The thing is more New Yorkers who have some sway on any side of this issue read the NY Post more than they do Lemmy. They read it more than any other thing other than maybe The Facepals or Instaslap or whatever the kids are into these days.
So - Yes, total garbage, ridiculously apparent propaganda, and also more effective and real-world than what we have. (not as effective as actually being the Mayor though, so good on him)
There's far more than enough money to go around, it is that most spending is inefficient. Lunches should be free and healthy, books should be free unless it's intentionally damaged, teachers should be paid well (60k minimum) and management should take a pay cut.
NYC teachers max out at about $124,000 after 15+ years and if they have a master's. That's not some huge amount in NYC. At least they get a pension so they can move to Costa Rica after they retire and live somewhat comfortably.
That's livable in that area for the most part. I imagine engineers range 80k to 180k in the same area unless they work their way into management or are in a particular in demand field.
Esta entrada fue editada (miércoles, 22 de julio de 2026, 7:16)
As a Costarican, I can tell you that inflation will bite them hard when they arrive. Anything below $25K USD a year will have them scrounging, and that's not even counting the apartment rates or a cleaner service.
Arguably, more rural schools or those in lower income areas should be paying proportionally better for teachers, to attract talent that would otherwise have no interest in being in that area. Those schools tend to be where students and their families have little or no say about what districts they are in, as they use regional magnet schools that cater to multiple small towns. They’d have to completely upend everything and move a substantial distance to have options urban folks take largely for granted.
Currently the rural districts pay nearly nothing and its lower than other places which also pay nearly nothing, so they get the worst of the worst educators who can’t find better and it keeps everyone’s wages depressed generationally.
But social mobility is a dream of that past that’s long since dead and buried anyway.
Esta entrada fue editada (martes, 21 de julio de 2026, 16:21)
It depends on circumstances, you're assuming a scenario vs the scenario of a local who went to a good university and wants to stay in their small town. Ideally things are left up to the decision of each community and school board. Like if they want to commit a particular percentage of the funds to teachers pay to attract a greater talent then that's a decision they can make. My argument is mostly that at minimum teachers should make a decent living wage in respect to the local market. 60k in a rural town in Mississippi, Montana, or West Virginia isn't the same as 60k in NYC, SF, LA, DC and so on as the default minimum.
I never said anyone shouldn't make a decent wage wrt:local economy. But I live in a depressed economy, and have my whole life, so I know full well just how stuck people get financially when they are from low cost areas or spend too much of their career time in one. Hardly anyone goes to a good school and then goes back to their shitty home town on purpose, because college is expensive and they can’t pay it off while making peanuts in their hometown. It ends up being an option only desperate people take, which means shitty teachers, which in turn means dumb kids who go on to lead low income lives.
I said rural and low cost areas should pay proportionally more, probably just through state budgets rather than giving them an option they will always choose to fuck up, to attract talent, because it’s good for the community across generations. A rising tide lifts all ships, and maybe people would go to a good school and then go back to their hometown, if their hometown was offering them a decent quality of life.
Its true that 60k is different in low cost areas vs
... Mostrar más
I never said anyone shouldn't make a decent wage wrt:local economy. But I live in a depressed economy, and have my whole life, so I know full well just how stuck people get financially when they are from low cost areas or spend too much of their career time in one. Hardly anyone goes to a good school and then goes back to their shitty home town on purpose, because college is expensive and they can’t pay it off while making peanuts in their hometown. It ends up being an option only desperate people take, which means shitty teachers, which in turn means dumb kids who go on to lead low income lives.
I said rural and low cost areas should pay proportionally more, probably just through state budgets rather than giving them an option they will always choose to fuck up, to attract talent, because it’s good for the community across generations. A rising tide lifts all ships, and maybe people would go to a good school and then go back to their hometown, if their hometown was offering them a decent quality of life.
Its true that 60k is different in low cost areas vs high cost ones, but thats part of my point. Its not like our low income areas are a separate country with their own currency and stuff. The only way it matters that 60k spends differently is if you never plan to leave. Wanna go on vacation? That 6k trip that’s reasonably affordable at 1/20th yearly wages for someone in California who makes 120k (comparing high wages in respective markets), is 1/10 yearly wages for someone making 60, a substantial difference in impact for the same life experience for two people making similarly “good wages” in their local economy, and there aren’t any poor area discounts, either. If they want to sell their house and buy one somewhere with better opportunities, they will absolutely for sure still need a substantial mortgage they will never get approved for because everything is so much more expensive than what they are selling from, and their work income history is so much lower than what’s required. Our goods aren’t cheaper either, other than maybe food and gas. That big purchase is proportionally bigger for someone who earns less, even if everyone around them also earns less.
I’d like to see the income distribution curve sort of level out a bit where mobility (physical, in this case) was a real option for all of us rather than something you have to take a massive risk of homelessness or be from a wealthy area to do. I’d like to see wages in low income areas increase faster than those in big urban areas, simply because they have been so much more stagnant for so much longer (min wage here is still 7.25 and lots of jobs still pay that -can’t live on that here either). Mostly, I’d like to see quality of life increase in poor areas, and that means more money available to the local economy. One of the ways to do this is to get better educational outcomes, make the future workforce desirable. Better education also tends to decrease conservatism, so it’d be doubly good to do. Snowball effect and everything.
it's just down the road from me. it's a convergence point between a bunch of mining towns so it's a bit of a significant labor organization point in central Appalachia. it's also where Mother Jones founded the UMWA. also prior to European colonization it access between the Allegheny highlands and the great valley made it an ideal trading hub thanks to the New River, so it holds significance to indigenous rights organizers in Appalachia as well. the fact that the median income is $19k/yr is very much a policy choice of enforcing poverty
There are some issues around corruption and school management. Schools near me requested substantial funding to replace aging AC units. The very next year after they got it, a number of the AC units failed, and they couldn't replace them. An audit showed that the entire funding for the AC replacement was divided among the top administrators and paid as a bonus.
That said, the way to stop that from happening isn't to defund public schools and just repeat the same problem with private schools. You put in some oversight. You make them provide reports for the funding, spot-check, and trust with verification.
Pushing kids into private schools by defunding will make education (and safety) impossible to monitor.
My local school district (that I actually work for as a bus driver) brought in a new superintendent for $600,000 a year. Did fuck all except for bringing in a bunch of his cronies to work meaningless jobs for over $200,000 a year and pissing off the teachers with more meaningless busywork. Three years into his six-year contract the school board had to run him out, by basically offering him his remaining $1.8 million to leave peacefully.
I wouldn't say everything Mamdani does is bad. I would support his opposition to Israel, & I would be happy if he could somehow arrest Netanyahu.
That said, I think his rent freeze policy is a bad idea. A rent freeze is just the government forcing landlords not to be able to raise rents when a tenant leaves, even if the cost of providing the good has gone up.
I don't think the government should make it harder for private businesses to provide goods & services. Rent freezes hurt smaller landlords, leaving only the biggest companies able to afford staying in the market. They also lead to rundown buildings, which the government could then use as an excuse to step in and take over those properties. That is probably Mamdani's intent & goal, since undermining the effectiveness of capitalism could popularize socialism.
With New York reviving a citywide rent freeze, Joseph Salerno returns to the economics of price controls. Following Mises and Rothbard, he shows how a single...
If Trump goes to war with Iran, the price of oil goes up. Since you're restricting supply, things like airfare also go up because they rely on jet fuel to provide their service. It's the same with housing. It's all supply & demand.
Yes and a price limit could be applied to oil there just isn't. This technically causes a "shortage" (which means something specific not just whatever you think) but housing and oil are complex markets and there's a lot of nuance. Also housing doesn't get consumed or ever move. It's not like the landlord can ship a building somewhere that rents are higher.
good thing "providing" housing costs nothing. it only makes money. you get the equity of owning the building and the rent. the cost of upkeep is always FAR behind rent. the idea that providing housing costs a huge amount of money is absurd. It's parasitic. If the people paying the rent, which is the upkeep and additional profit, owned the equity, they would also eventually break even and make money. Talking to people like they aren't smart enough to understand how badly they are getting robbed, it's an argument. it's assholery.
Honestly, I'm under the impression that building a building requires scarce resources and labor, which have opportunity costs reflected in market prices, and maintaining a building likewise requires ongoing expenditures. I would agree that, when someone becomes a landlord, the goal is generally to earn a return on the capital they risk, while facing uncertainties such as tenants not paying rent, changes in government policy, and other market risks. Whether any particular landlord is a good or bad person is something I can't really speak to.
a building is an asset, not a liability, it always increases in value, and even if it is burned to the ground on a higher than average rate, the land it's on remains incredibly valuable and an asset. the people living there are losing money. the people who own it are gaining money WITHOUT TENANTS. the equity goes up. period. that's why people go into debt to own the land. because it's an asset.
Up until December 1976, the Post was a center Left newspaper. It was quieter than the Daily News and less pretentious than the Times. Oscar Madison was a sports writer for The Post.
I do think that relying on government programs instead of voluntary associations will increase poverty over time. Going further into debt, or needing to borrow from the state budget just to stay afloat a little longer, is like taking out one credit card to pay off another. I think that's a bad idea.
So, to me, choosing not to step up and help solve a problem yourself (for example, through voluntary associations), while instead asking the government to use force to solve it on your behalf (by voting for government programs funded through taxation), is both a bad idea and immoral.
P.S. I know this is not a very Lemmy-friendly opinion, I know you guys tend to love democratic socialism. I think you're well-intentioned people, but you would cause poverty and stagnation if you got your way, though. Ideally, you wouldn't rage at me for thinking differently from you. (Take note that I hold no political power & admit I very well could be wrong, or propagandized, or whatever.)
I appreciate your point of view and, sure, in a different system relying on "voluntary work" would be the best option, self reliant, not dependant on market demand and government issues. Sadly we do not live in a system that allows for any real amount of free time, people that have extra work energy are few and far between, not because they are a bunch of money hogging ghouls but because the average person struggles to pay for his housing, his food, his clothing etc.
I’m under the assumption that the cost of living would decrease if there were a denationalization of money, or at least an asset-backed currency. If I’m wrong about that, then I’m probably wrong about much of my other ideological beliefs. I’m also assuming that a high cost of living, and secularism (which again I know isn’t a popular opinion on Lemmy, since you all tend to love atheism), are barriers to participation in voluntary associations. However, y'all could probably admit that churches make it easy to volunteer. Reliance on government programs also has a crowding-out effect on voluntary associations, which I would equate to fixating on the Eye of Sauron, or on evil itself, instead of trying to work within the realm of the good. Politics is a realm of toxicity that I think we should minimize, & voluntary associations are where we can do the most good & find the most agreement.
P.S. I'm a Christian, but I don't claim to speak for my religion since I'm a stupid, flawed human with biases, deficiencies, & so on, like we all are.
... Mostrar más
I’m under the assumption that the cost of living would decrease if there were a denationalization of money, or at least an asset-backed currency. If I’m wrong about that, then I’m probably wrong about much of my other ideological beliefs. I’m also assuming that a high cost of living, and secularism (which again I know isn’t a popular opinion on Lemmy, since you all tend to love atheism), are barriers to participation in voluntary associations. However, y'all could probably admit that churches make it easy to volunteer. Reliance on government programs also has a crowding-out effect on voluntary associations, which I would equate to fixating on the Eye of Sauron, or on evil itself, instead of trying to work within the realm of the good. Politics is a realm of toxicity that I think we should minimize, & voluntary associations are where we can do the most good & find the most agreement.
P.S. I'm a Christian, but I don't claim to speak for my religion since I'm a stupid, flawed human with biases, deficiencies, & so on, like we all are.
What do you believe the reality is, & what do you consider to be the facts? What do you assume my ideological beliefs are, that would lead you to claim my ideology is based on my imagination?
What's top of mind is Alexis de Tocqueville's comparisons between the USA and France mentioned in Democracy in America. So I suppose a decent example, with caveats I'd probably have to mention if you were in a super debate-ty mood, would be an older version of the USA, prior to the Federal Reserve. The book is in the public domain btw - librivox.org/democracy-in-america-vol-i-by-alexis-de-tocqueville/
Arguing against a specific idea, such as favoring voluntary associations, by bringing up slavery, which occurred during the same period when those associations were more prominent, is a goofy way to make a point. It would be analogous to arguing that the birth of the internet on January 1, 1983, was a bad thing because gay marriage was not legal at the time or because of some other unrelated thing during that time period.
You appear to be arguing against the time period as a whole rather than addressing the specific policy I support. In other words, you have constructed a straw man argument.
Maybe you should stop crying about schools being underfunded by "violence" and start crying about the MIC/imperialism being massively overfunded for committing genocidal violence around the planet.
Because this bullshit is just a worthless, word salad distraction from the actual underlying problems.
Esta entrada fue editada (miércoles, 22 de julio de 2026, 15:47)
I would agree with you in opposing the wars & Israel’s actions. I also think that is the main concern. Social democratic policies, especially those backed by the world's reserve currency (2030s social security is projected to have issues), would likely take a while to cause damage similar to what a war or the risk of nuclear proliferation could. (Social democratic policies mostly cause a removal of future growth, i.e., a higher future poverty rate.) I think Israel's genocidal actions are horrible, & America's evident limitations are exposed when it engages in wars with huge geographical disadvantages & not enough technological advantages. If America had to declare war on someone (to prop up its wartime economy), it should be Israel. Fighting giant empires like Iran, China, & Russia is strategically stupid; at the very least, pit them against each other rather than trying to fight them all at once. However, obviously I oppose warmongering, but it's also frustrating how bad they're at warmongering too.
Esta entrada fue editada (viernes, 24 de julio de 2026, 4:46)
Wikipedia is heavily biased in favor of center-left viewpoints. It doesn't allow similar right-wing sources to be cited in the same way that it allows similar left-wing ones. My solution to Wikipedia's bias problem would be to add bias labels to edits & users instead of banning sources along partisan lines. Users could voluntarily identify their own biases, and other users could dispute those labels if they believed they were inaccurate. P.S. Wikipedia and Reddit are major contributors to why LLMs tend to have that left-of-center bias.
I wouldn't say that; sometimes statistics, like crime statistics, are distorted at the point of collection. The misclassification of non-white offenders as "white" in crime statistics leads to an overrepresentation of white crime in the USA, which racist people could probably use as fuel for their perceived persecution.
In the UK, you'll see Pakistanis being labeled as Asian, which would lead people to joke that Japanese people are doing X or Y crimes. In the USA, you'll see Arabic or other non-stereotypical white names, and pictures of people obviously not white, being labeled as white.
P.S. I don't support any racist whatnot; it's just a notable example of data collection skewing a statistic and causing an overrepresentation of crimes committed by so-called white people.
That source is some guy's blog masquerading as a newspaper. Also, even if it's accurate, I don't see how "whites" (which has always been a malleable term) being marginally overrepresented in some subset of crime statistics is worth anyone's attention at this point. How is this of value to anyone except white supremacists trying to pretend their ideology is supported by facts?
It's probably the wrong example to bring up, even if it is true, since it’s likely to elicit an emotional response that undermines the delivery of the original intent of my point: that data collection is a point where the statistics people rely on are often skewed.
The main point is that flawed data collection is skewing the results. I don't remember where to find the one with the mugshots to be honest.
"In response to a directive by the U.S. Government’s Office of Management and Budget, the national UCR Program has expanded its data collection categories for race from four (White, Black, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Asian or Other Pacific Islander) to five (White, Black, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander). Also, the ethnicity categories have changed from “Hispanic” to “Hispanic or Latino Origin” and from “Non-Hispanic” to “Not of Hispanic or Latino Origin.” These changes will be reflected in data presented for 2013."
Getting back to your original point, is the idea that certain races commit more crimes a left versus right thing in your perspective? I’d like to clarify that before I look at fifteen year old data.
I don't really care about those statistics. I was just mentioning a notable mislabeling case. I don't like racism, & I think we should move beyond the tribal battle stuff. If you want to call me racist, you can call me racist for supporting "freedom of association," which would allow people to discriminate for arbitrary & goofy reasons. I support the coffee shop that didn't want to serve the Israeli guy & the Christian baker who didn't want to make a gay wedding cake.
While it is true that certain races currently commit more crimes per capita, these are trends subject to change; I doubt they are inherent to ethnicity. This is likely caused by cultural factors, learned helplessness, Marxism (which teaches an 'us versus them' mentality), ingrained persecution complexes, & other whatnot.
I also disagree with those who believe women shouldn't vote simply because they currently lean toward social democrats. While I agree that social democracy leads to poverty and stagnation, I don't think it's inevitable that women will always vote for social democratic candidates.
Esta entrada fue editada (viernes, 24 de julio de 2026, 4:31)
I'm gonna be honest, most parts in history are center-left. You're not gonna have this utopia of right wing facts because most of them are oversimplification. Tremendously.
'Right wing sources' are just lies at this point: white genocide, taxing rich people is communism, climate change isn't real, women don't deserve rights because god doesn't recognize them as human, more cops make society safer, more prisons make society more free, more gun sales make society safer, trans people commit every crime and are the cause of every economic failed policy, the global elites (billionaires) are going to help us fight the real global elites (college kids, moms).
Like idk man I just don't see a way anyone honest can make the claim that factuality is not politically aligned. If you want facts you have to bias towards facts, if that creates a political bias, that's a problem for politicians not people interested reality.
Once you start trying to pander to all political groups you've abadoned factuality.
Esta entrada fue editada (miércoles, 22 de julio de 2026, 7:49)
To fairly debate this, one would need to address your sweeping generalizations point by point. More importantly, right-wing sources aren't a monolith. For example, Fox News largely supports Israel, while the Mises Institute opposes foreign intervention & Israel. Reducing such a broad spectrum of thought into a single monolith is inaccurate. It might evince how left-wing people, when tendentious (like right-wing people can be too, since we're all flawed humans, including myself), can distort their political opposition's perspective out of convenience or rational ignorance, i.e., they don't have time to investigate what their opposition thinks.
I mean the problem with your critique is its dishonest: prominent right wingers like elon musk promote white genocide conspiricies. Every one of those fake ass conspiricies I mentioned has been stated by a prominent republican.
In order to "balance the scales" you have to embark on campaign of finding like online commenters or drunk kids on the street to get the same level of insanity of belief on the left. Then you have to pretend like actual prominent people are saying these things on the left. Which they aren't.
All you're doing is saying that you are willing to argue against reality in order to pander to liars and comfort them.
Esta entrada fue editada (jueves, 23 de julio de 2026, 1:40)
Honestly, white populations are being replaced through open-border policies. I'm not really a tribal person, so I don't particularly care about maintaining a population with any specific demographic makeup. I also wouldn't say that ideas about population replacement are necessarily fake or something like that. I do currently support controlled borders for a nation-state, but not because I want to control the ethnic composition of the population. In my opinion, that kind of thinking is strange and overly tribal.
Excuse me but could you explain what an "open border policy" even is? Are you talking about visas for skilled labor? Is this something to do with migrant seasonal labor? Refugee programs?
What the fuck are you even talking about? There's not a single goddamn country in the world that meets the criteria for some definitions of "open borders" and other defitions are met by every single country on earth.
Supporting or not supporting "open borders" is not a political stance because there's no meaning to the words, its nonsense.
Esta entrada fue editada (jueves, 23 de julio de 2026, 3:06)
It's one of those terms that means different things to different people, which can cause problems when discussing policy, similar to how people use the term "democratic socialism." The literal definition of "open borders" would be an anarchic policy. The context in which I used the term, which you probably didn't understand, perhaps due to a poor explanation on my part, was referring to open borders as a lack of adequate enforcement or supervision of the border (which, in effect, is an open border), with enough immigration to shift electoral outcomes or to supplant a native population's norms, culture, etc.
So what you're saying is "open borders" is used to describe a "feeling" you have about the border. Its not a factual description, its not an objective description, its an emotional invokation of a feeling you have regarding the border and like tourists from mexico or something.
I don't understand. The idea that inadequate border control policies & immigration policies can lead to mass migration into a country seems quite objective to me. I'd say I'd be making an empirical claim thingo there, no? Did I mess up some phrasing or something earlier?
You understood "open borders" is subject to wildly different interpretations yet you still used it because it represents what you want to convey the best: Your personal feelings.
There's no way to measure the following as they are weasel words for people's feelings because they represent goals or thresholds nobody agrees on and people can always say they're upset about them regardless of measurable outcomes. - border patrol 'adequacy' - 'openness' of borders - 'mass migration'
There's way to measure: - legal immigration numbers - misdemeanor border crossings - costs and results of border enforcement - asylum seekers and rejection rates - tourist crossings - visa types and issues - immigration quotas - visa and tourist overstays - enforcement actions
Which measurable outcomes are you actually upset about?
Esta entrada fue editada (jueves, 23 de julio de 2026, 9:23)
Perhaps because right wing sources have a higher tendency to create disinformation and fabricate facts than left. As an example today most far right wing politics in Western countries seem to be based on dangers of a non-existing enemy. Similarly Russian troll farms generally disseminate right wing ideologies in the form of distorted facts. Staying center for a knowledge source is the ideal but if I had to pick a side would definitely go center left.
Esta entrada fue editada (miércoles, 22 de julio de 2026, 8:46)
Honestly, this comment of yours is probably more a reflection of your own values than of reality.
It is possible that right-wing sources, or particular types of right-wing sources, have a greater tendency to create disinformation or fabricate facts than left-wing sources. However, the opposite could also be true in some cases; left-wing sources may sometimes be more likely to label their opposition’s claims as misinformation rather than recognizing them as competing interpretations or arguments.
For example, some sources labeled certain claims about natural immunity after exposure to the virus, including claims that it could provide stronger protection than boosters in some circumstances, as misinformation. However, certainty in any broad generalization, such as the idea that natural immunity is always better, hybrid immunity is always better, or mRNA vaccines are always better, would be inaccurate. The reality is that the effectiveness of different forms of immunity depends on many factors, & people continue to study how these factors interact. Outcomes can
... Mostrar más
Honestly, this comment of yours is probably more a reflection of your own values than of reality.
It is possible that right-wing sources, or particular types of right-wing sources, have a greater tendency to create disinformation or fabricate facts than left-wing sources. However, the opposite could also be true in some cases; left-wing sources may sometimes be more likely to label their opposition’s claims as misinformation rather than recognizing them as competing interpretations or arguments.
For example, some sources labeled certain claims about natural immunity after exposure to the virus, including claims that it could provide stronger protection than boosters in some circumstances, as misinformation. However, certainty in any broad generalization, such as the idea that natural immunity is always better, hybrid immunity is always better, or mRNA vaccines are always better, would be inaccurate. The reality is that the effectiveness of different forms of immunity depends on many factors, & people continue to study how these factors interact. Outcomes can vary depending on individual circumstances, such as age, comorbidities, immune status, prior exposure, and other whatnot.
more a reflection of your own values than of reality
Hard to say how much one's comments are affected by values but anyone who says they are completely unaffected is discussing in bad faith. So I won't claim it does not.
It is possible that right-wing sources,
Yes but one is ideological agression (left-wing) the other one is fact fabrication (right-wing). If I had to choose one I would still go for the first despite it being far from ideal. I do believe that both sides have a tendency to leave out facts that don't support their priors (consciously or unconsciously) but fact fabrication comes from the "ends justifies the means" perspective which I think leans more heavily to the right wing as of now (might not always been as such though).
For example, some sources labeled certain claims about natural immunity after exposure to the virus
Imagine the following case: Assume we have the following as facts (I am not claiming it is):
1- Infection confers more broad immunity than
... Mostrar más
more a reflection of your own values than of reality
Hard to say how much one's comments are affected by values but anyone who says they are completely unaffected is discussing in bad faith. So I won't claim it does not.
It is possible that right-wing sources,
Yes but one is ideological agression (left-wing) the other one is fact fabrication (right-wing). If I had to choose one I would still go for the first despite it being far from ideal. I do believe that both sides have a tendency to leave out facts that don't support their priors (consciously or unconsciously) but fact fabrication comes from the "ends justifies the means" perspective which I think leans more heavily to the right wing as of now (might not always been as such though).
For example, some sources labeled certain claims about natural immunity after exposure to the virus
Imagine the following case: Assume we have the following as facts (I am not claiming it is):
1- Infection confers more broad immunity than vaccines.
2- People at risk (elderly, newborn, low immunity) have a much higher risk of dying from a newly encountered virus (COVID) when they get infected without a vaccination.
3- In general people have a higher chance of hospitalization if they encounter a virus for the first time and without having been vaccinated.
If now a certain source of information takes this and only presents part 1 because in their ideology vaccination is wrong and they want to prove it, then this source of information is still wrong despite showing something correct. Not only they are wrong but they may bias people's perspective so as to actually cause harm against others. In this case you may remove this source for its purpose and not because what it presents is wrong. It only uses a piece of the information to distort perspective. Without seeing the original discussion as to why that source was removed I can not really justify or condemn the action that was performed there. Do you have a link to the discussion?
Esta entrada fue editada (jueves, 23 de julio de 2026, 10:55)
Look at the University of California. Paying slave’s wages to faculty in spite of ever-increasing tuitions that only feed a giant tumor called “admin.”
There was a lot of money that UC funneled to construction companies and banks during the LIBOR rigging scandal. It affected a lot of universities around the country, and became big news when Harvard sued to get their money back. The UC Regents said "nothin to see here" and elected not to pursue getting the stolen money back. Shortly after, one of those regents got a VP gig at Wells Fargo (with no prior banking experience).
So yeah... fuck the NYP for sure, but education budgets are badly bloated and the crookedness is rampant.
The conservative goal would be for schooling to be as affordable as possible, without artificial barriers restricting supply for the benefit of unions rather than students. I can't really speak for all conservatives because, first, I'm not one, & second, there's a huge diversity of thought within conservatism. For example, some conservatives support Israel's genocidal actions in Gaza, while others oppose them, so there are obvious huge differences of opinion within the tent that is 'conservatism'.
What monetary evidence have you seen that makes you think unions are the most expensive barrier to education?
All the evidence I've seen has shown education costs have outpaced even CEO/administrative pay (one of the highest rising costs in society, dwarfing even housing inflation.)
Chalking it up to unions and union workers (whose pay is often rising at inflation rates or below) seems a bit absurd.
To use a metaphor its like saying we should address a sinking ship by opening an umbrella on the roof to deflect rain instead of finding and sealing the actual holes. Maybe the rain adds to the water but shouldn't we be discussing the hole first: rising cost of living and administrative costs.
The hyperfixation on eliminating unions while ignoring real problems and costs seems less like 'conservative fiscal responsibility' and more like '2011 Scott Walker corruption ideology'
Esta entrada fue editada (viernes, 24 de julio de 2026, 8:21)
I shouldn't have only mentioned unions. A better way to put it is that I take issue with education when it isn't oriented to serve the consumer (i.e., the parent or student). I would oppose eliminating unions, as I actually like many of them; I just don't like closed-shop unions. I also like worker cooperatives, but I don't support mandating them.
Realistically though, lets set aside unions as they are at best irrelevant to any real discussion of education and at worst simply the subject of cold war hyperfixation and irrational fear.
What is a real cost saving measure that could be brought to education?
Technology fees, subscriptions and infrastruction are, for instance, a major cost burden that has arisen in the last 40 years during the course of time where educational costs have skyrocketed. Why don't I ever see conservatives talking about reducing educational technology costs?
There is a similar problem with legal and administrative costs as well.
I tell people to try to take the GED & graduate high school early (since it's a waste of time & full of propaganda), then save money on their first year of college by taking CLEP exams using vouchers provided through completing Modern States courses.
There's a lot to be said for community college transfers, testing out of credits etc from a purchaser perspective. While that can help individual students I don't think it addresses larger problems about rising costs in the academic sector and the fact that high costs make planning and attending colleges a high cost, moderate risk proposition.
For instance, an ideal college system would reduce need for corporations to request h1b visas
The level of bureacracy (both for students and institutions) required to maintain so many grant and voucher systems including secondary bureacratic patchworks like H1b visas could all be drastically reduced by subsidizing college tuiton prices across the board to the point where college costs were less of a financial burden.
One might argue that eliminating tuition costs entirely would pay for itself in reduced bureacratic burden across the government and would make it easier for corporations to retrain employees rather than importing them.
Here's a direct source for Wikipedia's own position on source reliability. I could send you someone's interpretation of it, but those interpretations would introduce another layer of bias, so it's better to look at the source itself: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources
Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger have both criticized Wikipedia in ways similar to my own criticisms, but they share some of my biases, which might cause you to dismiss their views as well if you already have a strong opinion on the matter.
"this man is investing in making kids smarter rather than making my stock portfolio increase by an additional 0.0001% and this makes him an existential threat to society" NY Post, translated from newspaper editor
Esta entrada fue editada (martes, 21 de julio de 2026, 20:46)
The Post is only fulfilling its original purpose since it was founded by Alexander Hamilton; it is a political mouthpiece for the moneyed interests in New York City.
One of their earliest political hit pieces absolutely decimated John Adams' already tenuous political career in the public eye and ultimately paved the way for Jeffersonian politics to calcify around the heart of our nation's politics.
DarkCloud
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •It's up there with the Washington Times, which is owned by a korean anti-communist cult (the moonies) that's full of sex crimes.
... that's the Washington Times, not to be confused with the Washington Post (a far more legitimate news outlet).
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness, KaRunChiy y Carlos Solís like this.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
chaogomu
in reply to DarkCloud • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
DarkCloud
in reply to chaogomu • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
ferret
in reply to DarkCloud • • •Optional
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •The thing is more New Yorkers who have some sway on any side of this issue read the NY Post more than they do Lemmy. They read it more than any other thing other than maybe The Facepals or Instaslap or whatever the kids are into these days.
So - Yes, total garbage, ridiculously apparent propaganda, and also more effective and real-world than what we have. (not as effective as actually being the Mayor though, so good on him)
Microblog Memes reshared this.
IndustryStandard
in reply to Optional • • •Broadfern
in reply to IndustryStandard • • •pelespirit
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
Zephyr
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •like this
KaRunChiy y felixthecat like this.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
ThePantser
in reply to Zephyr • • •like this
KaRunChiy likes this.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
Zephyr
in reply to ThePantser • • •ChickenLadyLovesLife
in reply to Zephyr • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Zephyr
in reply to ChickenLadyLovesLife • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Carlos Solís
in reply to ChickenLadyLovesLife • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Apathy Tree
in reply to Zephyr • • •Arguably, more rural schools or those in lower income areas should be paying proportionally better for teachers, to attract talent that would otherwise have no interest in being in that area. Those schools tend to be where students and their families have little or no say about what districts they are in, as they use regional magnet schools that cater to multiple small towns. They’d have to completely upend everything and move a substantial distance to have options urban folks take largely for granted.
Currently the rural districts pay nearly nothing and its lower than other places which also pay nearly nothing, so they get the worst of the worst educators who can’t find better and it keeps everyone’s wages depressed generationally.
But social mobility is a dream of that past that’s long since dead and buried anyway.
Zephyr
in reply to Apathy Tree • • •Apathy Tree
in reply to Zephyr • • •I never said anyone shouldn't make a decent wage wrt:local economy. But I live in a depressed economy, and have my whole life, so I know full well just how stuck people get financially when they are from low cost areas or spend too much of their career time in one. Hardly anyone goes to a good school and then goes back to their shitty home town on purpose, because college is expensive and they can’t pay it off while making peanuts in their hometown. It ends up being an option only desperate people take, which means shitty teachers, which in turn means dumb kids who go on to lead low income lives.
I said rural and low cost areas should pay proportionally more, probably just through state budgets rather than giving them an option they will always choose to fuck up, to attract talent, because it’s good for the community across generations. A rising tide lifts all ships, and maybe people would go to a good school and then go back to their hometown, if their hometown was offering them a decent quality of life.
Its true that 60k is different in low cost areas vs
... Mostrar másI never said anyone shouldn't make a decent wage wrt:local economy. But I live in a depressed economy, and have my whole life, so I know full well just how stuck people get financially when they are from low cost areas or spend too much of their career time in one. Hardly anyone goes to a good school and then goes back to their shitty home town on purpose, because college is expensive and they can’t pay it off while making peanuts in their hometown. It ends up being an option only desperate people take, which means shitty teachers, which in turn means dumb kids who go on to lead low income lives.
I said rural and low cost areas should pay proportionally more, probably just through state budgets rather than giving them an option they will always choose to fuck up, to attract talent, because it’s good for the community across generations. A rising tide lifts all ships, and maybe people would go to a good school and then go back to their hometown, if their hometown was offering them a decent quality of life.
Its true that 60k is different in low cost areas vs high cost ones, but thats part of my point. Its not like our low income areas are a separate country with their own currency and stuff. The only way it matters that 60k spends differently is if you never plan to leave. Wanna go on vacation? That 6k trip that’s reasonably affordable at 1/20th yearly wages for someone in California who makes 120k (comparing high wages in respective markets), is 1/10 yearly wages for someone making 60, a substantial difference in impact for the same life experience for two people making similarly “good wages” in their local economy, and there aren’t any poor area discounts, either. If they want to sell their house and buy one somewhere with better opportunities, they will absolutely for sure still need a substantial mortgage they will never get approved for because everything is so much more expensive than what they are selling from, and their work income history is so much lower than what’s required. Our goods aren’t cheaper either, other than maybe food and gas. That big purchase is proportionally bigger for someone who earns less, even if everyone around them also earns less.
I’d like to see the income distribution curve sort of level out a bit where mobility (physical, in this case) was a real option for all of us rather than something you have to take a massive risk of homelessness or be from a wealthy area to do. I’d like to see wages in low income areas increase faster than those in big urban areas, simply because they have been so much more stagnant for so much longer (min wage here is still 7.25 and lots of jobs still pay that -can’t live on that here either). Mostly, I’d like to see quality of life increase in poor areas, and that means more money available to the local economy. One of the ways to do this is to get better educational outcomes, make the future workforce desirable. Better education also tends to decrease conservatism, so it’d be doubly good to do. Snowball effect and everything.
quill7513
in reply to Zephyr • • •Zephyr
in reply to quill7513 • • •quill7513
in reply to Zephyr • • •Phoenixz
in reply to Zephyr • • •ChickenLadyLovesLife
in reply to Zephyr • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Zephyr
in reply to ChickenLadyLovesLife • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
rumba
in reply to Zephyr • • •There are some issues around corruption and school management. Schools near me requested substantial funding to replace aging AC units. The very next year after they got it, a number of the AC units failed, and they couldn't replace them. An audit showed that the entire funding for the AC replacement was divided among the top administrators and paid as a bonus.
That said, the way to stop that from happening isn't to defund public schools and just repeat the same problem with private schools.
You put in some oversight. You make them provide reports for the funding, spot-check, and trust with verification.
Pushing kids into private schools by defunding will make education (and safety) impossible to monitor.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
ChickenLadyLovesLife
in reply to rumba • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
rumba
in reply to ChickenLadyLovesLife • • •tormeh
in reply to rumba • • •RonnyZittledong
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Diplomjodler
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
ChickenLadyLovesLife
in reply to Diplomjodler • • •Teacher Salary and Benefits at NYC Public Schools
Apply to Teach at NYC Public SchoolsMicroblog Memes reshared this.
DarkFuture
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •It's a tabloid. Nothing more.
Unfortunately, modern Americans are too stupid to know the difference between tabloids and actual news.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
some_kind_of_guy
in reply to DarkFuture • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
DarkFuture
in reply to some_kind_of_guy • • •FiniteBanjo
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
guy
in reply to FiniteBanjo • • •Kairos
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
boonhet
in reply to Kairos • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
bizarroland
in reply to boonhet • • •"If he was a good person God would have made him white"
They won't say that out loud, but this is what they really think, deep inside of the shriveled cockles of their black hearts
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Kairos • • •I wouldn't say everything Mamdani does is bad. I would support his opposition to Israel, & I would be happy if he could somehow arrest Netanyahu.
That said, I think his rent freeze policy is a bad idea. A rent freeze is just the government forcing landlords not to be able to raise rents when a tenant leaves, even if the cost of providing the good has gone up.
I don't think the government should make it harder for private businesses to provide goods & services. Rent freezes hurt smaller landlords, leaving only the biggest companies able to afford staying in the market. They also lead to rundown buildings, which the government could then use as an excuse to step in and take over those properties. That is probably Mamdani's intent & goal, since undermining the effectiveness of capitalism could popularize socialism.
Price Controls | Joe Salerno
Price Controls | Joe Salerno
misesmedia (YouTube)Kairos
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Kairos • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Kairos
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Snowclone
in reply to MorPolitics • • •MorPolitics
in reply to Snowclone • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Snowclone
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
DagwoodIII
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Historical note-
Up until December 1976, the Post was a center Left newspaper. It was quieter than the Daily News and less pretentious than the Times. Oscar Madison was a sports writer for The Post.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
sangriaferret
in reply to DagwoodIII • • •DagwoodIII
in reply to sangriaferret • • •sangriaferret
in reply to DagwoodIII • • •MorPolitics
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •I do think that relying on government programs instead of voluntary associations will increase poverty over time. Going further into debt, or needing to borrow from the state budget just to stay afloat a little longer, is like taking out one credit card to pay off another. I think that's a bad idea.
So, to me, choosing not to step up and help solve a problem yourself (for example, through voluntary associations), while instead asking the government to use force to solve it on your behalf (by voting for government programs funded through taxation), is both a bad idea and immoral.
P.S. I know this is not a very Lemmy-friendly opinion, I know you guys tend to love democratic socialism. I think you're well-intentioned people, but you would cause poverty and stagnation if you got your way, though. Ideally, you wouldn't rage at me for thinking differently from you. (Take note that I hold no political power & admit I very well could be wrong, or propagandized, or whatever.)
Microblog Memes reshared this.
ThePuy
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to ThePuy • • •I’m under the assumption that the cost of living would decrease if there were a denationalization of money, or at least an asset-backed currency. If I’m wrong about that, then I’m probably wrong about much of my other ideological beliefs. I’m also assuming that a high cost of living, and secularism (which again I know isn’t a popular opinion on Lemmy, since you all tend to love atheism), are barriers to participation in voluntary associations. However, y'all could probably admit that churches make it easy to volunteer. Reliance on government programs also has a crowding-out effect on voluntary associations, which I would equate to fixating on the Eye of Sauron, or on evil itself, instead of trying to work within the realm of the good. Politics is a realm of toxicity that I think we should minimize, & voluntary associations are where we can do the most good & find the most agreement.
P.S. I'm a Christian, but I don't claim to speak for my religion since I'm a stupid, flawed human with biases, deficiencies, & so on, like we all are.
... Mostrar másI’m under the assumption that the cost of living would decrease if there were a denationalization of money, or at least an asset-backed currency. If I’m wrong about that, then I’m probably wrong about much of my other ideological beliefs. I’m also assuming that a high cost of living, and secularism (which again I know isn’t a popular opinion on Lemmy, since you all tend to love atheism), are barriers to participation in voluntary associations. However, y'all could probably admit that churches make it easy to volunteer. Reliance on government programs also has a crowding-out effect on voluntary associations, which I would equate to fixating on the Eye of Sauron, or on evil itself, instead of trying to work within the realm of the good. Politics is a realm of toxicity that I think we should minimize, & voluntary associations are where we can do the most good & find the most agreement.
P.S. I'm a Christian, but I don't claim to speak for my religion since I'm a stupid, flawed human with biases, deficiencies, & so on, like we all are.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
technocrit
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Ideology is bad in general, but especially when it's based on the imagination.
Holla when you come back to reality.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to technocrit • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
NotEasyBeingGreen
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to NotEasyBeingGreen • • •Democracy in America Vol. I | LibriVox
librivox.orgtechnocrit
in reply to MorPolitics • • •So slavery? Or just Jim Crowe? That's the ideal?
The book is talking about the 1830s so it seems like slavery.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to technocrit • • •Arguing against a specific idea, such as favoring voluntary associations, by bringing up slavery, which occurred during the same period when those associations were more prominent, is a goofy way to make a point. It would be analogous to arguing that the birth of the internet on January 1, 1983, was a bad thing because gay marriage was not legal at the time or because of some other unrelated thing during that time period.
You appear to be arguing against the time period as a whole rather than addressing the specific policy I support. In other words, you have constructed a straw man argument.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
technocrit
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Maybe you should stop crying about schools being underfunded by "violence" and start crying about the MIC/imperialism being massively overfunded for committing genocidal violence around the planet.
Because this bullshit is just a worthless, word salad distraction from the actual underlying problems.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to technocrit • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Lovable Sidekick
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Jankatarch
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
pewgar_seemsimandroid
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to pewgar_seemsimandroid • • •P.S. Wikipedia and Reddit are major contributors to why LLMs tend to have that left-of-center bias.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
andros_rex
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to andros_rex • • •I wouldn't say that; sometimes statistics, like crime statistics, are distorted at the point of collection. The misclassification of non-white offenders as "white" in crime statistics leads to an overrepresentation of white crime in the USA, which racist people could probably use as fuel for their perceived persecution.
In the UK, you'll see Pakistanis being labeled as Asian, which would lead people to joke that Japanese people are doing X or Y crimes. In the USA, you'll see Arabic or other non-stereotypical white names, and pictures of people obviously not white, being labeled as white.
P.S. I don't support any racist whatnot; it's just a notable example of data collection skewing a statistic and causing an overrepresentation of crimes committed by so-called white people.
The FBI’s White Crime Numbers Count More Than White Americans
The FBI’s White Crime Numbers Count More Than White Americans — The Rio Grande Dispatch
The Rio Grande DispatchMicroblog Memes reshared this.
Soupbreaker
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Soupbreaker • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
andros_rex
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Can you provide non-blog sources?
Complaining about bias and then throwing out a random guys blog post is kinda embarrassing mate. Maybe you should delete your account.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to andros_rex • • •The main point is that flawed data collection is skewing the results. I don't remember where to find the one with the mugshots to be honest.
"In response to a directive by the U.S. Government’s Office of Management and Budget, the national UCR Program has expanded its data collection categories for race from four (White, Black, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Asian or Other Pacific Islander) to five (White, Black, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander). Also, the ethnicity categories have changed from “Hispanic” to “Hispanic or Latino Origin” and from “Non-Hispanic” to “Not of Hispanic or Latino Origin.” These changes will be reflected in data presented for 2013."
ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2011/resources/about-the-uniform-crime-reporting-ucr-program
About the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program
FBIMicroblog Memes reshared this.
andros_rex
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to andros_rex • • •I don't really care about those statistics. I was just mentioning a notable mislabeling case. I don't like racism, & I think we should move beyond the tribal battle stuff. If you want to call me racist, you can call me racist for supporting "freedom of association," which would allow people to discriminate for arbitrary & goofy reasons. I support the coffee shop that didn't want to serve the Israeli guy & the Christian baker who didn't want to make a gay wedding cake.
While it is true that certain races currently commit more crimes per capita, these are trends subject to change; I doubt they are inherent to ethnicity. This is likely caused by cultural factors, learned helplessness, Marxism (which teaches an 'us versus them' mentality), ingrained persecution complexes, & other whatnot.
I also disagree with those who believe women shouldn't vote simply because they currently lean toward social democrats. While I agree that social democracy leads to poverty and stagnation, I don't think it's inevitable that women will always vote for social democratic candidates.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
DudeWhoYapsTooMuch
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Fedizen
in reply to MorPolitics • • •'Right wing sources' are just lies at this point: white genocide, taxing rich people is communism, climate change isn't real, women don't deserve rights because god doesn't recognize them as human, more cops make society safer, more prisons make society more free, more gun sales make society safer, trans people commit every crime and are the cause of every economic failed policy, the global elites (billionaires) are going to help us fight the real global elites (college kids, moms).
Like idk man I just don't see a way anyone honest can make the claim that factuality is not politically aligned. If you want facts you have to bias towards facts, if that creates a political bias, that's a problem for politicians not people interested reality.
Once you start trying to pander to all political groups you've abadoned factuality.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Fedizen • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Fedizen
in reply to MorPolitics • • •I mean the problem with your critique is its dishonest: prominent right wingers like elon musk promote white genocide conspiricies. Every one of those fake ass conspiricies I mentioned has been stated by a prominent republican.
In order to "balance the scales" you have to embark on campaign of finding like online commenters or drunk kids on the street to get the same level of insanity of belief on the left. Then you have to pretend like actual prominent people are saying these things on the left. Which they aren't.
All you're doing is saying that you are willing to argue against reality in order to pander to liars and comfort them.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Fedizen • • •Fedizen
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Excuse me but could you explain what an "open border policy" even is? Are you talking about visas for skilled labor? Is this something to do with migrant seasonal labor? Refugee programs?
What the fuck are you even talking about? There's not a single goddamn country in the world that meets the criteria for some definitions of "open borders" and other defitions are met by every single country on earth.
Supporting or not supporting "open borders" is not a political stance because there's no meaning to the words, its nonsense.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Fedizen • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Fedizen
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Fedizen • • •I'd say I'd be making an empirical claim thingo there, no? Did I mess up some phrasing or something earlier?
Microblog Memes reshared this.
Fedizen
in reply to MorPolitics • • •You understood "open borders" is subject to wildly different interpretations yet you still used it because it represents what you want to convey the best: Your personal feelings.
There's no way to measure the following as they are weasel words for people's feelings because they represent goals or thresholds nobody agrees on and people can always say they're upset about them regardless of measurable outcomes.
- border patrol 'adequacy'
- 'openness' of borders
- 'mass migration'
There's way to measure:
- legal immigration numbers
- misdemeanor border crossings
- costs and results of border enforcement
- asylum seekers and rejection rates
- tourist crossings
- visa types and issues
- immigration quotas
- visa and tourist overstays
- enforcement actions
Which measurable outcomes are you actually upset about?
Microblog Memes reshared this.
ZILtoid1991
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to ZILtoid1991 • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Avicenna
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Avicenna • • •Honestly, this comment of yours is probably more a reflection of your own values than of reality.
It is possible that right-wing sources, or particular types of right-wing sources, have a greater tendency to create disinformation or fabricate facts than left-wing sources. However, the opposite could also be true in some cases; left-wing sources may sometimes be more likely to label their opposition’s claims as misinformation rather than recognizing them as competing interpretations or arguments.
For example, some sources labeled certain claims about natural immunity after exposure to the virus, including claims that it could provide stronger protection than boosters in some circumstances, as misinformation. However, certainty in any broad generalization, such as the idea that natural immunity is always better, hybrid immunity is always better, or mRNA vaccines are always better, would be inaccurate. The reality is that the effectiveness of different forms of immunity depends on many factors, & people continue to study how these factors interact. Outcomes can
... Mostrar másHonestly, this comment of yours is probably more a reflection of your own values than of reality.
It is possible that right-wing sources, or particular types of right-wing sources, have a greater tendency to create disinformation or fabricate facts than left-wing sources. However, the opposite could also be true in some cases; left-wing sources may sometimes be more likely to label their opposition’s claims as misinformation rather than recognizing them as competing interpretations or arguments.
For example, some sources labeled certain claims about natural immunity after exposure to the virus, including claims that it could provide stronger protection than boosters in some circumstances, as misinformation. However, certainty in any broad generalization, such as the idea that natural immunity is always better, hybrid immunity is always better, or mRNA vaccines are always better, would be inaccurate. The reality is that the effectiveness of different forms of immunity depends on many factors, & people continue to study how these factors interact. Outcomes can vary depending on individual circumstances, such as age, comorbidities, immune status, prior exposure, and other whatnot.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
Avicenna
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Hard to say how much one's comments are affected by values but anyone who says they are completely unaffected is discussing in bad faith. So I won't claim it does not.
Yes but one is ideological agression (left-wing) the other one is fact fabrication (right-wing). If I had to choose one I would still go for the first despite it being far from ideal. I do believe that both sides have a tendency to leave out facts that don't support their priors (consciously or unconsciously) but fact fabrication comes from the "ends justifies the means" perspective which I think leans more heavily to the right wing as of now (might not always been as such though).
Imagine the following case: Assume we have the following as facts (I am not claiming it is):
1- Infection confers more broad immunity than
... Mostrar másHard to say how much one's comments are affected by values but anyone who says they are completely unaffected is discussing in bad faith. So I won't claim it does not.
Yes but one is ideological agression (left-wing) the other one is fact fabrication (right-wing). If I had to choose one I would still go for the first despite it being far from ideal. I do believe that both sides have a tendency to leave out facts that don't support their priors (consciously or unconsciously) but fact fabrication comes from the "ends justifies the means" perspective which I think leans more heavily to the right wing as of now (might not always been as such though).
Imagine the following case: Assume we have the following as facts (I am not claiming it is):
1- Infection confers more broad immunity than vaccines.
2- People at risk (elderly, newborn, low immunity) have a much higher risk of dying from a newly encountered virus (COVID) when they get infected without a vaccination.
3- In general people have a higher chance of hospitalization if they encounter a virus for the first time and without having been vaccinated.
If now a certain source of information takes this and only presents part 1 because in their ideology vaccination is wrong and they want to prove it, then this source of information is still wrong despite showing something correct. Not only they are wrong but they may bias people's perspective so as to actually cause harm against others. In this case you may remove this source for its purpose and not because what it presents is wrong. It only uses a piece of the information to distort perspective. Without seeing the original discussion as to why that source was removed I can not really justify or condemn the action that was performed there. Do you have a link to the discussion?
potpotato
in reply to MorPolitics • • •pewgar_seemsimandroid
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Archimedes
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
SleeplessCityLights
in reply to Archimedes • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to SleeplessCityLights • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
technocrit
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
TuringCompleteSocialist
in reply to technocrit • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
/home/pineapplelover
in reply to Archimedes • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
resipsaloquitur
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Fuck the NYP, but sadly both can be true.
Look at the University of California. Paying slave’s wages to faculty in spite of ever-increasing tuitions that only feed a giant tumor called “admin.”
Microblog Memes reshared this.
chillpanzee
in reply to resipsaloquitur • • •There was a lot of money that UC funneled to construction companies and banks during the LIBOR rigging scandal. It affected a lot of universities around the country, and became big news when Harvard sued to get their money back. The UC Regents said "nothin to see here" and elected not to pursue getting the stolen money back. Shortly after, one of those regents got a VP gig at Wells Fargo (with no prior banking experience).
So yeah... fuck the NYP for sure, but education budgets are badly bloated and the crookedness is rampant.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
technocrit
in reply to resipsaloquitur • • •If you think that's just UC, then I have bad news for you.
fritobugger2017
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
jack_of_sandwich
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Avicenna
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
MyVeryRealName
in reply to Avicenna • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
SnarkoPolo
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •If we privatize the schools, train the lower class for work and motherhood, this will.be a Fair Society! The weak stay in their place.
[this is what Conservatives actually believe]
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to SnarkoPolo • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Fedizen
in reply to MorPolitics • • •What monetary evidence have you seen that makes you think unions are the most expensive barrier to education?
All the evidence I've seen has shown education costs have outpaced even CEO/administrative pay (one of the highest rising costs in society, dwarfing even housing inflation.)
Chalking it up to unions and union workers (whose pay is often rising at inflation rates or below) seems a bit absurd.
To use a metaphor its like saying we should address a sinking ship by opening an umbrella on the roof to deflect rain instead of finding and sealing the actual holes. Maybe the rain adds to the water but shouldn't we be discussing the hole first: rising cost of living and administrative costs.
The hyperfixation on eliminating unions while ignoring real problems and costs seems less like 'conservative fiscal responsibility' and more like '2011 Scott Walker corruption ideology'
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Fedizen • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Fedizen
in reply to MorPolitics • • •Realistically though, lets set aside unions as they are at best irrelevant to any real discussion of education and at worst simply the subject of cold war hyperfixation and irrational fear.
What is a real cost saving measure that could be brought to education?
Technology fees, subscriptions and infrastruction are, for instance, a major cost burden that has arisen in the last 40 years during the course of time where educational costs have skyrocketed. Why don't I ever see conservatives talking about reducing educational technology costs?
There is a similar problem with legal and administrative costs as well.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
in reply to Fedizen • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
Fedizen
in reply to MorPolitics • • •There's a lot to be said for community college transfers, testing out of credits etc from a purchaser perspective. While that can help individual students I don't think it addresses larger problems about rising costs in the academic sector and the fact that high costs make planning and attending colleges a high cost, moderate risk proposition.
For instance, an ideal college system would reduce need for corporations to request h1b visas
The level of bureacracy (both for students and institutions) required to maintain so many grant and voucher systems including secondary bureacratic patchworks like H1b visas could all be drastically reduced by subsidizing college tuiton prices across the board to the point where college costs were less of a financial burden.
One might argue that eliminating tuition costs entirely would pay for itself in reduced bureacratic burden across the government and would make it easier for corporations to retrain employees rather than importing them.
Microblog Memes reshared this.
MorPolitics
Unknown parent • • •Here's a direct source for Wikipedia's own position on source reliability. I could send you someone's interpretation of it, but those interpretations would introduce another layer of bias, so it's better to look at the source itself: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources
Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger have both criticized Wikipedia in ways similar to my own criticisms, but they share some of my biases, which might cause you to dismiss their views as well if you already have a strong opinion on the matter.
Larry Sanger bias drama discussed from a perspective likely closer to your own bias. - nytimes.com/2026/06/25/business/media/wikipedia-larry-sanger-barred.html
wiki.encyclosphere.org/WikiProject_Intellectual_Diversity
Larry Sanger - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Sanger
Jimmy Wales - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales
P.S. It's possible to dislike right-wingers and still acknowledge that Wikipedia has a bias problem.
Larry Sanger - Wikipedia
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Microblog Memes reshared this.
tiramichu
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •Microblog Memes reshared this.
rapchee
in reply to tiramichu • • •apparently: Kaju Nukumizu from the anime series Too Many Losing Heroines!
google.com/search?vsrid=CO2fgbaDyeb8DBACGAEiJDNiNGE3ODgwLTY1YmYtNGQzOC1hYmE4LWRmMDA2NzM0MWQ5MDKCASIC…
search
www.google.comMicroblog Memes reshared this.
neatchee
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •like this
hankskyjames777 likes this.
Fedizen
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •WappleFF27
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •public school budgets can't be bloated, only misappropriated.
Which usually happens under dipshit republican school boards.
rizzothesmall
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •DjangoFett
in reply to VetOfTheSeas • • •The Post is only fulfilling its original purpose since it was founded by Alexander Hamilton; it is a political mouthpiece for the moneyed interests in New York City.
One of their earliest political hit pieces absolutely decimated John Adams' already tenuous political career in the public eye and ultimately paved the way for Jeffersonian politics to calcify around the heart of our nation's politics.
Kairos
in reply to DjangoFett • • •