Clinton and Obama campaigned on things they had no plan on actually accomplishing. Biden campaigned on none of those things but actually accomplished what Clinton and Obama promised but was punished nonetheless.

These guys named themselves after a technology in a fantasy story where an evil overlord tried to suppress every race. I mean this is all a big joke right? They can’t be serious with this shit right?

Driven policy in both Republican and Democratic administrations (until Biden’s).

Slight modification. No matter what politicians say this is “not how the economy works.” Never has. However both parties have been captured, for a long damn time, by the finance industry, causing much harm to our economy and society at large. So the needs of investment banks, PE, hedge funds have

Hmm. Just to clarify, are you calling people who are generally aligned with you, racist? That’s certainly an approach but not one that’s going to win us elections.

Let those billionaires run away to Texas or Florida. I’m from CA and they did the same and the state is chugging along fine.

Diverse and not social cohesive. Socialism there just led to concentration of power and stagnation. Don’t get me wrong, the strength of the US is its federalist system. If more governmental control works on a city or state level, by all means go for it!

Since these are correlative we can’t tell what is driving what. But based on my experience, good governance and social cohesion makes people more willing to allow the government to control more of the economy. In a place like the US, that’s not going to work. The country I came from was large,

The US is a mixed economy. Medicare is socialist. Social security is socialist. We fund basic research is healthcare and high tech with public funds. State by state we fund public education. The countries with high levels of QoL also have a high level of social cohesion and trust in institutions.

That but it’s not an either or situation from my perspective.

That’s the main reason I don’t believe that socialism is a panacea. I think, at its best, a country that use its private funds to create an intellectual “commons” but allows private companies to commercial that intellectual property is the one that benefits most people. The US has had moments like

I agree that our companies are being allowed to run amok. I agree we use tax subsidies for the benefit of private industry. A lot of times this is done in a depressingly bipartisan way but it is largely a Republican policy.But I’ve seen plenty of socialist oriented countries run with same corruption

It’s in my first line.

The US. A small, homogenous, oil rich country is more like Alaska than the lower 48. And guess what - Alaska hands out oil dividends too. Socialism! From a Republican controlled state. Thus my opinion that these labels are not helpful in driving policy but rather in creating tribes.

Spectrum and it was a shit show. I’m talking central planning, nationalizing “the heights of industry” and everything stagnated. It took 2 years, bribes, and paying high costs for a phone line. Norway is Norway because of good governance - not its economic mix. And Norway is not a proper analog to

We don’t get our money’s worth at all from the taxes we pay to the government. But the reason I reject the label socialist is that a pure socialist country doesn’t exist (nor does a pure capitalist country). Everything is on a spectrum. The country I came from tried to be more on the socialist

2nd homes that meet a very high price threshold no less. I’m not a socialist by any means, but to say “New York is cooked” because of this says a lot more about those with the big megaphone than it does about Mandani’s policies.

“Antics?” He’s not an 8 year old child. Stop minimizing who this guy is.

What the fuck? These guys all just have turds for brains don’t they.

I agree. The pernicious thing about this whole thing is traditionally very liberal and very conservative parts of the population have united to fuel this “skepticism.” The only ones who have gained are then grifters selling alternative “treatments” or crazy ideas like herd immunity.

So do you think this will eventually make its way to the US or is it a China only fork in products?

Ostensibly this about a real problem in science - the well known replication problem as well as the tendency for science to hew to orthodoxies without unbiasedly considering new evidence. I’ve seen both these things happen in practice. But man, the cast of characters they decided to include. 🤦🏽‍♂️

These guys believing their slop machines are close to sentience actually tells you everything you need to know about how shallow their understanding of humanity is.

CNBC is just Fox News with a cartoonish take on business. It’s ridiculous.

Hurt patients.

I financially support ProPublic but this is outright misleading coverage. I know I’m spitting in the wind here given the lack of nuance in healthcare discussions but I have to in good faith try to counter this lest we, as voters, elect people who have misguided policy ideas that will ultimately

It’s a one time therapy and the disease is rare. While NIH and charities may have funded early studies, the human trials and manufacturing of a complex therapy are all private and the bulk of the costs lie there (I’m talking >90%). The company (and investors) takes all that risk on their own.

Not all weight is equal. An ICE truck and an EV SUV may weigh the same but are likely totally different beasts when it comes to emissions, wear on the roads (and which roads), and likelihood to cause injury. Frankly coming from GM and Toyota I have to believe this benefits them at the cost of EVs.

Second only to Herc.

Great. /s