If you want to engage honestly, you can start by acknowledging that there is an enormous gap between believing that "record breaking wealth inequality is bad and causing societal problems" vs "no inequality should exist in any capacity."
If I am being honest inequality will always vary wildly based on the monetary policies and all the things I mentioned. To me anything else is getting into vague unattainable unrealistic ideologies. No harm in dreaming, everyone should. No harm in envy either even if some think it is unhealthy. It's all human nature.
If someone has a gazillion gazillion gazillion mega-bucks that does not harm me in any way shape or form. More power to them. I would be fine with them also collecting medicare and social security especially if they, like me, had to pay into social security their entire working life and could not opt out.
If we can hold out for machines like a holodeck then we can truly live any fantasy and that may be a nice form of escapism. No idea how long it will be for such machines to exist.
And that's fine. The pay out is also on a scale. I have no desire to "rob the rich". Everyone pays into corrupt governments and fraudulent wasteful government programs. I would rather cut 50% of all programs every year to remove the burden from all citizens.
It might be fine but it's not a brag that 'the billionaire is contributing'.
Reminder that the Republican policy for 40 years has been to 'starve the beast' and in other ways sabotage government programs so that exactly your argument can be presented. Prior to that intentional sabotage by Republicans and aligned political partisans against the United States we had much less fraudulent and wasteful government. When half of the politicians/oversite/management ACTIVELY wants government (and by extension the country) to fail and engage in policies intended to created failure in the government, it's hard to have effective government.
As it pertains to monetary policies there is no left, no right, no democrats, no republicans. It's the same left and right leg attached to the same ass. Each boot will pretend to hate the other guy but its just a show to make people fight and keep them distracted. Both sides have the same agenda, they just have a different style of kicking our asses. Each side wears a different shade of lipstick.
You are basically an anarchist then. There are examples of good governance in the world, where the rule of law hasn’t been eroded by the people you are set on protecting. The problem with billionaires is more about the problem of power in the hands of a few greedy people who change the balance of power in their favor.
No I am a leave people alone that are not harming me. I am not envious and I am not a power tripper. If I want to help those in need then I will push my government to cut programs. Governments do not help those in need as they have no incentive to do so. They will pocket the money as they do every ... single ... damn ... time. This never changes and never will.
That’s simply not true, governments help billions of people in many ways, especially people with disabilities, children (ie labor protections), women, etc. You are completely disingenuous to say otherwise. Billionaires are harming many people through eroding the institutions that protect the average people (rulings like citizens united, trumps election, etc). You don’t seem like a person with a real perspective to me.
> Again, folks, the argument here is from existence. If the browser stack is insufficient for developing UIs in the modern world, then why is it winning so terrifyingly?
If McDonald’s hamburgers taste like warmed-over shit, why are they the most popular in the world?
> complex UI that isn't a frustratingly slow resource hog
Maybe you can give ones of competing ones of comparable complexity that are clearly better?
Again, I'm just making a point from existence proof. VSCode wiped the floor with competing IDEs. GMail pushed its whole industry to near extinction, and (again, just to call this out explicitly) Amazon has shipped what I genuinely believe to be the single most complicated unified user experience in human history and made it run on literally everything.
People can yell and downvote all they want, but I just don't see it changing anything. Native app development is just dead. There really are only two major exceptions:
1. Gaming. Because the platform vendors (NVIDIA and Microsoft) don't expose the needed hardware APIs in a portable sense, mostly deliberately.
2. iOS. Because the platform vendor expressly and explicitly disallows unapproved web technologies, very deliberately, in a transparent attempt to avoid exactly the extinction I'm citing above.
> Maybe you can give ones of competing ones of comparable complexity that are clearly better?
Thunderbird is a fully-featured mail app and much more performant than Gmail. Neovim has more or less the same feature set as VSCode and its performance is incomparably better.
> Thunderbird is a fully-featured mail app and much more performant than Gmail.
TB is great and I use it every day. An argument for it from a performance standpoint is ridiculous on its face. Put 10G of mail in the Inbox and come back to me with measurements. GMail laughs at mere gigabytes.
Verifiably false. Like, this is just trivial to disprove with the "Reload" button in the browser (about 1.5s for me, FWIW). Why would you even try to make that claim?
> Amazon has shipped what I genuinely believe to be the single most complicated unified user experience in human history
OK, I shop at Amazon, am a Prime member, all that stuff, but their web site is horrible. Just pathetic.
I appreciate that they are huge and sell a pretty much incomprehensible number of things, and that what it takes behind the scenes to make it all happen is hugely complex and very impressive on its own terms, but still: the web site is horrible.
Documenting the disabilities seems ethically dubious (and perhaps legally dicey -- not sure if HIPAA applies here); wouldn't it be sufficient to document just the accomodations? Those are what should be relevant to employers and grad schools, after all.
Probably yes. The college's motive is to axe the rate of mendacious malingering; pushing beyond that could give them legal costs without commensurate benefits.
> It is amazing that this has to be confirmed on a website...
I think it has a lot of memetic power because it’s plausible given the other things she’s said, like trying to deflect to economic “success” by pointing out the DOW ~is~ was over 50,000.
It also doesn’t need to be an attributed quote in order to reflect the countering sentiment: “Yes, prosecute those in the Epstein files no matter the geopolitical and economic cost.”
It also has a certain whiney, servile tone to it that makes it just annoying enough to trigger the leftist “ick” instinct.
Idk, I hope the 50,000 dol- meme picks up and people stop spreading this fabricated quote.
reply