bobbydroptables

8 ms·

1.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
Machines, immigrant laborers and huge agribusinesses, mostly. I don't engage in the trendy family farm fad if that's what you're asking. More to the point, are you implying that it wouldn't be possible for a dead end com
2.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
How is it undisputably bad? This woman now has access to higher quality men around the world instead of a random farmer without much to offer (no offense to the random farmers in the audience). She now has the option to leave a dead end ru
3.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>Like rent an apartment? Have a car to get to work? Then you rent an apartment or buy a car. Are you implying you can't do this after bankruptcy? It's much easier to do these with a bankruptcy on your "record" than wi
4.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
Fair points, although to your last point, I wouldn't necessarily agree it solves the problem well. AMP makes some websites almost unusable (intentionally disables core functionality) and there's no way to disable AMP except manual
5.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
AMP seems like a solution in search of a problem. Are people really having trouble with loading speed in 2020? I travel to remote areas in third world countries regularly for work and still don't really have problems loading pages with
6.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
Preparing for expected catastrophes is not a fleeting desire. It's basically the opposite. There are entire industries built up around this (FEMA, insurance, flood control systems, the CDC, banking reserve ratios, backup servers, many
7.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
I typed out a much longer response but this will do: I think you are not following my argument or the OP. Neither supposes that "we need" is a standalone argument. OP provides specific examples for why "we need" to do th
8.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
Which part of the OP deals with megacorps? I don't like megacorps either but I don't see which part of the OP you disagree with. >Isn't it hypocritical to ask for money from common man to fix problems that they created in
9.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>There’s way too much “we need to start...” Not really. A world as complex as ours needs to be starting new initiatives all the time. Basically every convenience you take for granted (electricity, indoor plumbing, grocery stores) was bec
10.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
We don't fully understand the long term effects. Many people are experiencing prolonged sickness that may never go away. The disease can do permanent damage to basically any of your organs. Seems crazy to adopt a policy of infecting th
11.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
Maybe what he's getting at is that the technologies the west "can't dream of" were invented in the west. Drones, for example. The west doesn't use drones to deliver medicine because it has very well developed infras
12.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
And "judicial power" includes the sole power to shape the boundaries of con law. Who do you think can determine the boundaries of con law?
13.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
So why are you supporting a system that has assumptions of zero cost of CO2 emissions? There is no reason whatsoever to think there is zero cost. Why would we implement public policy assuming this?
14.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>Yes, and I have already said that I oppose those decisions. The government should not be playing favorites. So you agree that government should stop subsidizing roads and suburbs? >Cletus' behavior doesn't affect everybody;
15.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
Do I have any way to verify this as a user?
16.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
Yeah you're pretty much right. But this can be solved pretty simply with a pigovian tax. It's not inconsistent with any definition of rights that I'm aware of to say that you can't pollute our air without consequence
17.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>But public policy decisions affect everybody, so the criterion needs to be a lot stricter for how complete the information needs to be and how confident we need to be in our knowledge before we impose a public policy on everybody. Again
18.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>You're misstating the alternatives. No. >We're talking about public policy. Yes. >The alternatives for public policy are "don't dictate what everyone must do in area X" or "dictate what everyone must
19.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>No, a "subsidy" is not the same as a purchase. Did I a say "subsidy" was the same as a purchase? Not sure what you're getting at. >Purchasing something at whatever the current market price is is just a purcha
20.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>We cannot justify most of the things we're currently doing on that basis. Exactly my point. Why do you think we need to have a higher justification for good ideas (engaging in sustainable behavior) than for bad ideas (engaging in u
21.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>As I responded elsewhere in this thread, by this criterion, we should stop pretty much everything we are doing. Which is not a viable option, never has been, and never will be. No, I'm not saying this. I'm saying we need to st
22.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>I don't think the government should be subsidizing any energy sources or playing favorites with certain sources over others. That applies just as much to playing favorites in favor of "alternative" energy sources as to pl
23.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
I think only snowwrestler has a good point. "Waiting for the science" is the same as saying "we know for a fact that burning carbon is safe" if both of those result in burning unsustainable amounts of carbon. >I'
24.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>No, it's an affirmative choice to not impose a public policy on everyone based on what we think we know right now. You're either misunderstanding his point or misunderstanding reality. Our public policy today endorses (and he
25.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
So can too much air and water and literally anything else.
26.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
With a few exceptions, I learn more from user comments on sites like this than I do from today's "journalism". Turns out, people willing to spout random ideas on a topic are not in especially short supply and 99% of them are
27.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
Check out Marbury v. Madison.
28.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
Replying here since HN cuts us off. >The bad Yelp reviews is the tip of the iceberg, as restaurants are being squeezed out by the extinguishing embrace of food delivery apps and their fees. (This was covered in some of the links you&#x27
29.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
It's not nitpicking to say that the court can invalidate legislation. It's one of the most important powers the court has.
30.
by bobbydroptables 6y ago
>the capacity to cause problems for the rest of the world is much greater. And none of these problems should cause us to lose sleep. A few bad yelp reviews. Uh oh. Carbon emissions should cause us to lose sleep but nuking Lyft and Uber b

More ›