KillingTimeItself

It is weird that your comment was removed.

yeah idk i’ve seen weird shit happen a few times so far, btw if you’re a mod and remove shit, please tell people why even if its literally just quoting what they said that got it deleted.

Right this is the contradiction I was poking fun at.

yeah, if you’re a globalism absolutist that would be silly, but tariffs are a useful market force, they allow competition in market sectors that wouldn’t otherwise exist. Farming gets a lot of subsidies for these reasons, and when we’re talking about shit like non essentials a chinese EV specifically, the implications of it on the market are a lot less significant than something like tariffing AA batteries produced outside of america.

The trump admin tariffed canadian lumber imports. Why? There’s a reason they have a lumber industry, it’s because they can do it for cheaper than we can (they have a lot more wooded lands, and a lot less people living there)

yes a 100% tariff on EVs is quite significant, but then again, we have a massive domestic auto manufacturing capability, as well as a general lack of need for “foreign EVs” it might make the market cheaper and more accessible, but that’s coming eventually anyway.

Personally, I prefer the carrot to the stick approach. I think we should do more stuff like the chips act and less stuff like tariffs. This is especially true in the context of technology that aids in the transition to an economy that uses less fossil fuels. The ~$10,000 Chinese EVs would be a pretty massive tool in that arsenal. (Though not as good of a tool as they are in China because of China’s genuinely impressive rail system.) If you want more American made EVs —cool so do I— but we will get there faster with the right industrial policy. The tariffs do little to make that happen.

i’m generally inclined to agree especially on a federal level, IMO i think that tariffs generally have a really subtle market effect, and i think that’s generally the intention of them. They aren’t meant to be massive blanket sweeps. If you really wanted to incentivize people to own EVs you wouldn’t import them at 0% tariff, you would just subsidize owning or buying an EV. You would just make it more accessible, you fund domestic production and development of EVs.

I can’t tell you a quantity in a non-quantitative fashion.

damn, what a philosopher you are. Fucking plato over here.

You want to know how many and the answer remains that I have no idea because I don’t keep count. I’m sorry you don’t like that answer, but it’s still the answer.

that’s fair, i would assume you have some ability to provide some level of estimation, but maybe that’s just my autism. Or maybe you just shitpost way too much to be able to care about anything you say on the internet lol.

Removed by mod

which is why i granted you the flexibility of answering the outside of a quantitative fashion, as i don’t expect people to do unreasonable things.

You then accused me of moving the goalposts (which are my goalposts btw?) in order to make it more answerable, and then refused to answer presumably out of bad faith. I’m literally just curious about how you would conceptualize that.

i didn’t ask you for an example, i’m just curious how much of “people trying to convince you” ends up being “people convincing you”

funnily enough my comment was removed, unsure why, pretty sure it was mostly accurate though lol.

I’m sure you have some very unkind words for Biden after he continued and expanded Trump’s trade war.

it’s a fine balance between putting a 20% tariff on literally every import (i believe trump wanted to do this) and putting a 100% tariff on chinese EVs to give the american auto market a leg to stand on.

It’s a give and take, like everything is. But regardless, globalism is generally good for the economy.

that is a potential problem, though im sure there’s a vim user somewhere that’s fixed it with a bind set.

a text editor that has a tutor because it’s been around for so long and it’s had so many years to establish itself with an outside control interface that’s quite literally about as optimal as it can be. Vim basically allows you to never move your hands away from the homerow keys, even when navigating and doing bulk edits. The sheer amount of gained speed and productivity you get from this combined with the amount of times you’ll have to deal with text editing throughout your life is probably going to outweight any potential learned annoyances.

i doubt it, but i would assume you have some sort of anecdotal references somewhere, considering most living people can recall things and discussions with other people, especially more involved ones.

(the answer was no btw, unless you have really strong proof that there is a government structure of loyalty and power grabbing currently in place, you’re dead in the water on that one)

Also the united states is a collection of states, so technically it’s not a collective state, but a country, the individual states themselves are irrelevant, unless texas is directly sending israel money for the war or something.

however I’m sure you understand that literal fucking Nazis leading NATO is a sign of it being Nazi friendly, don’t you think?

i would be inclined to agree with you in the case that like, they were pushing nazi ideals, and like, hated jews. Or something.

Also i’m not even sure this is accurate today? How many original nazis are even still alive?

I’m also assuming that when you say “leaders of NATO” you mean “a member of NATO” NATO is literally just a military alliance, it’s not like it has a governmental structure, at best it has a democratic process, or something like that, but im guessing you probably don’t even know how NATO works beyond the fact that it had a nazi in it once and that is bad maybe.

You have to give me more information than “there was a nazi in NATO once” before i can even begin to consider whether or not this is a good or a bad or completely ambivalent thing.

if the original statement is useless (it’s not a question, so i’m not repeating it) then my question should be more useful in the context of that useless statement, considering i have a specific word removed that changes the entire meaning of the question.

well no that was people trying to convince you, i can try to convince you that the sky is yellow for example, but that’d be fucking stupid.

I’m just curious how many people have actually managed to convince you of something.

idk if its the exact same goals. idk much about solarpunk aside from the fact that it’s techpunk futurist. Matched with primitive and simple living. theoreticalyl any style of government would work with it, but im guessing anarchy tends to pair with it nicely (i.e. little to no local government, but government on a state/federal level explicitly bound in its capabilities of power.

tankies or hexbear users im not really sure what their goal is, tankies love russia and china, so presumably they want more of that and less of the west, or just less of the west, i’m not really sure. western commies are usually what i call “pseudo commies” they want communism only because our western capitalism sucks and is bad. If they had capitalism but non shit they would like it equally as much.

anarachist orgs are like a centralized lemmy instance.

average political nihilist experience

the part where the CCP is pretending to be anarchists on the internet

as a dbzer9 instance user myself, yeah pretty much.

bro this shit came from chicago and they call themselves the “wobblies?” Who the fuck created this a british person?

Shitposting aside, we do love a good humanitarian group posting from time to time

environmentalism is morality sure, but doesn’t it seem silly to use an appeal to morality to push for more morality.

wait until you find out about all of the infrastructure and build costs for these things.

realistically we should do everything, but transit is one of the significant providers of emissions, along with power production and agriculture.