volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
But Congress is NOT trying to stop him. There is no bill on the table that would tell the president not to pay the debts, and such legislation would be legally unenforceable if it even existed.
Instead, this is just about the president seeking to expand his power to borrow against the nation's credit. Congress is skeptical of giving him that power, as it should be under our system of checks and balances.
Should the president refuse to pay the lawful debts, that would be grounds for impeachment in my view, so he really should stop threatening it.
So that would refuse to raise the debt ceiling unless EVs were subsidized?
Speaking of hostage taking...
Congress didn't make it illegal to research gun deaths. That is certainly researched even today.
But really, this is apples and oranges. Cars are far, far different from guns.
The problem is that those clear majorities of voters don't actually exist when it comes down to specifics.
For example, you may get a ton of people to agree that some abortion should be available, but once you start asking about particular methods, specific limitations on length into pregnancy, and other guidelines, disagreements show up, and the apparent consensus breaks down.
All that has happened around abortion reflects that political reality, that people have honest disagreements over abortion, and the only way to resolve the issue is to work to build actual agreement, which is unlikely to be possible.
@barney@mas.to @Tengrain @TonyStark @edwardchampion@universeodon.com @GreenFire @JamesBazan @mentallyalex@beige.party
The SCOTUS ruling supports the 10th Amendment...
@JamesBazan @AnneTheWriter1
Yeah, randomized server is pretty much the only alternative I could think of, but then you get into issues of the centralized list, who can be on it, what happens when there's drama over a server that the devs don't control, etc.
Sure, it's an option, but it, too, has downsides.
At least it is an alternative solution to the problem, though.
@NEETzsche and @ArneBab sure, but I wonder how many users are in that position, with such established communities to follow.
Twitter-type users have always struck me as particularly lacking in community. From the way they talk, the whole world is their community... which is to say, they have no community :)
And I see SO MANY people here echoing the same perspective, referring to the whole Fediverse as their community.
Yeah, instances reflecting communities sounds like a nice ideal to me, but I don't think that experience is the norm among users.
Ha, see I like it when someone doing something good for me has a profit motive. It means they're more likely to keep at and not get bored and wander off.
That's why I pay my doctor :)
So long as they produce a system that's open and resistant to capture I hope they can make all the money they want, so it doesn't turn into yet another half-finished hobby project.
Well it's a big issue that these are designed decisions that go to the core of the protocol. These are how they are engineered in the first place.
It's like saying, yeah we decided to build a dump truck, but can we make it a sports car? Can we make this giant massive dump truck go really really fast?
The answer is no. Without completely ripping out and redoing the core of the protocol, without alienating everybody who has already bought into the protocol, that change can't be made.
ActivityPub made its choices that can't really be taken back now.
And we live in a world where a whole lot of best protocols didn't win. That's just how it goes.
ActivityPub is all about instances. All the power goes to instances. For example, if you want to move from one to the other you have to rely on the instance you are leaving to support the redirect to your new home.
Bluesky is more focused on users so it doesn't matter where you were, people will find you at your new home.
Disagree.
When you're ordering from Amazon and avoiding all human contact you get away from psychology but still have to deal with math in terms of everything from cost per unit through interest rates on the credit card that's going to be charged.
Bluesky is already sharing, though.
They are still early, they are still in beta, and it looks like their documentation is incomplete. I imagine they will finish it in due time.
But so far it's looking like their protocol is better than ActivityPub in terms of empowering users, so I'm all for that.
#USPOL, TRUMP
@marchuff@mastodon.social that might be a reasonable way of thinking about him.
If I remember right (I honestly don't care) Trump doesn't drink, but he's had decades of practice disconnecting his thought processes so it's about the same result. It's just the habit he has formed through practice over all of those years, so that's what you get.
Her voters voted her into that chair.
To demand that she leave is to override the democratic process that put her into that position.
Don't like her being there? Fair enough. But it was the will of her constituents that she be there, and so she is.
#USPOL, TRUMP
@0xamit I think the thing about #Trump is that he's one of those celebrities who has spent so much time in character that he becomes the character.
And his character is this completely spineless, reactionary mouth that does nothing but respond to audience reaction.
You can see it when he says something in front of a crowd that the crowd doesn't particularly like, so he quickly pivots, says something they do like, and then doubles down on that path.
The problem is that he's become so practiced in constantly pandering to an audience that he's forgotten how to speak for himself, and that's what you're seeing here.
It's not that his brain is mush as much as his brain has been trained to work the crowd, so he's sort of lost without one.
Cw politics
No it has nothing to do with the GOP acting.
The Treasury's monthly report shows that they have plenty of revenue to service their debts. This is 100% executive branch business at this point, since the Treasury will have enough money to pay the debt, it must, as per the 14th Amendment.
And there's nothing the GOP can do to change that since they are not holding the executive branch at the moment.
Biden's Treasury has enough money to service its debts according to its own accounting reports. This is out of the hands of the Congress and 100% up to Biden, and if he directs the Treasury to spend money on things other than servicing the debt, that would be an impeachable offense.
Even his threatening it to try to get more borrowing power is pretty bad.
USpol, job growth
The problem is that job growth slowed down even as it was still trying to recover from pre-pandemic levels.
It wasn't so much phenomenal as it was measured and expected, reflecting the pent-up demand from a national lockdown.
There is no us and them, but them they do not think the same.
Cw politics
The limitation on presidents acting to unilaterally borrow against the credit of the United States is not in the 14th Amendment but in the body of the Constitution which assigns that authority to the Congress.
It's because we don't want presidents to have the power to by themselves obligate potentially generations of citizens to repaying the debts of today instead of spending money on the needs of tomorrow.
So no, the president cannot claim that power. It is clearly given to the other branch of government, as a check in the checks and balances arrangement.
That being said, the 14th Amendment DOES obligate the president to service the debts out of revenues in the Treasury, so if he orders otherwise, that would be impeachable.
Why in the world would rich people bother trading cash back and forth? That would tie up the cash so they would never be able to spend any of it on housing or cars or whatever, and I have seen rich people with houses and cars, so I know that can't be the case.
Also how do you put a stock in a bond?
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
