raspberry1337

All freespeech platforms, from 4chan to twitter, are pre-dominantly right wing.

All censorship-based platforms, such as reddit or mastodon that has _mods_, are left wing.

Secondly, the woke left is the same in the US as it is in Europe. The west is one global entity these days. JK Rowling is hated by swedish leftists and california leftists.

Third, "it's simply not true" is not a convincing argument in the face of millions of examples. Why do you think all the biggest comedians in the US avoid colleges?

It's not really a problem if none cares who you are.

You're neo-nazi!

Furthermore, leftism needs to have these banning-systems because modern leftism cannot survive in a free speech environment.

This is why all leftists started leaving twitter when Musk took over and promised free speech (not freedom of reach), they knew instantly that the gig was up.

"I don't think so. Please provide concrete examples."

You would get fired in Sweden if you spoke against mass immigration just 15 years ago. The social democrats still ban people who have romantic relationships with an individual of the nationalist party.

Working corporate in the west is about having the correct progressive opinions, dissent means you are an evil conspiracy theorist. Just 2 years ago it was evil and racist conspiracy theorist to say that Covid came from a lab leak.

It's evil to say the the truth until the emperor becomes absolutely naked, such as the case with mass immigration in Sweden. When you suddenly have more murders than the UK (a 7x larger country) and bombings every day it's kinda hard to deny that immigration has a link to crime.

I don't think firing middle management, documenters and designers with no trackable productiveness and forcing people to work in their free time is the same thing ?

I have a lot of solutions, I proposed reduced immigration in Sweden 10 years before the leftists realized it was a necessity. I have loads of more solutions now too, but it will probably take 10 years for the left to realize they are inevitable too.

If you are gonna say ridiculous things online, it's supposed to be funny.

Then again, there aren't any (successful) leftist comedians left anymore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Marxism#:~:text=Neo%2DMarx...).

France has smaller manufacturing than the UK [1], neither France or Germany has never been "ruled by unions" the same way that the UK was in the 70s [2]:

> _The most egregious example of waste was the coal industry, hence the strikes. The tax payer was subsidizing coal to the tune of £1.3 billion a year which was real money back then, just under 1% of total national GDP, not including the increased costs to power and steel industries that were prevented from using cheaper alternatives. When the mining union leader Arthur Scargill appeared before a Parliamentary committee and was asked at what level of loss it was acceptable to close a pit he answered “As far as I can see, the loss is without limits.”_

You are just straight up lying at this point. Even in France, unionist lawmaking is one of the reasons _why_ France has so little investment and manufacturing, and Macron was elected on a platform of trying to break it up.

[1] https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/FRA/france/manufacturi....

United Kingdom $274.87B France $262.64B

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35092534

> Small cities put children in a disadvantage and should not exist

This is the kind of radical bat shit craziness, from posters who are so intelligent they can rationalize anything, craziness that I love to find on HN.

I went to high school in a specialized class in Sweden anyway and I didnt have any internship because if you study all your waking hours to get max grades you don't have time for interning.

Ironic you blame the Tories, since all those industries primarily died of during the 70s, after the collapse of Bretton-woods; when unionist Labour ruled the country by marxist-economist principles.

Which is a discussion of what they are supposed to be shipping. Usually a description of a program, in text. A discussion that very often ends in court over disagreements. Have you ever worked on a commercial software?

We do, they named the least productive yet most experienced gentleman to "teach lead" to lead the scrums because they started getting a notion that not much was getting done. This is the guy who love writing documentation (One A4 per week of 40h hour, about). The end result was nothing changed: "I am working on X", "OK, good good" and nothing really gets done. Then the customer started changing the demands 9 months into the project which justified the inproductivity even more. It's all around just a shit show.

It's not about will, but the managers capability to oversee what is going on. Since they dont know anything about programming, they cant even really know if someone is slacking, or working really hard.

That is, their capability to manage.

It's my first gig, so my options are limited. Things might still shake up when people start asking where all the money is going. But I've also come to realize that my situation is not unique, there's a lot of non-work going on in modern tech.

I didn't write it out, but our managers have no idea of the code at all. They have never been programmers. Hence the programmers sit around all day, like posting on HN, and not much gets done at all. But hey they are surely really passionate about managing.

I don't work at Meta, but if its anything like where I currently work, the ones who become "managers" have no correlation to coding performance, or perfomance at all for that matter.

Me too. I wish I could work at a company where I dont have a "project manager" making more than I do for sending a few emails and holding a weekly project meeting. I've decided to practice leetcode if that's what it takes.

So they amicably saved all depositors in SVB, but not investors, because using taxpayers money to protect bad investment would be very unfair - unless its too big to fail, then it's "necessary". Otherwise we could get a depression, and depression is very bad and should never have to happen.

The problem being that now no investor would ever want to invest in a small, not-too-big-to-fail bank, especially in volatile times such as these. So all investors are pulling their money out of small banks, even at massive losses.

We might be seeing the start of an investor-bank-run, instead of a depositor bank run. Also just called a _crash_ I guess.

>Having your bank account randomly disappear isn't one of the risks that anyone should have to take.

This bank choose to _avoid_ safety regulations from the 2008 financial crisis, which is completely open information. They used this avoidance to pursue greater risk.

What is "randomly disappear" about putting your money into such a bank?

What a weird post.

>Lots of people are starving and homeless for as trivial a "decision" as that.

Most homeless are either severely mentally ill, drug addicted, usually both.

>I'd much rather give everybody food and a home, including the Etsy seller, instead of: giving the bankers a ski jolly, people still starving and homeless, less this Etsy seller. Why can't we do that?

You could be running a soup kitchen homeless shelter right now instead of posting on HN. It's always someone elses fault!

>Some of those entitled Etsy sellers voted against everybody having food and a home;

Great analysis and input - if we would all vote x, everybody would have food and home, problem sovled!

> Also Britons who live in areas with large immigrant populations are the least concerned about immigration.

Maybe if you define immigrants with passports as Britons. There's a reason why the BNP, British National Party, won the two seats they ever won in counties most affected by immigration. This effect would also be exact opposite of that in Sweden, which is intriguing, because here the sub-urb ghettos are split between social democrats, which the immigrants vote for, and the nationalists, which the few non-immigrants left vote for.

The fact that you are trying to argue that areas affected are the least concerned, when the case is exactly the opposite across Europe; says a lot about your "reality". Modern leftists are a scourge.

It's not over yet, we're yet to see the how the opposite of mass immigration multiculturalism affects a european nation too. Jusging by Sweden and Germany who has applied it the most, it is and ending that goes "no more please"

If you can't see that immigration is having a negative impact, which so many voters perceive, then yes you have a minority perspective. Crime in the UK is so bad in some areas that Ukrainian refugees were shocked.

That's not true at all, just because one individual person can make a temporary, big profit in an industry, that does not mean that the industry itself is profitable. Industry has large investment costs and takes time to become profitable, sometimes it never does.

Gulf war didn't save Senior Bush from the bad-economy, neither did the Iraq War help Tony Blair's popularity.

It's a lot more complex than war-helps-current-leader, at least outside the US. It depends on the war and the context.

Nothing in that article indicates that the war overshadowed her domestic policy, both contributed to her success.

It is, and neither more neo-liberalism nor socialism is the answer.

>"The conservative and republican parties are mocking parodies of their former selves. Back in the 80s there were serious, major economic and social problems that desperately needed fixing and economic liberalism had the answers. Nowadays that's just not even vaguely controversial, instead the focus of the right has shifted towards damaging reactionary dog whistle issues like culture wars and blind nationalism. "

The conservatives of the 80's had a problem to solve, stagflation, inefficient socialism, big state. Neo-liberalism solved those problems, but created new ones.

The conservatives today have another problem to solve, mass immigration, rampant crime, loss of sovereignty and ability to reform to foreign bureaucracy, dependency on foreign manufacturing, etc.

Part of these problems are residues of the same economic neo-liberalism that was enacted in the 80s. Reagans and Thatcher's neo-liberalism saved society from the socialist dystopia, but over time it has thrown society in a neo-liberalist dystopian path that few people like, beside the corporate elites.

The conservatives have moved on to new, real problems. You seem stuck in the past.

Do you understand that solar as a economic investment, and the economics of one dude that install solars, are very different things?