1,421 karma · joined December 17, 2019
Later classic buildings especially in cities had higher ceilings and consequentially a more roomy vibe than modern residential buildings.
Hell the Sears Roebuck houses someone else mentioned had a lot more ornamentation than your average new built
It becomes change and following avant garde for the sake of it and a group of people trying to be different in all the same boring ways.
Not american but I'd presume food, protection from the elements and healthcare costs arefor the vast majority higher than what's left over even if they only afford themselves the minimum no?
Where I live the absolute bottom segment of housing is proportionally more expensive and the price inflexible because smaller or shitier quite frankly doens't exist or is illegal.
I kept it broad since it applies broadly. Region specific separatism and struggles for self determination, migration, covid response, etc I have piles of experiences so think this discussion is better had with some wide framing which is hard to do candidly over text without writing a book (and putting out too much personal info for more eyes) but I'd love to hop on a call some time if you'd like. I find that it also makes people more receptive to eachothers points and ideas if they see/hear a living breathing human with often similar fundamentals.
> but have you entertained the idea that some opinions held by someone who doesn't necessarily identify as bigoted/hateful/illwilling can still be weaponized as such?
I agree but i don't consider this a onesided thing. In fact it becomes very evident when essentially the same positions are firmly branded left wing or right wing depending on the country and context.
>Personally I think very few of them were racists or fascists, but yet their votes were what led to "Nazi Germany".
I agree and not only were they as human as you and me and shaped and misled by their circumstances I think this kind of stuff applies much more broadly than this popular extreme pivotal point around which a lot of western viewpoints revolve. From a consequentialist perspective it's remarkably common to see people actively pushing towards outcomes they don't want or towards extremes they don't quite support trough nothing but innapropriate tying togheter of ideas or the power of words.
> that "woke" people are rightfully upset by this.
On some fronts they are. On others I've found that people weren't exactly pulled towards their respective (extreme) political bubble. They were shoved towards it by people who consider themselves very righteous and on occasion would "prefer a pagan to a heretic" or by reality not bending towards pure expectations and kneejerk reactions when faced with that.
It's disproportional in that it's more than the swedish would want to give since they'd rather invest it domestically (in energy production and those prices).
>By the same token, we should stop exporting fish and oil – that'd be sure to lower the price of both commodities domestically.
It would and I suspect you might take issue if your consumer prices were relatively higher and you were told you could not build a sovereign wealth fund to the same extent and should instead give much of that money so the eu can build bigger pipelines so germanies prices can remain relatively low.
I disagree with some of his views but can see it across the board. One doesn't have to agree with him or others to take note and this doesn't affect only some well known rich people. It's far more pervasive and from my perspective it is pushing self-censorship and conformity under a pervasive reputation economy. That is social cooling and it's often done purposefully.
Once one of your oppinions sticks out and bumps into this wall it becomes very easy to see how often it actually applies. How falling too much out of line on one front creates all kinds of connected assumptions about anything else you might say. From there it is easily visible how it pushes a lot of people to political fringes (helped by the social media bubbles) and has other consequences.
It appears to be higher electricity prices whilst the compensation given doesn't adequately match and goes disproportionally to what's essentially a middleman.
Is it then not better for the population to essentially reward it's investment in energy production and keep prices low domestically?
I was called similar for much milder views and past caution. I stood by in discussion further in the past when people got attacked in that way lest id be perceived badly and out of line with my ohter progressive views. No caution was had. Now it's too late. You can't reasonably wish to undo most of it. (Denaturalising people who are abusing or comiting crime is not that) I honestly see my culture as a dead one down the line. All so we could supress wages and pretend to hold up a pyramid scheme whilst doing some social signaling.
That doesn't mean i should forget, forgive myself and others and go along. I've developed a strong dislike for the social cooling that got us there in conflict with the opinions of the majority of the public. I no longer want to be overly nuanced and I am more than able to remember and throw back every past claim and defense regarding all this i read countless times a decade or 2 ago.
> vs talking about shooting wolves and calling for deportations using a word regarded as a slur
It's a stupid analogy. That said deportations within the law of foreign nationals that have no permission to be there is a historic normality the world over. The slur i can see tho i also don't give it much weight because I think it's one squarely on the euphemism threadmil. I used to argue your very point roughly a decade ago alongside an american against a polish friend who was very much opposed to them. Putting his grandma in the hospital over a bike, killing a mates dog along the whole cultural chasm with forced marriages and attitudes towards education and authority really didn't sit well which i could see. But i thought words have power and will worsen the situation and generalisation. But in the end the word gypsies will be forced out of the vocab, zigeuner/cigany will go as well and then roma will be used with those conotations all whilst useful change is sidestepped. I think Slavoj Žižek had a good bit on this.
>Remember one of the tactics is to sound reasonable, while stretching what is acceptable speech. This lets those who approach with bad faith defend the statements while approving of what they imply or lead to.
And the opposite has happened as well and has had far far more impact. Curtailing what is acceptable speech to defend in bad faith and hide what it's all leading to.
He's opposed to mass migration and as someone who finds the local culture erased in places my family is from and where i've lived i can only say I agree. It was never something the local population was in agreement with anyways. A plainly purposefull democratic deficit and more of a slippery slope than I expected since it gets more and more pushed by the same migrants and rootless cosmopolitans that couldn't handle the cognitive dissonance that they might be an outlier and others might feel more tied to their nation or assimilate.
After all it wasn't too long ago that progressives were calling people bigots for saying these migrants would not assimilate like some minor culturally similar migrant flows of the past. Now that script has flipped, done a 180 and they collectively developed rapid Alzheimers?
I also remember getting the same insults thrown at me for supporting policy that was impossible and fashistic. yet now we do do things take nationality from naturalised dual nationals who are serious criminals, terrorists and the like and it's supported by the same parties and people that were throwing names and continue to do so.
I think much of this is all far too late so why would I give a shit about your desperate attempts to keep social cooling going.
One of his criticisms was the virulent attacks on anyone that questioned policy during covid. He for example prefered the Danish approach and they still ended up doing better than the UK or US.
I also can't help but see the folks clamoring for mass migration for the past 2 decades in europe against popular will as anything other than blind oikophobes. If you'd look at my capital and other places you'd question who is actually calling for ethnic cleansing.
The facilitator is not someone in the free market trying to offer the service for a low price either. It's a government essentially forcing profit to be given to a middleman and anther country.
The thing is when everything has moved or been outsourced or been given to AI the majority will not be left with the "fulfilling" jobs and which ones are is very arbitrary.
The illegal migration was an easy target for this since it's indeed the only thing some people are opposed to and it doesn't quite activate a big created class of people that have a migrant background.
What are you on about?
>Jevons Paradox did not happen for nuclear power. What happened was crazy cost overruns, cancellations and the industry collapsing into its current state.
And the opposite happened in the past whilst europe was building bunch more of them.
>Who cares if we get 95%, 97, 99% or 100% when we still need to decarbonize agriculture, aviation, chemicals, industry, construction and so on?
Funny you say that when some of those are significantly harder. Are you going to turn on steel plants only in summer? Do you think that might have some effect?
>You do realize that renewable subsidies are being phased out all over the world? They aren't needed anymore. Complaining about "equality" because your desired solution didn't deliver in time is a kindergarten level argument.
You should tell my government and the neighbouring governments.
>We've spent the past 70 years subsidizing nuclear power. It just never delivered on its promise.
It did exactly that?
>The relevant question is: Where does Germany spend the next €100 billion today to avoid the most emissions?
it has spent €700 billion to $1 trillion on the energywende (a metric which doesn't properly include a lot of private investment) and ends as one of the worst emitters in europe whilst deindustrialising due to high energy prices. They jerk eachother off about how high their renewables share of the economy is every summer and then import and fire up the browncoal and gasplants again troughout the other seasons. When that solar panel is producing a 10th of it's average summer output (already below the capacity everyone loves to roll with for articles) in winter there's only one big winner possible. People like to point out how france's electricity production is subsidised when they come out looking good even when the gov intentionally puts a stick in it's wheels by essentially forcing it to subsidise pricing to competition.
>For example here they discuss economic life vs operational life, when you live in reality rather than grasping for straws:
It's essentially just saying the market can't think long term enough leading to drastic differences in your calculations. But hence it's typically governments pushing these projects forward.
>The market is limited until for example Jevons paradox expands it. Which will never happen with new built nuclear power due to how expensive the electricity is
But it did happen for nuclear power in the past. Now you see essentially the opposite.
>Why are you so afraid of renewables and storage?
I'm not. I think it's a great set of technologies. But I think if one tries to get to 100% everywhere one's going to stub their toes on the scenarios where it's not all roses. Why? Because the storage part is hard at scale in a lot of places and the intermitency more pronounced. In Texas and Cali are incredibly sunny places in the south of the US. Silicon valley where it's already an issue gets 3 times as much sunshine hours during winter as let's say berlin and those hours are far less usefull.
>Crying about FOAK vs NOAK is not even close to solving the absolutely stupidly large subsidies new built nuclear power needs.
Is this not intentionally sidestepping the ludicrous amount of subsidies that have been handed out to renewables in aggregate?
Berlin would need to overproduce insane amounts in summer to handle it's winters.
They still have 2-3 times the amount of migration they did in the 90's and that is assuming they're not masively underestimating again?
My great grandparents and grandparents did and I appreciate it a ton. I think modern consumerist culture that has even started to affect buildings with throwaway architecture (because long term thinking doesn't properly fit into the profit motive) is absolutely ghoulish.
It's wild to see how this flipped completely around in such a short time and now some markers of integration seem to go backwards and at the same time some consider it biggoted to demand/expect assimilation.
Slavery was a foundational economic and social pillar of the mali empire.
Influences related to migration have overwhelmed whatever support systems there are to tackle this.
West canadian weather which is in itself more moderate. The amoc is not the only moderating effect that makes europes climate possible. It'll still suck tho.