why are we restricted to windowed layouts of applications? I think we can get more creative than that. I would like a more fully immersive experience that doesn't try to mimic our constrained current experience. Getting to the pixel level and determining the outcome based on that is missing the forest for the trees.
managing emotions is at the crux of all of this. those productivity apps try to remove the emotion from certain decisions and give you some organizational help so you can act procedurally throughout your day. giving yourself a deadline is another approach coming that tries to focus the emotions you already feel into a productive force. a deadline will provide clarity because your subconscious will try to prioritize it over the small details that those productivity apps will have you continuously document, which can be a pain and sometimes create more friction when you're stuck with zero momentum.
if your life is already moving fast and you are managing a ton of different things, I think those productivity apps will provide a great resource to remind you of other things that need to get done and remove the friction that comes with context switching.
Would you include political ideology as another problem? If bitcoin/ether fulfilled their potential, wouldn't that mean the US dollar would fall as the world reserve currency and thereby weaken the US government's influence? This seems to be the main reason for introducing a CBDC as it gives nation states complete control over their money.
I've been mentally planning all of this in my head for when I move to a place with enough space. The amount of detail and research provided in one page is nothing short of astounding. I know I would have never done anything close to this level of work had I done it myself. This level is something else entirely.
I would like nationalization if it were split up into a research co-op with manufacturing contracted out to US companies. I would like to maintain some level of competitiveness but also have knowledge sharing across research teams.
I think it's smarter to go after automation and consumption than land value tax as of this moment. It's a lot harder to measure the true value of land compared to consumption. Also, the VAT can also be adjusted for non essential goods. Consumption is quite strong in this country. It's wise to target that.
Consumption and automation are beneficial activities. Not smart to tax them.
Excluding others from a valuable natural resource is deeply immoral unless compensation to those excluded is paid.
The difficulty(or not) of measuring the "true value" of that compensation isn't a justifiable reason that we should as close to it as is reasonably possible.
this is very inflammatory and false. The VAT is not highly regressive. Money is power but poverty stricken people literally have zero money. How are gov't "programs" going to help? democrats love "programs" because it just gives them something to show off. it hardly solves any real problems.
I doubt you've lived through any sort of poverty or have felt like the walls were closing in on your life, but people live that everyday. For those that have been through it, it hardly feels like a "weird 10x play"
It is not inflammatory or false. VAT taxes are regressive consumption-based taxes, and poorer people disproportionately bear the costs compared to the wealthy. It's very well established among economists https://www.quora.com/Why-is-value-added-tax-regressive
> I doubt you've lived through any sort of poverty or have felt like the walls were closing in on your life, but people live that everyday. For those that have been through it, it hardly feels like a "weird 10x play"
The poor and working class of this country clearly have a candidate they stand by, and it's Bernie Sanders, who is about to set a record for the largest number of small dollar contributions in US history. You won't find them at $5600 a plate dinners at Sam Altman's mansion in California. To their great credit, the working poor in this country seem much more interested in an agenda that proposes real change to systemic inequality and poverty, rather than just pouring some regressively funded UBI candy coating over the existing broken system and expecting it to not get much, much worse.
VAT is a tax on goods and services. Wealth inequality comes from people owning future streams of income, not stuff; rentiers, in other words. To the degree that VAT decreases wealth inequality, it's only by harming the net present value of those future income streams. It would be better to have a more equitable distribution of ownership without harming wealth production.
Sharing the gains in some manner is the right goal, no question. The question is what approach will be most effective. Bernie’s corporate accountability plan is thus the perhaps more direct set of proposals instead of something like the FJG and climate plan. Oddly enough, the CAP is not talked about much yet and there’s already dozens of holes in it. Maybe in 1975 it would work but corporations have moved far beyond what Bernie’s plan could accomplish. Admittedly better than nothing but the administrative overhead of this should be pushed with a massive overhaul of our federal regulatory agencies including improving the career paths of those in federal service.
Yang’s got the dynamic of federal bureaucrats down correctly. It’s the same ones I went through and why I left federal service a decade ago. Bernie’s commitment to service is incredibly inspiring but relying upon other people to be more like Bernie is not a plan, nor is relying upon more executives to be like Yang is not a plan either.
I’m not an either/or kind of person and see Bernie and Yang working together on legislation as a real, material step forward.
