well - at least in your (and mine?) intellectual circles, you should be prepared for the possibility that one writes "well it's obvious we shouldn't legally protect industries from automation, therefore by analogy we shouldn't protect neighbourhoods from technological shocks either" and then someone pounces and declares WAIT I THINK WE SHOULD LEGALLY PROTECT INDUSTRIES FROM AUTOMATION and then you're suddenly stuck with the horrible rhetorical terrain of defending capitalism qua capitalism, the capitalism of the luddites and the early industrial revolution, with enclosures and corporate armies and colonial genocide. Gandhi may show up. Anarcho-primitivism and other radical critiques of consumerism also make an appearance. Your opponent may perform a quickstep between quasi-Keynesian 1960s-flavoured demand-as-socially-unproductive-creation-of-makework and 1980s unemployment-as-the-prime-evil-of-evils, and it is extraordinarily difficult to pin them down. Especially since political scientists and philosophers tend to love the economics-as-a-salad-bar literary practice that I complain so much about.
What I'm saying is, your argument isn't wrong but it is rather flaunting its weaknesses and then not defending them.
The argument from inevitably corrupt political control over local government is plausible, but a little involved, and not obviously true either. You can set it forth, but for the relevant audiences, you have a duty to refute the obligation to defer to local government, rather having someone else refute the duty to defer to central government; this isn't the 1960s apogee of central comprehensive planning of local services. It also isn't Singapore (probably). You can't take it for granted that fellow vaguely-left-leaning intellectuals will agree that humanity has to defer to the Gosplan. Instead there's a lot of the opposite - local government assumed to be not only less corrupt, less rigid, more representative, more efficient etc. but also exercising some independent sovereignty. A human right to local government, so to speak.
If you say "but local government is inefficient then you are valuing economic efficiency over democratic sovereignty, which immediately discredits you - so the question of the level at which democratic mandates are granted needs to be tackled first.
The last argument from mobility walks you into a fight over neoliberalism in the most abstract sense. Easy mobility is one of those complicated economic goods where the extreme lowest and the extreme highest on the privilege curve arguably do not benefit (the former don't move, the latter move regardless), so you are stuck in terrible rhetorical terrain where it's not really clear whether your chosen horse in the Oppression tourney is the deserving working class or the undeserving petite-bourgeosie.
WHY IS EVERYTHING COMPLICATED
Most philosophers I know aren't going to stand up for out-and-out luddism, and are not that into the really radical critiques of capitalism. We're a pretty petty bougie bunch, and satisfied with that.
Even if mobility directly benefits the middle more than the bottom, can't you always redistribute benefits by transfer payments and get pareto improvement?
It seems to me like the hardest counter-argument (which connects to some of the corporate army etc stuff) is that even though a regime of transfer payments is more efficient and generates a larger surplus and higher quality of life for everyone, such a scheme will simply never in a million years happen. We have to settle for stuff like this not because it's better, but because it's possible and better than the actual alternative (which is pure rapacious development with no safety net). But I dunno what you think.
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
So... I was watching Batman (the Keaton one) earlier today, and in passing my brain went "hey, wut..." So I rewound, and holy fuck the Gotham City flag appears to be the Indiana state-flag with "Gotham City" written on it.
Posts
if you squint
what is even the point of making it a sandwich if you're just going to try to dilute it with meat
does the ideal reuben approach 100% meat as the size approaches infinity
WHY IS EVERYTHING COMPLICATED
Most philosophers I know aren't going to stand up for out-and-out luddism, and are not that into the really radical critiques of capitalism. We're a pretty petty bougie bunch, and satisfied with that.
Even if mobility directly benefits the middle more than the bottom, can't you always redistribute benefits by transfer payments and get pareto improvement?
It seems to me like the hardest counter-argument (which connects to some of the corporate army etc stuff) is that even though a regime of transfer payments is more efficient and generates a larger surplus and higher quality of life for everyone, such a scheme will simply never in a million years happen. We have to settle for stuff like this not because it's better, but because it's possible and better than the actual alternative (which is pure rapacious development with no safety net). But I dunno what you think.
wat i kno wat i like
also pet pig tho...
good luck, yo :^:
i know what i'm having for lunch tomorrow.
american food culture is an exercise in the absurd
4neck8
"Always like this."
bad grammar can be fixed though
like that sammich i had at 2nd ave deli a few weeks back was perf
i literally just had pastrami and rye, and put a bit o mustard on it, nothing else
I mean, I don't eat a reuben all the time.
But if I did it sure as shit wouldn't be a Katz one because I would die in a month.
But for the occasional drunk treat, there is something amazing about having half of an animal put between two slices of bread and served to you.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
also pet pigs are p rad
Uncanny Magazine!
The Mad Writers Union
Like... did I actually type that?
What's become of me!?
I wish my life was as hard as it was when I was a kid.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
Dude I'm guessing there is a 99% chance that she dresses this pig in little pig clothes.
I don't know if I should try to interpret this as some commentary on Indiana or not. I'm not sure how I'll relate corn and Gotham City. :P
so cute
still not seeing downsides
oh no they released a bald eagle and had it fly around the stadium during the national anthem at the start of this football game
With a properly capitalized D, amirite?!
Rad is completely unaffected by Too Many Cooks. Like, at all. This was her annoyed response:
"He's the only cook there's too many so he killed all the rest because he's the only cook."
@Cambiata
why... why would you fix it...
I also did not find it funny
This seems like something I might find myself unconsciously doing.
So you're only as broken as me.
Daps
Holy shit my boss was drunk.
He was so drunk.
Met a bunch of my team. Cool folks.
I got a hug when I left from the lady who works with the marine corp international command. She was cool.
Basically had a ton of fun. Crohns kicking my butt again. So I left saying I was tired.
Also I am exhausted.
Body fuck you.
You don't like Beethoven!
props for well timed rude titties
because I was just going "jesus fuck have I not missed 90s television I'm not sure I want to watch even a - oh hello"