 California senators being R? Rhetorical, I know you wouldn't, but face it, you ain't about making it fair, and representative, you're about making the senate forever liberal.

Jesus Christ. You are so full of shit.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

And what's so special about the California border? Break it in two- Lower and upper. And NY? Make it urbania and Hudsonville- Florida? SouthBeachatopia and RedNeckville. But don't tell me you want all people represented.

Even your examples don't achieve what you intend.

As with your bullshit above, I would be all for a system that apportions Senators based on your ridiculous examples. How many Dem senators would NYC get? The rest of the state can split 1 way right Republican.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

*and you had one job- go look at senate election returns and back out the LA area and see what happens to the 63/37 split. Do you so lack intellectual curiosity that you reply to me as if my IQ is in the 90s instead of actually doing the work to have an intelligent discussion?

I'm sure you understand that that split benefits Dems more than the current system if you apply it across the board, correct? Maybe not.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

fairly sure we all know the discussion is academic, and why stuff is how it is.

You're really confusing me today because I'm all about this post.

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The serious grievances (police brutality, predatory racist laws, a racists court and justice system, etc.) should be clearly separated from the less-serious complaints (microaggressions, etc.). These things cannot be lumped together because doing so allows the latter to discredit the former. And no - the argument they are all inseparable threads of a cloth or part of a continuum of behavior that must be addressed in aggregate holds no sway.

"Holds no sway." That is wonderfully dismissive and empty, all at the same time. Bravo.

Lurid, immature, and preposterous college activists should be ignored.

And yet you are dismissing micro-aggressions and talking about college activists instead. That's how it's done.

This is not to degrade the concept of microaggressions.

Um, yes it is. That is exactly what you are saying.

[ferrets_bueller]

Under the topic of "you learn something new every day", buried in the last phrase of Article 5 of the Constitution, that document can be amended any old way with the exception of the fact that "no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."

The small states drove a hard bargain and wanted to make sure it was kept.

So lets try this instead:

The Cash and Carry Campaigns

　

I.

The two men had played bridge with one another for many years. They had become fast friends. They were philosophically compatible, had a similar sense of humor, and shared the same general view of the world. In fact, they both thought the world was going to hell in a handbasket.
They were also rich beyond reason. Excluding a couple of oil sheiks, they were the two wealthiest men on the planet.

They had tried philanthropy, and had done good works all around the world. And still, the world seemed spinning out of control. When they discussed the federal government, it was all the two men could do not to rage at the absolute paralysis of the Executive and Legislative branches. One evening, they tried to figure out how to set things in Washington on a productive path. Beverages were involved, so the two men were simultaneously in their cups and "outside the box."

"So, Warren, here’s my plan. You get two Senate seats. I get two. Steve gets his two as well. Suddenly, we have a voting block of six seats that could swing any vote in the Senate, and therefore any piece of legislation in the country."

"Sounds fine, Bill, but the very act of campaigning turns you into one of the people we despise."

"I have no intention of campaigning."

"Makes it a bit tough to win the election, then, doesn’t it?"

"Not at all. I intend to buy the two seats, fair and square."

Warren sighed and rolled his eyes.

"I’m serious, Warren. Just do the math, and follow along. My net worth is pretty astronomical Therefore with two percent of my net worth. I am prepared to offer a two million dollars apiece to each of the 500,000 current residents of Wyoming if they will leave the state by September. That will cost me a small fraction of my wealth. Those people who move will not have to forfeit their property. They will merely have to establish a legal voting residence elsewhere."

"That’s preposterous, Bill. Who would take you up on this?"

"Who would be stupid enough NOT to take my money? I would write each person a check upon seeing proof that they had established a residence in a different state. Sure, not every single person would leave, but it would take an awful lot of willpower to resist a couple of million bucks apiece."
"You’re serious."

"Absolutely."

II.

"I Want Everybody Out By Tuesday !" The headline on the Casper Star Tribune was accompanied by a cartoonish picture of the man who would pay every last one of them two million dollars apiece. The press conference had actually been calmer than Bill had expected. Doing his homework had paid off. Establishing a New Casper development in northern Arizona allowed neighbors to remain neighbors, and pictures of the first new transplanted inhabitants of New Casper lounging around their swimming pool was a stroke of genius. The brand new school building even had the same teachers the students had the previous year. The Arizona real estate market, which had cratered during the subprime mortgage disaster, rebounded sharply.

III.

Using New Casper as a blueprint, Bill’s bridge partner Warren made the citizens of flood ravaged North Dakota an offer they couldn’t refuse. He developed the South Fargo Estates in New Mexico. The development was so successful that additional people wanted to live in South Fargo estates, and Warren accommodated them. He actually made a profit on the entire deal, taken as a package. Their colleague Steve had plans to established Sioux Falls South on the Texas Gulf Coast, but he passed away before he could implement the project. A preposterously young billionaire, Mark, and his wife, took over the project. The citizens of Montana and Idaho were actively entertaining similar bids. Law firms throughout the nation’s northern tier took up specialization in negotiating specific "diaspora agreements".

IV.

After the inevitable lawsuits were dismissed, the three new Senators, and their Senator spouses, were elected and sworn in over a six year period.. The blogosphere, the newspaper headlines, and the people of the other 47 states could speak of little else. Most people thought the concept was somehow wrong, but nobody could identify a victim. Politicians from the other states fell over each other to curry favor with the Six Oligarchs, given the financial benefits of being an Oligarch Friend.

V.

Wyoming soon became the windmill capital of the world. North Dakota became a giant solar collector. South Dakota capitalized on both sources of clean power. The "temporary workers" in the three states established "formal" residences in other states with little or no state income tax, and were happier than ever before. Much of the farmland returned to nature; the idea of a "Great Commons" on the plains was taking hold. Ted, a wealthy friend of the Six Oligarchs, released 10,000 bison in the Dakotas. Although Ted was wealthy enough to join the program as a Senator-Investor, he declined to do so. His wife was considered unelectable.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

"Holds no sway." That is wonderfully dismissive and empty, all at the same time. Bravo.

It holds no sway means it does not even come close to overcoming the sound and logical advice that one should never try to argue 10,000 issues at once, and it is wise to address the most acute issues first.

It's dismissive perhaps because I don't respect people who can't follow simple and obvious strategy.

And yet you are dismissing micro-aggressions and talking about college activists instead. That's how it's done.

No, I'm not. Microaggressions are worth discussing. Among adults, like adults. You and I can discuss them and agree they have validity, or in some instances, that they do not.

There is no point in discussing microaggressions with semi-adults who believe that certain speech should be censored, there should be "safe spaces" and "trigger warnings," we must use gender-neutral pronouns, and that disregard of trans issues is on par with police shootings. People who engage in these lurid arguments should be ignored.

Um, yes it is. That is exactly what you are saying.

You're confusing the speaker and hysterical form of expression with the microaggression. The microaggression is usually valid. The college protester who equates it with police violence, or seeks to ban speech because of it, is preposterous and does a disservice to those who'd seek to discuss those microaggressions seriously.

But here's the easy fix. Adults can separate the frivolous rhetoric and its immature speaker from the valid points buried within their exhortations. And adults can determine it is unwise to discuss microaggressions of any kind as something on par with violence against innocents and predatory justice policies

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I actually think this is a good idea.

Maybe we should ban cars to protect the jobs of people who clean manure off the streets every day.

Information technology means that you can buy stuff and have it delivered instead of having to go to a store. Or for that matter, a restaurant. This is causing all sorts of changes in the economy, and I wouldn't invest in retail space, which is not as valuable when people don't need it as much.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

But you know what? None of this will mean shit. Because his base is with him no matter what - even while he's shooting them on 5th Av-- err, Pennsylvania Avenue.

I wonder if a 25% tax increase on foreign cars will piss off his base.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ferrets_bueller

Under the topic of "you learn something new every day", buried in the last phrase of Article 5 of the Constitution, that document can be amended any old way with the exception of the fact that "no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."

The small states drove a hard bargain and wanted to make sure it was kept.

So lets try this instead:

The Cash and Carry Campaigns

　

I.

The two men had played bridge with one another for many years. They had become fast friends. They were philosophically compatible, had a similar sense of humor, and shared the same general view of the world. In fact, they both thought the world was going to hell in a handbasket.
They were also rich beyond reason. Excluding a couple of oil sheiks, they were the two wealthiest men on the planet.

They had tried philanthropy, and had done good works all around the world. And still, the world seemed spinning out of control. When they discussed the federal government, it was all the two men could do not to rage at the absolute paralysis of the Executive and Legislative branches. One evening, they tried to figure out how to set things in Washington on a productive path. Beverages were involved, so the two men were simultaneously in their cups and "outside the box."

"So, Warren, here’s my plan. You get two Senate seats. I get two. Steve gets his two as well. Suddenly, we have a voting block of six seats that could swing any vote in the Senate, and therefore any piece of legislation in the country."

"Sounds fine, Bill, but the very act of campaigning turns you into one of the people we despise."

"I have no intention of campaigning."

"Makes it a bit tough to win the election, then, doesn’t it?"

"Not at all. I intend to buy the two seats, fair and square."

Warren sighed and rolled his eyes.

"I’m serious, Warren. Just do the math, and follow along. My net worth is pretty astronomical Therefore with two percent of my net worth. I am prepared to offer a two million dollars apiece to each of the 500,000 current residents of Wyoming if they will leave the state by September. That will cost me a small fraction of my wealth. Those people who move will not have to forfeit their property. They will merely have to establish a legal voting residence elsewhere."

"That’s preposterous, Bill. Who would take you up on this?"

"Who would be stupid enough NOT to take my money? I would write each person a check upon seeing proof that they had established a residence in a different state. Sure, not every single person would leave, but it would take an awful lot of willpower to resist a couple of million bucks apiece."
"You’re serious."

"Absolutely."

II.

"I Want Everybody Out By Tuesday !" The headline on the Casper Star Tribune was accompanied by a cartoonish picture of the man who would pay every last one of them two million dollars apiece. The press conference had actually been calmer than Bill had expected. Doing his homework had paid off. Establishing a New Casper development in northern Arizona allowed neighbors to remain neighbors, and pictures of the first new transplanted inhabitants of New Casper lounging around their swimming pool was a stroke of genius. The brand new school building even had the same teachers the students had the previous year. The Arizona real estate market, which had cratered during the subprime mortgage disaster, rebounded sharply.

III.

Using New Casper as a blueprint, Bill’s bridge partner Warren made the citizens of flood ravaged North Dakota an offer they couldn’t refuse. He developed the South Fargo Estates in New Mexico. The development was so successful that additional people wanted to live in South Fargo estates, and Warren accommodated them. He actually made a profit on the entire deal, taken as a package. Their colleague Steve had plans to established Sioux Falls South on the Texas Gulf Coast, but he passed away before he could implement the project. A preposterously young billionaire, Mark, and his wife, took over the project. The citizens of Montana and Idaho were actively entertaining similar bids. Law firms throughout the nation’s northern tier took up specialization in negotiating specific "diaspora agreements".

IV.

After the inevitable lawsuits were dismissed, the three new Senators, and their Senator spouses, were elected and sworn in over a six year period.. The blogosphere, the newspaper headlines, and the people of the other 47 states could speak of little else. Most people thought the concept was somehow wrong, but nobody could identify a victim. Politicians from the other states fell over each other to curry favor with the Six Oligarchs, given the financial benefits of being an Oligarch Friend.

V.

Wyoming soon became the windmill capital of the world. North Dakota became a giant solar collector. South Dakota capitalized on both sources of clean power. The "temporary workers" in the three states established "formal" residences in other states with little or no state income tax, and were happier than ever before. Much of the farmland returned to nature; the idea of a "Great Commons" on the plains was taking hold. Ted, a wealthy friend of the Six Oligarchs, released 10,000 bison in the Dakotas. Although Ted was wealthy enough to join the program as a Senator-Investor, he declined to do so. His wife was considered unelectable.

The remedy for problems with our democracy is enlightened rich people spending their money wisely. God save us.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

It holds no sway means it does not even come close to overcoming the sound and logical advice that one should never try to argue 10,000 issues at once, and it is wise to address the most acute issues first.

It's hard to take you seriously on this point when you keep talking about college protestors and free speech.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I wonder if a 25% tax increase on foreign cars will piss off his base.

No. That'll just piss me off.

I will never buy an American car. I drive my cars for 250k miles and throw them away. Save a Suburban, which is a truck too big for me, American cars do not last anywhere near that long.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

No. That'll just piss me off.

I will never buy an American car. I drive my cars for 250k miles and throw them away. Save a Suburban, which is a truck too big for me, American cars do not last anywhere near that long.

With a 25% tariff on foreign cars, US carmakers would be fools not to raise their prices.