« first day (687 days earlier)      last day (1750 days later) » 

12:19 AM
@MartinSleziak I can see some argument here for attempts to deceive, but I can also see it being a parody site.
I think the argument boils down to how visible is the site informing readers that it's not official.
 
1:00 AM
I can't, get over the fact that "ross perot gave bernie sanders a sword" is a true and correct set of words
 
> Only a small disclaimer at the bottom of the site reveals its purpose as a form of "entertainment and political commentary."
 
@murgatroid99 Yeah, that's going to be bad faith, then.
 
From the article, it's a lot of "Biden supported X position" with an unstated "but reversed his position decades ago"
 
I wonder how that ties into election disclosure regulations?
Although, I have a feeling that if the ruling goes against them, they'll throw the operative under the bus.
 
One of the really bad things about our information age is that you can easily easily make things look really bad or really good by taking them out of context.
Claiming it was someone working "without their knowledge".
I could see that
 
1:13 AM
It's fair to criticize someone for their past votes, but it's clearly cherry-picking and implying that he still holds those positions
 
Certainly
So is Arqade pretty liberal across the board or is it just the people who bother to come to the chatroom?
 
This chat room is definitely very liberal
 
I mean at this point it's pretty hard to be a conservative and have an ethical position on most things but I was pretty surprised when I got here and saw the Dump bashing
Spectacular
we can discuss the world going up in flames
 
It's also pretty much the only place Arqade people chat about politics, so it's kind of hard to tell what positions people who aren't here would hold
 
lol
 
1:18 AM
I think we have had one or two people who lean more conservative who don't really like being in this room
 
The truth can hurt
Anyone here watch john oliver
 
I mean, in general, if you show up in a room saying something, and everyone in the room drops everything to take the time to tell you why you're wrong, you probably won't want to stick around. Independent of the objective value of either position.
@Nik3141 Every week
 
See the one he did on warehouses?
 
That's totally not true.
For instance, nearly everyone told me that my moaning in The Bridge and the community check in meta post about old questions needing retagging and closing was wrong, and yet I still am interested in Arqade.
 
I think it's great
mostly
just makes it hard to see new questions
 
1:23 AM
@pppery I hedged like twice in one sentence. You don't need to tell me that it's not a 100% accurate generalization.
 
but that's what search is for
 
I've definitely got some conservative leanings; I grew up super traditional, after all.
But I've had arguments with my brother in law about how he thought Trump was the best thing since sliced bread.
 
@Nik3141 is syfy.com really a good source for news about secret government space planes?
 
no
But the one biggest problem I have with the military is how a lot of their projects are super secret, and they have a ton of them. I understand the need for a military, and I know that we are technically in a war right now, and have been for 96% of our history, but we spend way too much money on guns and tanks and planes rather than heckin highways.
 
That's the military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned us about almost 60 years ago
 
2:30 AM
@ToxicFrog that ice-cream licking has gotten from bad to "people are fucken stupid thanks to the internet" because there are copycats who seem to be doing it for the internet
not sure which is more of a mistake, the internet, social media or all the "celebrities" who come out of social media and makes everyone else think that they can post up stupid shit and get famous that way
 
3:17 AM
Satire but funny:
@Nik3141 Certainly the room is liberal
@TimStone I didn't realize that you need approval to switch out lawyers, that's weird
 
4:10 AM
@Stormblessed copycats as in pandering the same message or copycats as in like Alec Baldwin being Trump
and also, probably should have asked this first, is that legit because it's the onion and i am starting to question if it's legit or news satire or just taken to an extreme for the laughs
 
 
3 hours later…
7:22 AM
How much salt should I costume this thread with
 
 
3 hours later…
10:21 AM
@Nik3141 🙄😅
@badp that's messed up
 
@GnomeSlice I live in Belgium, I had heard a number of things about the Dutroux case including Spaghettigate, but not that there was a huge attempt at dropping things below the radar
 
 
1 hour later…
11:49 AM
'Where the hell is everybody?': N.S. man left locked inside liquor store beta.ctvnews.ca/national/canada/2019/7/8/1_4499663.html
Luckily he just got a good laugh out of it by the sounds of it.
 
12:18 PM
> YouTube will now require copyright holders to put timestamps on alleged infringement and says it will revoke access to those who "repeatedly fail to provide accurate data."
 
@GnomeSlice this might be a good thing.....but it's youtube so can't hold our breath
but this might stop abuse of the DMCA system by shit devs?
and also it might mean Nintendo will stop acting like hard asses since they will need to do more workj
 
12:55 PM
@Memor-X Actually, last I heard Nintendo has relaxed their rules for content creators
 
 
1 hour later…
2:09 PM
Today in News that sounds like satire but isnt:
 
(the flight made an emergency landing at Raleigh-Durham with no injuries)
 
delta is scheduled to retire their fleet of MD-88s by 2020, but until then, the particular aircraft involved in the incident has already been fitted with a replacement engine and is back in service today
 
I don't really know how I feel about that: I don't want it to become another Star Wars anything after 6: all hollywood insta action
 
FC has a pretty good and neutral report on the upcoming social media summit thing fastcompany.com/90373754/…
 
3:03 PM
@Nik3141 pretty sure Tolkien had a whole bunch of lore stuff in The Silmarillion but think it was mostly 1st Age stuff so not sure where they are getting their 2nd age stuff from
 
 
1 hour later…
4:05 PM
@Unionhawk "who gives a shit" kinda rude mate sorry I was just trying to share something I thought the room might be interested in
And I don't know who saladman is
I don't have any opinion on Alexandria oca whatever personally, I can't even focus on local politics atm
 
the congressional candidate at hand here, best known for such films as "pay some people to beat up a car and call it a social experiment"
 
Okay, thanks
 
4:20 PM
> "I have officially filed my lawsuit against AOC for blocking me on Twitter," congressional candidate Joseph Saladino, one of the two men suing Ocasio-Cortez, tweeted on Wednesday. "Trump is not allowed to block people, will the standards apply equally? Stay tuned to find out!"
so there's a few things here.
 
I mean I'm probably the most liberal person you could find and I agree with that last statement.
 
First off, part of the thing with Trump is how he uses Twitter. He's literally used it for declaring policy.
 
Just not the gloating in it
Yeah that is valid
 
Second, he is president, so there's probably additional rules around what he can and can't do.
 
4:22 PM
Third, I'd be curious to know what sort of behaviour lead to blocking. In Trumps case, part of it was he'd literally block people for just disagreeing with him, not just for harassing him. I'd be curious to know if these people were blocked for harassing behaviour.
But the first part is the most important. It's how Trump uses twitter that's made this twitter blocking a thing, from what I understand. Plus, well, he's got more power to actually make laws just by tweeting it. Which is uh, a thing.
 
True true, I assumed that they were doing normal dialogue stuff, but it's twitter so
Yeah its a little nuts that twitter is actually a medium for military dispatches now
This is a little less depressing:
This is fantastic for better efficiency processes but besides lowering consumer costs I doubt it will ever get down in a practical form to the everyday person.
 
4:41 PM
@GnomeSlice You're welcome
 
5:13 PM
@Wipqozn I don't think anyone can make a law just by tweeting it, not even the Donald
I'll be interested to see how laws around social media use start to apply to people in the public eye
Seems like uncharted territory
 
@GnomeSlice He's definitely enacted policy via Twitter. The Trans military ban started that way.
 
Right.. But it still has to go through Congress doesn't it
Anyway I'm not trying to argue I wasn't trying to come across as for or against
 
There are some things he can do without congress it seems?
Like veto power for example
Which might essentially be what this is
I'm sure @Unionhawk could speak more to it
@GnomeSlice Well I'mnot really arguing with you, I'm just pointing out the issues with the portion I quoted.
I mean ultimately it sounds like these people are just acting in bad faith anyways, as is often the case it seems
 
"""often"""
 
@Wipqozn it sounds to me like they want to test the new rules and see what happens. Probably just for the sake of it? I don't know either of them
 
5:20 PM
@GnomeSlice That quote makes it very clear they have an anti-aoc agenda.
 
Well yeah probably
 
Due to the phrasing and tone
 
I suspect a lot of the "can't block me Donnie" commenters have an anti Trump agenda. Everyone has an agenda now. Anyway, I'm still interested to see how this plays out. I bet we'll see more public people getting in hot water for blocking people before long
 
I'm honestly kind of amazed the joey salads congressional campaign is still ongoing, I guess it was worth more content than I thought it would be
plus people have to call you "congressional candidate" and not "guy who does youtube pranks"
excuse me mr police i am no longer allowed to scream "DEBATE MEEEEEEEEEEE" please help this is super important
 
I didn't even know who that was until just now
I'm glad I do though
 
5:35 PM
"guy who does youtube pranks who decided that he could file for a congressional run in order to be called congressional candidate" is about the gist of it
not to be confused with "guy who thought becoming a UKIP MP candidate meant that he could finally and successfully evade his twitter ban" that's baked alaska
basically the same guy, but different
 
lol
 
5:53 PM
> To get at those crucial materials, in April an "impactor" was fired from Hayabusa2 towards Ryugu in a risky process that created a crater on the asteroid's surface and stirred up material that had not previously been exposed to the atmosphere
Atmosphere?
Is 1km ish large enough for an atmosphere? I doubt it
Hayabusa2 is cool project tho
 
@Wipqozn Yeah, it takes a ton of elected officials to override the President's veto.
Which...sorta makes sense, but makes me question what good they do when the prez can just go, "Don't like, veto."
 
Yeah probably a typo/mistake on the part of the publisher
No way it has an atmosphere @GnomeSlice
 
6:36 PM
Chat, can I have your thoughts on whether you support a maximum voting age?
Hang on, sorry, wrong room
 
@Unionhawk That classic Pissing in Your Own Mouth conservative caucus
"You see, back then rich people got away with everything, now they only get away with most things. What was I to do??"
 
@Nzall absolutely not
 
@GnomeSlice Absolutely not as in "I absolutely don't support that" or "you absolutely can't ask taht here"?
 
I don't support that
Might as well this is just a politics room anyway
 
I'm not so sure
 
6:44 PM
@GnomeSlice Why not?
 
I just don't see why seniors should lose the right to vote and participate in their country's future. They also have a lot more life experience than someone like me
I mean there's probably a case to be made for people with dementia, etc
 
I think that as people get older, they do sometimes make bad decisions, or are not completely in control of their mental faculties. However, I saw a ted talk about a man who pretended to be mentally ill to avoid prison and then was locked up for 25? years because he couldn't convince anyone he wasn't insane. I don't want to prevent people just because of their age, but I do think some people shouldn't be able to vote.
I also don't want to infringe on anyone's rights like that so...
@GnomeSlice And of course there is that fact that old people have a lot of life experience.
 
@GnomeSlice I'm not talking about 65 years old or something like that. I'm talking about way older, like 80+. i'm personally somewhat in favor, purely on the idea that the future of a nation should be decided by those who are going to live in it
 
That TED talk is really really good btw
And that is true
I can't even vote yet and so I'm so screwed when it comes to climate change and things like that
 
6:49 PM
@Nzall Why?
 
Okay, how about this? plural scaling vote: during a vote, the youngest voters have their vote count for a certain amount more, and this amount scales down with your age, ending at a 1:1 ratio at the estimated average lifespan on January 1st on the year of elections
 
What arguments are there to take away senior's ability to make their preferences in politics known?
Especially as the people in politics are likely the same age as them.
 
The only one is that they may not be thinking of the future in their decisions.
 
Sure, that's fair.
 
@Frank Which would probably not be the case if their votes didn't count as much
 
6:51 PM
Is it fair to take away their voice because of that?
@SaintWacko That's a good point. I wonder how that would play out, though?
 
@Frank What's your opinion on scaling plural vote?
 
@Nzall At first glance, I don't like it.
It's still minimizing the voice of those who've been around longest.
 
Where younger people who will be affected by the outcome of the election at a far greater scale have more impact on the result
 
I think, unfortunately, that a max age for voting just couldn't work and go with the ideals of the country. Even if we think that generically very old people have a higher propensity for bad decisions, it is still unjustified.
 
It's a reversal of revering elder's wisdom.
Granted, there's a ton of old people that make stupid decisions.
But that's painting with an awful broad brush.
 
6:54 PM
@Frank counterpoint: the elder's wisdom tends to be formed based on their life experiences, which makes it a lot slower to change. This in turn makes the political machine slower at reacting at events
 
That is true, but sometimes we don't want it to go too fast
for example, iraq war
 
@Nzall I don't buy that younger people make better decisions.
 
Look at all the older politicians who struggle to understand the current problems with social media, lootboxes,...
 
If anything, I'd argue that young adults are the likeliest to make stupid, short term decisions.
 
@Frank Maybe not, but it's the young people who actually have to live with those decisions
 
6:57 PM
@Nzall That's a product of our time; the internet has accelerated change, social, political, etc., hugely.
Yes, they struggle to understand, but I'd have a hard time seeing how that means their voice should be meaningless.
 
I agree that young adults make awful decisions, but I think that can be said about every age group. Also, people in general are growing up a lot more slowly and spending more time in school getting educated.
 
@Frank I didn't say younger people make better decisions. I feel like they make equally valid decisions based on their experiences, but older people tend to be very slow in making their decisions, where we sometimes need a fast response
 
@Nzall Older people take longer because they have so much more experience to weigh the pros and cons.
 
true
 
That's not to say they'll entirely understand the issue, but I don't think the answer is to silence them.
If anything, I would argue that we need to educate the politicians, and hold them accountable for their understanding.
Like any most? regulated fields; require a minimum number of hours of upgrading each year.
 
7:00 PM
@Frank See, I'd support that
 
There was a judge that was overseeing a code copyright case, and taught himself Java so he would understand what they were talking about.
 
@Frank Yeah, William Alsup
 
There's still an issue when it comes to long term decisions with consequences they'll never have to deal with.
Someone once floated an idea that any law a politican passes, they have to deal with the consequences of.
 
@Frank How would you do that, though?
 
ie. passing a law negating overtime for fast food workers would require them to work at a fast food joint for a period of time after passing it.
 
7:05 PM
For laws with long term effects, would you only let younger members vote on it?
For laws concerning the internet, would you have to show a proficiency with and certain level of use of the internet?
@Frank And this wouldn't matter for all the wealthy politicians, unless you took away their wealth during that period. Which would never happen
 
@SaintWacko Well, working 70 hours a week and needing to get up before dawn might give them something to think about.
It's a thorny problem.
I'm not sure how we can force understanding, but I don't think the answer is to silence them.
 
@TimStone god, I don't even know if this one is real but it tracks well enough with other nonsense he has done on youtube dot com
 
As far as I can tell it's at least real in the sense that was probably him and that was what it was meant to look like but as you can imagine I did not do a deep dive on this one
 
imagine getting clowned on by h3h3 of all the brain geniuses on that website too
 
@Frank We've got a lot of those right now
 
7:16 PM
@SaintWacko Yeah. There's no easy answers, either.
I'd be a proponent of massively upgrading conflict of interest laws, and bring the hammer down on any politician that violates them even a little.
That, by itself, would likely shake up the entire political landscape.
 
@Frank That I could get behind
Of course, if you have one party that's completely uninterested in enforcing said laws, it gets tricky
 
Or demanding a level of integrity from lawmakers (and cops!) above that of regular citizens, and getting ousted when they break them.
Anyways, I'm just spitballing about potential solutions.
Good discussion, though.
 
8:09 PM
France is going to try and tax big tech apparently? So we might do tariffs again, in the most predictable follow up ever
The President doesn't even like most of these companies and they avoid paying taxes to pretty much everyone and would likely be 100% fine if they had to start paying something so this definitely makes sense
 
8:21 PM
I wish El Presidento would just focus on the important issues right now rather than some tax some other country is putting on some international company.
 
all these companies keep all of their money in delaware, ireland, the netherlands, and the cayman islands anyway
like, legally
is france trying to tie down illicit but legal outflows?
 
> France’s proposed 3% levy would hit global tech companies with at least 750 million euros ($845 million) in worldwide revenue and digital sales totaling 25 million euros in France.
 
It's always super fun to try and nail down a company that claims to technically not have a headquarters
even though it clearly has a headquarters in mountain view ca or whatever
 
Maybe classify headquarters as building with most number of employees.
Or, if they try to skirt that with fluctuating numbers, the building the CEO resides closest to.
 
8:49 PM
@Frank And then the CEO relocates to the building next to the PO box in Cologne
 
@Nzall Building defined as having two more staff.
So it can't just be the boss by himself.
 
@Frank Then they put 2 local sales representatives there or however many it needs to meet your criteria
 
The idea is to make trying to avoid taxes too much trouble to make it worthwhile.
We shouldn't have to force corporations to participate in good faith.
 
9:07 PM
What do you think of an exponential wealth tax?
 
More or less useless.
It just motivates wealthy people to hide it.
And actively hinders anyone attempting to further themselves to cross that, "wealthy" threshold.
 
9:48 PM
Arguably there's no real social benefit to having people try to make money past that threshold
 
Yeah honestly once you have 10 million in assets you have enough money to not have any problems.
What about an exponential income tax?
 
Plus, at that level of wealth, gathering more wealth comes primarily from investing or otherwise using resources to accumulate more resources, rather than from furthering yourself in any meaningful way
@Nik3141 how would that be different from what we currently have?
I guess endless increasing tax brackets?
 
@Frank Reminds me of when people used to say deplatforming was more or less useless. Didn't end up being that way in practice.
 
You'd probably need to also do that to long-term capital gains tax brackets to meaningfully impact the ultra-rich
@Frank But then that would be tax fraud, which is a crime. You could just say that the ultra-rich are essentially immune to the law, but then the whole exercise is moot.
 
Let's say you make 500,000 a year, the highest bracket. You pay 37% income tax.
Let's say you make 2,000,000 a year, also in the highest bracket. You also pay 37% income tax.
 
10:03 PM
So, yes to endlessly increasing tax brackets?
 
Let's say you make 10,000,000 a year, also in the highest bracket. You also pay 37% income tax.
No
Up to a point
How much money a year would you have to make for a 75% tax to be very comfortable?
I would say that it should exponentially increase to 10,000,000.
Above that is also 75%.
 
@Nik3141 I mean, once you hit 10M, you should be comfortable with a 99% marginal rate
 
Yeah I just didn't want to be too extreme
Personally I would argue for a tax rate that increases so that your annual gross income (as your net increases) has a limit of $400,000.
 
@Nik3141 That's not how marginal tax rates work
 
So no one can become uber wealthy.
That's just how I envision the perfect tax system
Well
A better one than the one we have now
 
10:08 PM
In that case, you should support a 100% marginal tax rate above 1M or so
 
I'm not entirely sure if we've been having this conversation from a shared context. A marginal tax rate of X% at $Y means that all income above the first $Y of gross income are taxed at a rate of X%.
 
@puzzlepiece87 Eh. I'm of two minds on that one. It feels too much like silencing someone you don't agree with.
 
@TimStone This district doesn't have the same rule, the judge is just concerned about continuity issues and has said he's inclined to permit it eventually provided DoJ provides some level of assurance
 
10:19 PM
Honestly we mostly need to hire like 10k irs people to put the microscope on the rich lol
That's their only job, to figure out exactly how all of these guys are tax cheats probably
Other than by claiming that marginal rates are absolute rates that just apply based on what threshold you pass
Convincing hundreds of upper middle managers that they'll actually lose money when their income goes above 400k eventually
 
@murgatroid99 Well, it's already tax fraud. Doesn't stop people from doing it anyways.
I dunno about the US, but up here in Canada, if you have enough money to lawyer up, the CRA (our version of the IRS) folds like a cheap tent.
 
@murgatroid99 yeah so if you make 100k with a marginal rate of 10% at 50k (let's say that is the lowest bracket) then you pay 5k in taxes
 
Which just continues the perception that those with the money are immune to the rules the rest of us plebes have to deal with.
 
Instead of paying 2 dudes to stand at the subway chokepoint looking for people trying to save $3, make public transit fully tax funded and pay 2 dudes to look for thousands of dollars in tax crimes
 
@Frank My point is that "people will commit tax fraud" is not a reasonable argument against any particular tax policy. Either they get prosecuted for tax fraud, and the problem is solved, or they don't, and it doesn't matter what the tax policy was because they're not paying anyway.
 
10:23 PM
My proposal wasn't a marginal tax rate anyways but a new unnamed one
 
I have watched the Bagelboss incident videos and my life is not better for this
 
I assume it's unnamed because I came up with it an hour ago
 
@murgatroid99 I feel like it has deeper implications than just dismissing it out of hand.
It's natural to want to reduce your tax burden.
It takes something outside of, "You made money, so give us some" to convince people to pitch in. They have to feel like it benefits them to do so.
 
Are you saying that the problem is that the government isn't spending the tax money well?
 
I think it's a fair assessment that most people are of that opinion.
And there obviously is a benefit; schools, roads, police, etc., and those are taken for granted far too much.
 
10:31 PM
I mean tbf that is probably also true I just don't think it's the issue
 
Right, people aren't committing tax fraud because they disagree with government appropriations, they're committing tax fraud because they want to keep more money.
The richest people should never be getting the most benefit from government spending anyway, because they have the resources to do themselves what other people need government assistance for.
 
@Frank You know people do take those things way too much for granted.
That's why we need the purge
Also, I think most people, when looking at actual government budget figures, can agree that we spend too much on the military and not enough on schools, infrastructure, and healthcare
and environmental incentives
 
10:46 PM
Trump is notoriously tweet-happy and has indicated that information disseminated through his account should be taken as official political government announcements.

A panel of three judges concluded in their ruling on Tuesday:

“The First Amendment does not permit a public official who utilises a social media account for all manner of official purposes to exclude persons from an otherwise-open dialogue because they expressed views with which the official disagrees.”
 
@murgatroid99 True, but I think there's merit to updating the messaging.
Give people a sense of helping out, appeal to their sense of belonging.
I know I'm going to be much easier to convince to spend money to help out those things I feel a part of.
 
11:02 PM
This whole Iran thing is ridiculous
Its sortof the same situation as Cuba was
Or Japan with Commodore Perry
the US tries to push someone around and they say no, and get lots of sanctions. Then, their economy drops and they start doing stuff like that
 

« first day (687 days earlier)      last day (1750 days later) »