I’m sick of these articles telling me what I value. You know what I really value? Stability, security, peace of mind. I don’t want a mansion, a million Instagram followers, or a passport full of stamps, I just want a decent, relatively simple life. I just want to be happy and content.
I wish I hadn’t installed the update. I was hoping it would make the game run better on the steam deck, but it’s actually worse. I think they’ve increased the graphical fidelity, but it’s come at the expense of the battery. I found a work around to get the game launcher to come up so I could lower the graphics settings to improve battery life, but that doesn’t fix the bugs. They seem to have gotten worse with the update. Never change, Bethesda. Never change.
Averages are kind of meaningless. The article does mention that median net worth also rose for people under 35, but it doesn’t give the numbers. Probably because the median numbers are considerably lower than the average. But even the median numbers wouldn’t’ tell the whole story. Net worth has gone up for people who own certain assets that have appreciated in value over recent years, like houses and stocks. Means nothing to those who don’t own any of those assets, and the more the value of assets goes up, the higher the barrier of entry will get for anyone looking to acquire such assets in an effort to improve their own wealth. It’s also worth mentioning that some people think we are in an asset bubble, and if that bubble were to pop, especially housing, people’s net worth would decline, maybe even significantly.
Frankly, I think we need to stop worrying about wealth and start carrying about well being.
You may have noticed that in recent weeks, the Biden administration has been rolling out a hell of a lot of new regulations. Earlier this month it was big student loan reforms and a massive improvement in how public lands are managed, then this week we had better pay and working conditions for working Americans, minimum staffing...
Too far? Not far enough. Biden is not only the greatest American president, he’s the greatest ruler/leader to ever live. The future is only possible because of him and his wisdom and virtue. By singlehandedly solving the climate crisis, he has saved us and countless future generations. He’s basically a god.
The most distressing thing about this quote from Rand is that many people, even today, will read it and say that it’s wise, insightful, and true, rather than see it for what it is: incoherent nonsense.
When Marisa Fernández lost her husband to cancer a few years ago, her employers at the Eroski hypermarket went, she says, “above and beyond to help me through the dark days afterwards, rejigging my timetable and giving me time off when I couldn’t face coming in.”...
I know it’s not exactly the same but I worked for a credit union, they are member owned. All of the workers and customers are members and the members are the owners. It was a really good place to work. It was technically not-for-profit, so our surplus at the end of the year was reinvested into the institution, rather than being paid out to shareholders.
I’m not young, but I feel the same way as these young people. I don’t care about this country, I don’t care about its people, and I don’t care about its future. It’s like that Bob Dylan song, “I used to care, but things have changed.”
Why? I commented something you didn’t like for some reason so I must be a “creepy authoritarian?” What is the person I responded to advocating for if not a one party state. There are two major political parties in the US, that person wants the Republican party to be reduced to a “smoking crater.” Two parties minus one party equals one party. That’s about as simple as arithmetic gets.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand how things function. If the Republican party is destroyed, Republican voters will fracture into multiple parties, dividing conservative voters and making it impossible for any one of the new parties to compete with the Democrats in our winner-take-all, first-past-the-post electoral system. The federal government would become a defacto single party system, with the Democrats being that party. Conservatives likely would coalesce around a new single party and join efforts to try and take on the Democrats, but that party would exist to do nothing but obstruct, like the Republican party today. So we would once again be in a situation where there is one party trying to represent a plurality of Americans and an opposition party trying to obstruct everything that party wants to do.
If we want a system of plurality and proportional representation, it would require changing not only the US constitution, but 50 state constitutions as well. How do you propose accomplishing that with two parties competing for control, when one of those parties wants only to obstruct?
Getting rid of one party in a First Past The Post system would result in another party taking its place.
Exactly. Get rid of the Republicans and another obstructionist party would eventually take their place, putting us right back where we are right now. You want to replace the first-past-the-post electoral system with one of proportional representation and political plurality? Fine, but how do you plan on accomplishing that with the Republicans, or some other obstructionist fighting you at every turn?
Of course using DEI as a pejorative or a slur is reactionary, but there are legitimate criticisms of DEI. Diversity, equity, and inclusion sound good on their face, but things get complicated when even a little critical thinking is applied. Diversity of what, exactly? Diversity of culture, beliefs, ideals? Ok, but some cultures have beliefs that DEI proponents might find problematic, like homophobic ideas or sexist ideas. So, clearly, we don’t actually want too much diversity of ideals. DEI proponents don’t want to be inclusive to people they see as intolerant, so clearly there are limits to diversity and inclusion.
Equity is justice and fairness, but what is considered just and fair can change from culture to culture. If we are a diverse and multicultural country, which culture’s conception of justice and fairness do we use to determine what is equitable?
As the dominant culture, it is not our place to decide to exclude groups of people based on a preconception.
I’m not sure progressives are the dominant culture in America, but regardless exclusion based on preconception is not the only kind of exclusion. You can exclude cultures based on behaviors that have demonstrated to lead to unacceptable consequences, and that does include white conservatives. It’s clear that liberals believe white, Christian conservative culture is at least partly unacceptable, even dangerous, and yet you insist it be tolerated. This seems, foolish. Especially since those conservatives seem hell bent on destroying your culture. It’s like refusing to remove a murderer from your home because that would go against the spirit of inclusion.
Every culture has blindspots. But none of them are absolutes. You tolerate the culture, and try to discourage behavior that is detrimental to the whole. Otherwise we’d ban most religions. Even western ones.
But what you’re describing isn’t inclusion, it’s passive assimilation. Discouraging behaviors you consider detrimental isn’t inclusion, it’s the opposite. Even if you are not excluding the whole culture, you are excluding part of it. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, but it’s not inclusivity and diversity, it’s promoting cultural homogeny, at least homogeny of some core principles. So, even if you don’t want to outright ban most religions, even western ones, because that would go against your core principles, you do want to “ban” (albeit not overtly) some aspects of those cultures.
Thin with a boyish face and earrings in both ears, 23-year-old Isayah Turner does not look like a stereotypical Trump supporter, who tend to be middle aged or older....
I will never understand Trump’s appeal to anyone, but it’s an undeniable fact that he is appealing to some people. I think we should try to figure out why, objectively.
We can’t compete with China on price, but do we need to? I don’t think it matters if our cars are more expensive than Chinese cars, what matters is: can Americans afford to buy American cars? If Americans can’t afford to buy American made products, our industrial renaissance will fail.
Labor is usually one of the biggest costs of making things. Our laborers need to make more than Chinese laborers because our cost of living is higher. We went from a country that made stuff to a country that generated a lot of its growth from inflating the value of assets and charging rents. As a result, the cost of living, especially housing, has gone up considerably, relative to wages. If we bring down the cost of living, housing especially, it will prevent labor costs from ballooning out of control. But, while this will help with affordability, it won’t be enough on its own. We’ll have to find other ways to cut costs, as well.
There is a lot of waste and bloat in our economy, we need to streamline. We need to eliminate inefficiencies wherever possible. We need to eliminate needless middlemen who just jack up prices, and we need to allow consumers to buy directly from manufacturers. We also need to reign in executive pay, and we need to get rid of shareholders who do nothing but sit back and collect passive income. We need to boost productive work and reduce, or eliminate, all of the non productive, rent seeking behavior.
I really don’t think cost-benefit analysis is going to sway very many people. A lot of people continue to believe in the idea that humans are wholly rational, calculating, utility maximizing individuals, and thus if we just show them how much money they can save, they’ll support climate mitigation efforts. But this model of rational economic man is wrong. Maybe it describes some people well enough, but I think it’s a poor representation of how most people think and behave.
Humans are not wholly “rational.” We are often influenced by emotions and our passions that can be decidedly irrational. But the thing I really take issue with is this continued narrative that humans are fully atomized individuals. It absolutely needs to stop, it’s simply untrue. Humans are social, hyper social, even. We form all sorts of interconnected relationships, we depend on them, even, and we are highly tribal by our nature. It is how we evolved, it is how we survived. We are here because our ancestors formed tightly connected groups of people, with common purpose, common culture, common language, and common belief systems.
Do you know why so many people continue to deny climate change and fight against climate mitigation efforts? Because it’s what their tribe tells them to do. They are being told by the members of their tribe that they respect and admire that climate change is a hoax perpetuated by an enemy tribe. They’re being told that climate mitigation efforts are an attack on their culture, their way of life, and they’re being told this by bad actors who deliberately use people’s tribal nature against them, to manipulate the people into supporting them and their interests. We need to use culture for progress, so that it can’t be weaponized against progress.
The sooner we shit-can the rational economic man model and start seeing people for what they really are: social beings who are highly motivated by emotions and passions, and the sooner we recognize the importance of culture and group identity, the closer we’ll be to an actual solution.
(2019) NOwnership, No Problem: An Updated Look At Why Millennials Value Experiences Over Owning Things (lemmy.world)
You will own nothing, and you will smile all the time and love it. These kookie 40 year old young people and their trends....
That one glory hole (lemmy.world)
Fallout 4's most popular mods are now ones that remove Bethesda's disastrous 'next gen' update (www.pcgamer.com)
deleted_by_author
In private, Biden shifts from frustration to confidence that he'll beat Trump (www.nbcnews.com)
Joe Biden Has Another Big F*cking Deal For Climate, Again (www.wonkette.com)
You may have noticed that in recent weeks, the Biden administration has been rolling out a hell of a lot of new regulations. Earlier this month it was big student loan reforms and a massive improvement in how public lands are managed, then this week we had better pay and working conditions for working Americans, minimum staffing...
R. Crumb gives his opinion of Ayn Rand (lemmy.world)
Does it count as a meme if it’s from 1985 but still structured like a meme?
The US economy is cooling off. Why experts say there's no need to worry yet (abcnews.go.com)
‘In the US they think we’re communists!’ The 70,000 workers showing the world another way to earn a living (www.theguardian.com)
When Marisa Fernández lost her husband to cancer a few years ago, her employers at the Eroski hypermarket went, she says, “above and beyond to help me through the dark days afterwards, rejigging my timetable and giving me time off when I couldn’t face coming in.”...
‘They Are Just Pissed Off’: Scott Galloway Warns Young People Are ‘Opting Out of America’ As Older Generations Failed Them (www.mediaite.com)
Why would she tweet that?! We're so effed... (lemmy.world)
Racist dog whistle: the right wing has weaponized ‘DEI’ (www.theguardian.com)
Some young people see Trump as an answer to their economic woes (www.reuters.com)
Thin with a boyish face and earrings in both ears, 23-year-old Isayah Turner does not look like a stereotypical Trump supporter, who tend to be middle aged or older....
There’s No Easy Answer to Chinese EVs (www.theatlantic.com)
Climate damages by 2050 will be 6 times the cost of limiting warming to 2° (arstechnica.com)