> would be 10% of the total income, which at those income levels, would never be a priority. People vastly underestimate the subjective importance of the Internet for people. 10-20% of the total income seems like a very…
Look, I'm not suggesting we do anything bad to Americans and Europeans. Just let them pay their fair share to those they've driven into poverty. Or do you enjoy the suffering of billions of people working for less than…
Isn't this natural for any "Social" ideologies? They imply a system of centralized redistribution, which implies a powerful repressive apparatus and an omnipresent surveillance system.
> We should all just try to be like Denmark Wait, but doesn't Denmark have the strictest immigration policies in the entire EU? > they at the top or near the top of practially every metric. Happiness, corruption index,…
They won't ignore it if Americans and Europeans agree to contribute their fair share to the well-being of all the people and stop hoarding all the world's wealth to themselves. A situation where the minimum wage in some…
We have statistics on solar performance at the huge countries levels. And it shows that, in reality, we're talking about 20x overbuild. Not 3x and not even 10x. And there is no way around it. Wind and solar…
In fact, I think this is one of the main reasons that will make the widespread use of nuclear energy possible: once your neighbor have built a reactor, you begin to share with them all the risks associated with nuclear…
> There just isn't $26T of money to buy this stuff. But there is. Like, it is less then GDP of US only
I think it has something to do with the fact that the first company is better at spreading messages on the Internet than the other at building reactors.
> We Europeans are very well aware that we need to strengthen our position in the world, both economically and militarily. It doesn't seems like this. It hasn't even been ten years since Europeans ridiculed Trump for…
> this is absurd! Why? Сountries pass laws, companies that don't comply are fined, shut down, blocked, and their owners are prosecuted and imprisoned. That is how it works already, nothing new or absurd here.
> How is it possible to make encrypted communication impossible? Illegal, not impossible
Eh? Like in North Korea?
> they are talking about the dangers of "chain migration" which is exactly what his family did to great success Where is the contradiction here?
In fact, it's very easy to reason them to change their minds: 1. Take statistics from any of these excellent solar power plants for, say, five years time span 2. Find the worst week in terms of energy production in…
> But is Yandex government owned? In fact, yes. Yandex is totally controlled by Putin's presidential administration. > What about Russians abroad that send money back home to their families It doesn't seem like a…
Our ability to do this is more of a fact. But the socialist distribution system completely destroys this ability.
Yes, it's EXACTLY equivalent. If you read the works of the communists who implemented all of this, you'll find literally the same arguments about unjust wealth created by productivity gains of automation (mechanization).
Do you think perhaps the totalitarian dictatorships perverted the communist aims of the proles perhaps just a little bit? No, I don't think so. From a historical point of view, everything is quite clear: after…
> it was far and away the broken incentives for reporting failures as successes to avoid immediate head chopping Actually, no. What you're describing is more of a part of the next stage, designed to solve the already…
This is a well-known affliction of democracy. Logically, it seems insane that people who live on other people's taxes have the right to vote. Officials, public sector employees, and anyone else who receives money from…
> unless automation taxes pay for it But this doesn't solve the problem in any way; it simply leads to production drop. I mean, this is literally the logic of every communist government in the 20th century. They had the…
Yeah, but they say it is because of weapons and climate change and not because of all of this
I don't follow American politics very closely, but in the last election it was not Trump who came out with a racist platform, but his opponent.
> it is fundamentally important that nobody has too much power > taking power away from the capitalist class An obvious and apparently irresolvable contradiction. Capitalist power is inherently anarchic and isn't power…
> would be 10% of the total income, which at those income levels, would never be a priority. People vastly underestimate the subjective importance of the Internet for people. 10-20% of the total income seems like a very…
Look, I'm not suggesting we do anything bad to Americans and Europeans. Just let them pay their fair share to those they've driven into poverty. Or do you enjoy the suffering of billions of people working for less than…
Isn't this natural for any "Social" ideologies? They imply a system of centralized redistribution, which implies a powerful repressive apparatus and an omnipresent surveillance system.
> We should all just try to be like Denmark Wait, but doesn't Denmark have the strictest immigration policies in the entire EU? > they at the top or near the top of practially every metric. Happiness, corruption index,…
They won't ignore it if Americans and Europeans agree to contribute their fair share to the well-being of all the people and stop hoarding all the world's wealth to themselves. A situation where the minimum wage in some…
We have statistics on solar performance at the huge countries levels. And it shows that, in reality, we're talking about 20x overbuild. Not 3x and not even 10x. And there is no way around it. Wind and solar…
In fact, I think this is one of the main reasons that will make the widespread use of nuclear energy possible: once your neighbor have built a reactor, you begin to share with them all the risks associated with nuclear…
> There just isn't $26T of money to buy this stuff. But there is. Like, it is less then GDP of US only
I think it has something to do with the fact that the first company is better at spreading messages on the Internet than the other at building reactors.
> We Europeans are very well aware that we need to strengthen our position in the world, both economically and militarily. It doesn't seems like this. It hasn't even been ten years since Europeans ridiculed Trump for…
> this is absurd! Why? Сountries pass laws, companies that don't comply are fined, shut down, blocked, and their owners are prosecuted and imprisoned. That is how it works already, nothing new or absurd here.
> How is it possible to make encrypted communication impossible? Illegal, not impossible
Eh? Like in North Korea?
> they are talking about the dangers of "chain migration" which is exactly what his family did to great success Where is the contradiction here?
In fact, it's very easy to reason them to change their minds: 1. Take statistics from any of these excellent solar power plants for, say, five years time span 2. Find the worst week in terms of energy production in…
> But is Yandex government owned? In fact, yes. Yandex is totally controlled by Putin's presidential administration. > What about Russians abroad that send money back home to their families It doesn't seem like a…
Our ability to do this is more of a fact. But the socialist distribution system completely destroys this ability.
Yes, it's EXACTLY equivalent. If you read the works of the communists who implemented all of this, you'll find literally the same arguments about unjust wealth created by productivity gains of automation (mechanization).
Do you think perhaps the totalitarian dictatorships perverted the communist aims of the proles perhaps just a little bit? No, I don't think so. From a historical point of view, everything is quite clear: after…
> it was far and away the broken incentives for reporting failures as successes to avoid immediate head chopping Actually, no. What you're describing is more of a part of the next stage, designed to solve the already…
This is a well-known affliction of democracy. Logically, it seems insane that people who live on other people's taxes have the right to vote. Officials, public sector employees, and anyone else who receives money from…
> unless automation taxes pay for it But this doesn't solve the problem in any way; it simply leads to production drop. I mean, this is literally the logic of every communist government in the 20th century. They had the…
Yeah, but they say it is because of weapons and climate change and not because of all of this
I don't follow American politics very closely, but in the last election it was not Trump who came out with a racist platform, but his opponent.
> it is fundamentally important that nobody has too much power > taking power away from the capitalist class An obvious and apparently irresolvable contradiction. Capitalist power is inherently anarchic and isn't power…