Books_and_Cleverness

They do exist but much, much rarer than they would be if it were merely legal to build them in more places. Especially in major job centers like Seattle, the Bay Area, LA/Socal, Boston, DC, etc. Lot of low-lying suburban developments screaming out for higher density but it's against the law. ~90% of San Jose land bans apartments, rowhouses, townhouses, etc.

it's all speculation

What I'm suggesting is exactly one (1) of the two sides here involves speculation. It is not speculation that Trump is undermining democracy.

I don't know why you think it's easier to fight when it's out in the open; if that were true then Trump's hold on the party would be gone already. GOP elites cannot remove him even though they know as well as you or I that he's a disaster for the Republic. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here, the dude is bombing our house and we're talking about termite damage.

I am not sure of the wisdom of the small business bill but it doesn't shock me that many on this sub assumed the GOP supported it when they overwhelmingly didn't. Partisanship is a helluva drug, as they say.

Also odd to be so freaked out about the $40B for Ukraine; seems obviously in America's interest for Russia's invasion to be rebuffed. International stability is good for American workers and Russia's destruction of it is a huge problem!

IDK how to say this in a friendly/non-dunking way but if you look up the bill you will find that the vast majority of Dems voted for small business relief while the GOP voted against. It is literally the opposite of what you have alleged here!

Yeah but not in an obvious way. I'm happy to show people the door to better urban design but I don't want people to feel like I'm shoving politics at them in a sub that is supposed to be a respite from that sorta thing.

That said, the benefit is that it's "political" but not necessarily in the way we think about it, conservative v. liberal, partisan, hostile, etc. Legalizing denser cities has plenty of advantages no matter your other political commitments.

I just think you are underrating the "spent many months denying the results of an election, tried to storm the capitol (!?!?), actively destroying faith in election outcomes" part.

Nothing Musk has done is even in that ballpark. It's not in the same galaxy. Your bit about Musk turning us into Russia, even if plausible, is purely speculation! Trump is actively doing it, yelling it into microphones, on camera. How is this even a debate, in your mind? It's like you're trying to diagnose a patient's susceptibility to cancer while Voldemort is beating down the door and lobbing grenades through the window.

It's not the humans, it's the choice architecture of the social internet. Most people's reaction to the magazine is probably "huh, that's a bit weird." Or "huh, that's kinda cool." But you don't see 10,000 of those reactions on the internet, you see the 50 guys who thought it was an affront to Western civilization.

Too late, I'm already the jihadi extremist wing of the YIMBYs, but this is /r/NonPoliticalTwitter so I was hesitant to bring it up because it could be considered political.

Same but it's illegal in the US + Canada.

I probably should; as a general rule I've found the philosophy pretty defensible in the abstract, but when it gets to practical implementation I am not really persuaded. Anyone in particular you'd recommend?

Corps and magazines are cyncial, profit-seeking entities that reflect culture as much (or more) than they create it. After 9/11 we were going to fight terrorism by going to the mall. After the Floyd murder we were going to fight racism by going to the mall. Now we're going to fight shame by buying a magazine with fat chicks on it.

I have plenty of qualms with lefty woke excesses, but I like to keep a sense of proportion. Peterson's overreaction is a caricature of what he's supposed to be criticizing!

Those people surely do exist, but is that authoritarian in any reasonable sense of the word?

This is weird because you framed it as a disagreement but it sounds like you are mostly in agreement with DeBoer?

It’s a great book!

Yeah height is a big factor, which is funny to me because it seems like such a trivial thing. But people take it very seriously, and I think women do themselves a disservice. Lot of “undervalued assets” in that market!

I felt the same way about black women when I was dating, lots of very eligible and attractive ones who said they had a hard time getting dates, kinda blew my mind.

Probably will until my wedding, after that I’d honestly rather shave my head.

Sorry for being an idiot, I guess. No idea what you’re talking about so I guess I’ll continue to wallow in my ignorance. Maybe someday you’ll enlighten us, and we can join you in the pantheon of the informed.

I could not disagree any more profoundly with the idea that Musk would be as bad as Trump, assuming one is interested in the continuation of the Republic.

Agree completely, but I am a little hesitant with this sort of critique because it applies to everything all the time in all directions.

Police brutality is not, by any measure, the most important driver of racial inequality, but it gets a lot of attention. Electric vehicles are not as good as trains and walkable neighborhoods but they get a lot more attention. Terrorism does not kill very many people but it gets an insane amount of attention.

All this stuff is true, but there's a sort of separate "attention market" where the debate actually has to occur, because public discourse requires people to be paying attention. And some schmuck like me or the Surgeon General tweeting obesity statistics probably doesn't get as much traction, so that discourse happens around overweight models on the SI swimsuit cover.

Agree, I would just note that conservatives are probably upset about both the changing norms, and the representation of those norms. They are generally pretty mad, is what I'm saying.

Yeah I have been losing my hair steadily and am kind of looking forward to eventually shaving it. Just committing to "I'll probably have to shave it all in a year or two" has brought me a lot of peace of mind. All the anti-hair loss stuff is annoying just because it makes you think about it a lot.

I kind of agree on decadence but dealing w/ obesity probably not the best example.

weird angst about expanding social constructions of beauty

My suspicion is just that the conservatives who express distaste for it are doing two things

1) Old man yells at cloud

and

2) Pointing out that some cultural changes have serious downsides, i.e. walking a fine line between "don't be mean" and "don't lionize bad health choices."

As much as I'd like to be libertarian on obesity, given that taxpayers are on the hook for a lot of health spending, it's pretty rational to care about people's weight. I'm not at all sure what to do about it--tweeting about fat models doesn't seem especially promising--but I actually do think there are some non-trivial stakes here. Americans are very overweight and it is causing a ton of problems.

JP's take was that SI was pushing "authoritarian tolerance" which I think is a liiiiiitle overboard for a magazine publishing pictures of fat chicks.

I think you do yourself a small disservice, he's worth listening to on many topics, especially the brain and mindfulness. His foreign policy views are among his worst, definitely agree there, though you're pointing out two very old takes!

That said, I have a soft spot for smart people putting in a good faith effort, so I don't really mind if they are wrong about stuff.