That's why I want the bq to do better than both the liberals and NDP so both of them can get their heads out of their asses.
Honestly, Maxime might be correct. But Maxime might have been a huge disappointment too if he was ever going to get more than 0 seats.
Right now what I want is a bloc quebecois official opposition.
Right now what I want is a bloc quebecois official opposition.
Colbert seems to be where left wing politicians who are about to lose their political career go so they can pretend someone still likes them.
We haven't moved past evolution. We're just arrogant and think the rules stop applying to us. That's why we're dying out, because we are filled with hubris and think we are the gods when in reality we are just men.
And so a lot of people will die out and their genetics and culture with them.
And so a lot of people will die out and their genetics and culture with them.
Two things being a father helped me learn are:
1. There are things you do in life that are important and have nothing to do with money. Being a good father for example is a full time job and doesn't pay a dime.
2. There are important things in life you don't need money for. People think you need money to do things, but it doesn't cost money to go for a walk, to swim in a local river, to have a conversation, to read a library book.
Money is important but not all-important.
1. There are things you do in life that are important and have nothing to do with money. Being a good father for example is a full time job and doesn't pay a dime.
2. There are important things in life you don't need money for. People think you need money to do things, but it doesn't cost money to go for a walk, to swim in a local river, to have a conversation, to read a library book.
Money is important but not all-important.
I've actually said something similar, that if you want to destroy someone, take away their reason to get up in the morning and go do something. You'll kill them more surely than putting a gun to their head and pulling the trigger.
If the best don't breed then they have no future because they ended their story. Their genetics stop with them, their culture stops with them, the future is handed to someone else who survived and reproduced.
That's just reality. If the chain of life ends, it never restarts once it's smith is dead.
That's just reality. If the chain of life ends, it never restarts once it's smith is dead.
Part of the downfall of the west is the short term view of success. People can claim the best people aren't breeding, but evolutionarily if they aren't breeding they aren't the best.
Exposure to asbestos might not have direct effects for 30 years. The guy who sold the asbestos blankets to you might be dead before you know there's a problem.
[admin mode] down for a bit due to DNS. It's solved now. I'll have to come up with an automatic solution at some point.
I don't think it's a problem with capitalism or socialism as much as a problem with the world: both prosocial and antisocial survival strategies are legitimate in the sense of both allow individuals to survive and reproduce, and there are times that one or the other will be more advantageous than the other. Ghengis Kahn (neither a capitalist nor a socialist) caused unimaginable harm to many people when he made his horrible invasion of Eurasia, but his genetics are now part of almost a billion people today. On the other hand, organized religion for whatever flaws you might assign it has become a powerful prosocial force helping entire populations survive and thrive under a common set of assumptions and rules about how to live "right".
The world is really complex and has a lot of paradoxes that you can't really easily resolve. Given the fact that industrialization can have a negative externality on the environment that everyone shares, you would think that we need to just make sure that we don't do that at all costs, but there's a cost to that decision as well. Much of the world was extremely conservative and didn't want to take any risks because things have been basically fine for a very long time, and then the tiny island of Britain started to take scientific risks, and there were definitely negative and externalities in terms of deforestation and air pollution but that tiny island nation ended up having the largest empire in the history of the world. Meanwhile, those extremely conservative places like China which wanted to just keep doing the things that they had already done ended up facing colonialization and in the case of china they faced the century of humiliation, in the case of India they were totally colonized, in the case of the Americas they eventually became effective extensions of the European continent.
About all you can do in a situation like that is try to find the best balance for the situation of the time. I think that one thing that the West is going to discover and perhaps is discovering right now is that if we don't burn oil then our global competitors will and if they outcompete us hard enough it won't matter what we want to do because we'll be speaking Chinese and Russian. On the other hand, what's the point of continuing to be a superpower if everyone has to live in Mordor because the entire world was burned to ashes to manufacture more junk? On the third hand, the fact is that industrialization and like our good for individuals in the aggregate to a degree. I mean, we are all on the fediverse which is pretty much definitionally a fruit of industrialization. We have access to computers which are truly magical devices, and we have access to home electricity and home internet which is amazing, and we are all literate which is unheard of throughout global history. Most people don't want to go back to sustenance farming.
I read a story about a waste dump that was built by just some guy in the mountains, and he would just take on whatever. And companies would pay him to take their waste. Eventually, the guy died and there was suddenly this massive environmental disaster that nobody was alive to care about. This story shows that just being local doesn't mean you are totally immune to ignoring externalities, but I do think that being more local does help. If you have to live in the same community that you are destroying, first you're going to have to deal with living in a worse place, and second you're going to have to deal with the people in the local community really not liking you very much because you're messing up their local environment. So it isn't a complete answer, but I do think that one of the things that needs to happen is we make it harder for businesses to get much much bigger. My first proposal for how to do this is to eliminate limited liability, so everyone who owns a company could be fully on the hook for the actions of that company.
Second, there would have to be rules everyone has to follow because otherwise the free rider problem doesn't go away. The guy who dumps a bunch of toxic waste on his land and then guys without any heirs, there's literally nothing you can do about that because there's no one after the fact to punish. Therefore, they would have to be some way that the government (it doesn't have to be the feds, it can be municipal or regional) can step in before someone starts causing all that harm.
The world is really complex and has a lot of paradoxes that you can't really easily resolve. Given the fact that industrialization can have a negative externality on the environment that everyone shares, you would think that we need to just make sure that we don't do that at all costs, but there's a cost to that decision as well. Much of the world was extremely conservative and didn't want to take any risks because things have been basically fine for a very long time, and then the tiny island of Britain started to take scientific risks, and there were definitely negative and externalities in terms of deforestation and air pollution but that tiny island nation ended up having the largest empire in the history of the world. Meanwhile, those extremely conservative places like China which wanted to just keep doing the things that they had already done ended up facing colonialization and in the case of china they faced the century of humiliation, in the case of India they were totally colonized, in the case of the Americas they eventually became effective extensions of the European continent.
About all you can do in a situation like that is try to find the best balance for the situation of the time. I think that one thing that the West is going to discover and perhaps is discovering right now is that if we don't burn oil then our global competitors will and if they outcompete us hard enough it won't matter what we want to do because we'll be speaking Chinese and Russian. On the other hand, what's the point of continuing to be a superpower if everyone has to live in Mordor because the entire world was burned to ashes to manufacture more junk? On the third hand, the fact is that industrialization and like our good for individuals in the aggregate to a degree. I mean, we are all on the fediverse which is pretty much definitionally a fruit of industrialization. We have access to computers which are truly magical devices, and we have access to home electricity and home internet which is amazing, and we are all literate which is unheard of throughout global history. Most people don't want to go back to sustenance farming.
I read a story about a waste dump that was built by just some guy in the mountains, and he would just take on whatever. And companies would pay him to take their waste. Eventually, the guy died and there was suddenly this massive environmental disaster that nobody was alive to care about. This story shows that just being local doesn't mean you are totally immune to ignoring externalities, but I do think that being more local does help. If you have to live in the same community that you are destroying, first you're going to have to deal with living in a worse place, and second you're going to have to deal with the people in the local community really not liking you very much because you're messing up their local environment. So it isn't a complete answer, but I do think that one of the things that needs to happen is we make it harder for businesses to get much much bigger. My first proposal for how to do this is to eliminate limited liability, so everyone who owns a company could be fully on the hook for the actions of that company.
Second, there would have to be rules everyone has to follow because otherwise the free rider problem doesn't go away. The guy who dumps a bunch of toxic waste on his land and then guys without any heirs, there's literally nothing you can do about that because there's no one after the fact to punish. Therefore, they would have to be some way that the government (it doesn't have to be the feds, it can be municipal or regional) can step in before someone starts causing all that harm.
Choose 20 games that have had a big impact on you. One game per day, for 20 days. No explanations, no ratings, no particular order. #GameChallenge (7/20)
Star Raiders (Atari 2600)
Star Raiders (Atari 2600)
I was watching an amazing video about a very complicated soviet spy operation where they asked politely and paid the fee and were able to get public research documents.
They built a replica of the space shuttle. It's actually a really funny story about spies stealing stuff they can just get by asking politely.
They built a replica of the space shuttle. It's actually a really funny story about spies stealing stuff they can just get by asking politely.
I think in general what I see out there in the world is a serious talent deficit. I'm certain that there are extremely competent people out there, but having worked for Fortune 500 companies and seeing what their best of the best looked like, if nothing else the market isn't connecting those talented people to the right jobs. Part of that could be the fact that the few megacaps sucked up generations worth of talent for so long that most Fields just don't have that much. I mean if you're talented guy, do you want to go work a real job for a real wage, or do you want to go work for prestigious Google and make 300K a year arguing on discord or whatever they do?
I live in the middle of nowhere, so that would make even more sense. "Dump em in the hinterlands"
So is English. Written English in particular is something everyone learned in elementary school, whereas only a few people will know asl.
It's what's implied by seeing open cases everywhere trying to sell in bulk. Literally one of just a couple things at the bulk store checkout (not just there but it's one example) just boxes and boxes of the things. You'd need everyone who comes in to buy tons to justify having so many boxes.
I think I saw a giant basket at the corner store too. They don't have anything like that, but there's a giant bin of these things. Just doesn't make sense unless they're praying they can unload them and don't want to put much effort into selling them.
I think I saw a giant basket at the corner store too. They don't have anything like that, but there's a giant bin of these things. Just doesn't make sense unless they're praying they can unload them and don't want to put much effort into selling them.