Day1

I think it will encourage China to expand its borders sooner than it already plans to

Chinese money has been heavily funding the Democrats too. Not much you can do

I’m surprised at how much this got downvoted. The laffer curve is pretty intuitive. I’m not sure why there is all the hate

Lookup ‘laffer curve’ for the explanation. Essentially, decreasing the tax rate incentivized more participants into the market and incentivized existing participants too

Meh, to each their own. I’m inclined to agree with 12ft.io on that front

Perhaps related to the collapse of the bronze age?

Talk to China about any race other than Chinese for that matter

The reality is both. We have largely focused on mitigating COVID deaths but we need to address the devastation caused from anti-COVID measures because despite it being largely underreported and understated, the impact is there and we all feel and see it.

The thing is, I’m not sure preventing the spread is realistic. Unless you move to the country or to outer space, and never receive any mail or goods, you will always be in contact with, or in the vicinity of, something that has been in contact with, or in the vicinity of, someone else.

An odd contrast considering non-nationalistic Americans are usually the first to defend Big Business and Big Government.

Unfortunately, as seen during the pandemic, we as a society care more about the health of our older and sicker members than we do the health of our younger members.

I agree. But go beyond elementary school and you’ve completely lost me.

That’s true. If public schools only focused on lower grade levels that would free up resources tremendously.

Public school is overrated. I would choose Khan Academy, the South Korean model, or Charter schools over public schools any day of the week.

Could you infer from this that lockdowns increased Covid-19 severity by reducing exposure to sunlight for the average person?

Yes, that’s why the majority of the world wants to immigrate here. /s

I think this was a universal conclusion early in the pandemic for anyone with a background rigorous in statistics.

Don’t bring attention to any historic caucasian struggles because bringing attention to the plight of any race other than a race currently labeled ‘minority’ is an affront to the party.

Yes and because of incentivized reporting.

This is generally how socialist govt programs work. Give money to the rich and advertise it as helping the poor.

I was forced to read Maus in college. Kids in Tennessee won’t be missing much from it being banned. Well maybe they’ll miss the added dose of depression you get from reading about the holocaust.

Precisely why entrepreneurial movements will always contribute more to society rather than the strong institutional movement we currently have coming from the left.

Absolutely true, I would argue the advantage of having greater attention from knowledgeable adults in a small town far outweigh the benefits from living in a city.

The COVID angle is tired.

There are a few interesting nuggets from the article though,

> “[Putin has] gone as far as introducing a number of financial incentives for parents with more than one child, such as cash bonuses and favourable mortgage rates.”

Is this the best approach to policy for incentivizing population growth? Why or why not?

Also,

> “Since 2014, living standards in Russia have continuously deteriorated due to economic sanctions by western powerhouses, a dependence on oil and gas, as well as corruption.”

Would be interested in learning more about this too. (A more substantial economic analysis and the potential implications perhaps.)

Thank you for your response. I’m curious to know what the utilitarian approach to policing would be. (An approach that is useful or beneficial to the majority?) I currently believe that approach is still a highly decentralized one—Local communities deciding what the best approach is and the freedom to move over to a different community if desired. And I still think that belief aligns most with libertarianism.

I thought libertarians tout smaller government? Are police not part of the government?

Can’t the Chinese replicate something like this pretty easily?

First argument seems defeatist to me.

Second argument seems like the realistic outcome but I also think it underestimates the powers that be/will be. The conflicts of interest will be addressed too slowly and the powers that be will say too bad to their opponents.

You are very loosely or indirectly giving the company money to re-invest when you purchase their shares, no?

I imagine North Korea has a similar percentage of their population that would report either ‘relatively satisfied’ or ‘highly satisfied’ with Pyongyang too.