whybroke

not only has the IRS said "Nothing prevents individuals from sharing their own tax information" as others have observed but also...

...an executive editor at Bloomberg who has seen those reports was sued for libel (which case was dropped) after which Trump obtained a court order banning any revelation of their contents.

And also one might be wrong in the first place and one's opponent in fact be correct.

"middle class" is defined but the cohort of wages around the median. By definition, were it to disappear, exactly half the population will be above and half will be below its bounds. It is solely a measure of distribution of wealth not absolute wealth. In recent years more people have risen up out of it. And in many of the past 40 years, more have fallen down out of it. necessarily.

Likewise in the last 40 years, the US per capita GDP has risen close to 70% while the median income has risen less then 20%. But the problem of declining social mobility and rising inequality is not remotely unique to the US.

At least as disturbing is the resultant problem of the steady rise and now mainstreaming of politically extreme views in several western countries in (including the current presidential race obviously). I suggest the economic underpinnings of this problem are issues that we really ought to look at objectively rather than waving the flag and insisting we live in the best of all possible wolds.

Given that the US has among the lowest social mobility of developed nations, this is highly unlikely today.

Interestingly, Americans have more belief that their society is a meritocracy than most developed nations and so are especially unaware of the problem. I submit it is this commonly held perception rather than data that is informing you comment.

Obviously in the past, when democracies were even fewer in number, the situation may have been different.

Here[1] you'll find a bounty of links supporting my point were one to take time time to read it rather than instantly and silently down voting what one doesnt want to know.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility#Patterns_of_mo...

There is no analogy to bread or 10miilon dollar salaries.

A company found something it could profit from more if it paid less than current market value. That is all. They are not saying there are no qualified applicants. They are not saying they want 10million dollars.

What is the case is that a business finds a resource (the perfect hire) that they wish to profit from but do not want to pay the market value for it because that would reduce profits. Rather than be satisfied with what would be an erosion of profit (or an admission of an unworkable business model) articles are posted to demand government pressure wages downward.

If you want a bread analogy, it's as if I found a cheap source of bread I can sell elsewhere at a profit but then complain there's a shortage solely because the cheap stuff isn't even cheaper.

If we're relying on all critical thinking skills to come as an unstated side effect of teaching math and elementary science that is sometimes taught alongside creationism then the results are obviously going to be watery.

If on the other hand students were taught just a few formal fallacies and led to analyze just a few arguments and just touched on formal logic while in high school, the nation would be transformed (but I imagine the flyover states would yell bloody murder)

Or a name is not an attribute and .999... and 1 name the same thing.

I would humbly submit that if your code is showing Cassius Clay is not the same person as Mohammed Ali, it is your code that would be in error rather than the universe.

Cassius Clay differs from Mohamed Ali on the name property therefore they are not identical?

It is not. Although the idea rent control benefits no one and that north American land ownership is unambiguously virtuous both are. Points I have objected to to his account's serious detriment. I can not fathom why you imply I make such claims about affordable housing although, even ridiculously untrue, it cleverly nullifies my complain doesn't it?

But whether I personally eat babies or not does not change the problem I have pointed out.

There is a problem that I and others have taken the time to point out, and rest assured if one person points it out, far more don't bother. So whether anyone wishes to address the problem or just downvote the complain itself is not really my concern.

In the end the site is an advertisement for ycombinator and in practice it's really a question of how they want their organization perceived. I had assumed having NY Times articles that point out Russian interference in Swedish politics swiftly whooshed from the front page does not serve that end.

I agree that vacuous comment are ruthless downvoted as they should be.

But observations, even with high grade citations that criticize the libertarian narrative are also regularly down voted to oblivion.

Likewise any criticism of Russia gets clobber very quickly no matter how much evidence is offered.

[edit] likewise pointing out either of those two problems

So yes, poor post are down voted very efficiently but there is still a genuine problem with downvoting to hide information that parties don't want spread.

Even though not cannibalistic, what pigs are typically fed makes a disturbingly tightly loop even.

Well after 40, whether bro or not they certainly won't be hired as programmers anymore.

To survive an attempted gun suicide is such an unspeakably, crippling and horrendous thing, it's almost unbearable to contemplate. It is certainly not something that could easily be hidden.

Do you agree with every foreign policy decision your current country makes? Are there really allot EU member states that support terrorist? Is the UK - EU divide really as violent as the Israel Palestine divide?

I was hoping there was some coherent argument in favor of Brexit that I had not heard and that maronthewall might be hinting at. Clearly I was in error in that hope.

And as objectivistbrit so defensively denied: '...emotionally driven and intellectually dishonest...' is shown very clearly again to be very much at the core of the Brexit movement

> The goal we object to was the attempt to build a giant country.

Why?

Honestly, how would that be bad? After all the UK consists of Wales, England, Scotland and N. Ireland. People of the past opposed that unity so much they were willing to die to try to prevent it yet on the whole that unity has been undeniably positive.

For the EU for example, how could having an single foreign policy be a bad idea in any way? How does having an EU flag do any harm what so ever? I'd claim that point in particular shows the issue very much is emotionally driven.

And what will make it fall apart except people voting to leave it on grounds as trivial as having a flag?

Likewise such an extreme step as dismantling the entire EU project rather than just fixing the monetary problem can't really be justified rationally and looks pretty overwhelmingly like emotionally driven nationalism.

Which goals would those be? An efficient tariff free zone? A larger area for individual opportunity? A reasonable social safety net? Greater power on the global stage? Protection for human rights?

Or is the objection merely to some wholly imaginary threat to the purity of the anglo-saxon race and culture and an unthinking and instantaneous embracing of anything nationalist and right leaning?

Intriguing but 3 questions:

How could shifting more towards Ordoliberalism (=government regulation to maximize competition plus a social safety net) be a bad thing? Quality of life is rather high in Germany after all.

Is there in fact evidence that unemployment is intentionally maintained in order to suppress inflation?

Even if your assertions are true, how would Brexit address any of these things and generally how would a balkanized Europe be more prosperous let alone more globally competitive than a unified Europe?

The talent shortage they refer to is merely a shortage of engineers willing to work at the salaries and under the conditions offered.

In a normal market wages would merely rise to adjust for that. But curiously it seems to be the only area where there is sudden vehement opposition to market forces.

Yes but it's also a practical psychological question. A person can come to a mental state where nothing in life interests them yet they wish there was something they enjoyed.

So, although possibly mundane, there is a point of view where the question "does anything in life have meaning" is less interesting than the question "is everything ok".

'Realize' is a strong claim, experiences may indeed be meaningless or they may not be. How could anyone ever prove one way or another? But if one could be convinced they were indeed meaningful, it might provide an avenue for happiness.

May I ask is it possible you desire something to desire?

Too bad this was down-voted, it's by far the most revealing post in the thread. (and most entertaining too)

Clearly all the evidence for the Sumerians, Lumerians and Brobdingnagians knowledge of Nibiru was covered up by the knights Templar in order to hide the fact the world is going to end next Wednesday afternoon just after the Sleestaks take over.

I didn't mean to imply that you did, just wished to point out that the entire post was absurd not just the conspiracy theory part but the tu quoque part too.

And.... off the front page almost as quickly as it go there.

Moral of the story: don't criticize Russia with today's HN crowd.

Well since the first part of the argument is "The USA is like Hitler so Russia is flawless", I'd give the post 0 out of 10 and conjecture that 4chan must be down right now

It is also an interesting test case for the hypothesis that merely increasing inventory, however enormously, will fix the problem.

Unfortunately, as soon as an area demonstrates it is becoming a significant hacker/maker region, speculation drives housing process through the roof killing the trend before it seriously takes off. For example Portland OR.

If there is ever going to be another profuondly innovative tech center (ala early SV) we have to solve the way housing prices work first.

A point I hope employers note:

The first reason he lists for declining the offer; salary was too low relative to housing prices.

But flexibility, adventurousness, low pay were not listed in the parent post, just age.

Indeed, you can easily insert any idea not actually mentioned post hoc. It's especially easy to insert unsupported but widely believed justifications. For that matter, you could extrapolate that dietary habits or music taste somehow result in less time eating and more team unity if you're absolutely set on justifying a weak assumption or policy.

But particularly one would think the fact they they are not all actually young would be somehow taken into account before justifying they claim that it's the premier attribute to enumerate.

>...young...

This the first and presumably most important requirement in you opinion? Interesting.

May I ask, how did you extrpolate it was a property of the team at all let alone responsible for its success let alone the first component of that success?