Nabu's recent activity

  1. Comment on San Diego-based group wins US suit: Male-only draft unconstitutional in ~life

    Nabu
    Link Parent
    Right, that does make sense from a logistical standpoint. However, the United States is geographically in a pretty fantastic spot. A land invasion is extremely unlikely, which means a future draft...

    Right, that does make sense from a logistical standpoint. However, the United States is geographically in a pretty fantastic spot. A land invasion is extremely unlikely, which means a future draft would probably be used to fight wars overseas, which is something I'm generally against.

    Furthermore, the idea that the government can force you into that situation goes against my idea of personal autonomy.

    2 votes

  2. Comment on Would you pay higher taxes for better government services? in ~talk

    Nabu
    (edited )
    Link Parent
    Hm, yeah. I looked at some of the data and was going to try to make a comparisson, but it seems like there are too many factors. For example, California seems to include the cost of poll workers,...

    Hm, yeah. I looked at some of the data and was going to try to make a comparisson, but it seems like there are too many factors. For example, California seems to include the cost of poll workers, but those costs seem to be absent from the pdf of Maine I linked.

    Edit for your edit: I was literally doing those exact same calculations! Except, I was using the three Colorado counties because Maine apparently has an active voting population of a little over a million.

    Therefore: Denver + El Paso + Douglas = 409591 + 394100 + 214593 = 1018284 active voters

    Maine has 1028602 active voters.

    The 2016 gross general election cost for those three Colorado counties = 4002578 or $4,002,578

    The 2018 (state, not federal) general election cost for Maine = 340373 or $340,373

    Surely this isn't a fair comparison and not an accurate representation, right? Also, I'm not sure if I was supposed to use net or gross.

    1 vote

  3. Comment on San Diego-based group wins US suit: Male-only draft unconstitutional in ~life

    Nabu
    Link
    I think it only makes sense for women to be required to register, just as men are. I also think there could be good reason to abolish the draft altogether. I'd really like to hear arguments...

    I think it only makes sense for women to be required to register, just as men are. I also think there could be good reason to abolish the draft altogether.

    I'd really like to hear arguments against that proposition, though. Does anyone disagree? If so, please tell me why.

    4 votes

  4. Comment on Would you pay higher taxes for better government services? in ~talk

    Nabu
    Link Parent
    Wow, I actually found the answer. It cost exactly $441,804. That includes costs for start-up, the primary election, and the general election. The general election by itself cost $340,373. I don't...

    Wow, I actually found the answer. It cost exactly $441,804. That includes costs for start-up, the primary election, and the general election. The general election by itself cost $340,373.

    I don't have enough information to contextualize that number, though. I'm still not sure if it's a lot or a little compared to FPTP.

    2 votes

  5. Comment on Would you pay higher taxes for better government services? in ~talk

    Nabu
    Link Parent
    While the costs (both money and complexity) are something to consider, I don't think it's enough to act as an argument against it. The benefits would be so much greater, I think!

    While the costs (both money and complexity) are something to consider, I don't think it's enough to act as an argument against it. The benefits would be so much greater, I think!

    1 vote

  6. Comment on Would you pay higher taxes for better government services? in ~talk

    Nabu
    Link Parent
    Would a ranked voting system actually cost that much more than what we currently have? I don't know if I've ever seen any estimates. I can't imagine it'd cost too much. With that said, I agree...

    Would a ranked voting system actually cost that much more than what we currently have? I don't know if I've ever seen any estimates. I can't imagine it'd cost too much. With that said, I agree with you.

    I think we should work on getting rid of the first-past-the-post voting system in favor of a smarter one, like ranked voting.

    1 vote

  7. Comment on Would you pay higher taxes for better government services? in ~talk

    Nabu
    Link
    It feels like your title and your body are talking about two different things? I'm not exactly sure how higher taxes would lead to better congressional representation. Maybe I'm just...

    It feels like your title and your body are talking about two different things? I'm not exactly sure how higher taxes would lead to better congressional representation. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding.

    Regardless, I really disagree with your tax ideas. I don't think we should be increasing taxes on the bottom earners. We should be increasing taxes on the top % earners. As just the first idea that popped into my mind: since we have a progressive tax system, I don't see why we couldn't just add a few more brackets. We could have brackets that extend to something like 50% on income over $1,000,000, etc.

    The idea of taxing the lower-income people, the people who are struggling, in order to fund the healthcare program rubs me the wrong way. Much less harm can be caused if we taxed the wealthy instead.

    In addition, I'm generally against raising sales taxes, such as a gas tax. This is because it disproportionately effects lower-income people, and I would assume (but I haven't looked into it) it would have a negative impact on the economy.

    David Pakman did a recent video on ways to raise over a trillion dollars to fund Medicare for all, among other things. I suggest everyone who's interested watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd-MP6pXzuc

    9 votes

  8. Comment on Atheists and non-believers could soon receive civil rights protections under Portland law in ~humanities

    Nabu
    Link Parent
    It seems like it depends on whether or not non-theism and sexual orientation are protected classes in your location. I'm not familiar with the laws, so I don't know for sure if someone's religious...

    It seems like it depends on whether or not non-theism and sexual orientation are protected classes in your location.

    I'm not familiar with the laws, so I don't know for sure if someone's religious beliefs has allowed them to discriminate. In it's most basic form, I don't think it would.

    The often talked about Colorado cakeshop case (that you alluded to) has been commonly misunderstood from what I've seen. It involves compelled speech, whether cake-making is an art, and other things. The ruling wasn't really about whether you can discriminate against gay people. Rather, "In a 7-2 decision, the Court ruled on narrow grounds that the Commission did not employ religious neutrality, violating Masterpiece owner Jack Phillips' rights to free exercise, and reversed the Commission's decision. The Court did not rule on the broader intersection of anti-discrimination laws, free exercise of religion, and freedom of speech, due to the complications of the Commission's lack of religious neutrality." Moreover, the owner was willing to sell a pre-made cake off the shelf, but refused to create a custom cake for the couple.

    If anyone wants to read more about it: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/06/opinion-analysis-court-rules-narrowly-for-baker-in-same-sex-wedding-cake-case/ & https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/16-111

    4 votes

  9. Comment on Don Winslow: Think of it this way. Mexico has a US drug problem in ~books

    Nabu
    Link
    Let me try to present an argument against two theories this article makes. First, it says that Americans are taking illegal drugs completely voluntarily. Second, it says that because the drug...

    Let me try to present an argument against two theories this article makes. First, it says that Americans are taking illegal drugs completely voluntarily. Second, it says that because the drug users are taking it voluntarily, that they are also making a conscious decision to support the illicit activities of drug cartels.

    While it's true that the drug users are technically purchasing and using these drugs voluntarily, I would disagree with just how voluntary it really is. These hard drugs (like heroin) are extremely addictive, both physically and mentally. It's also known that drug addiction can and does start at a very young age. Therefore, to say that these people (sometimes even children) have the agency to give true informed consent, isn't something I agree with.

    Finally, to put the blame on the users for supporting the cartels is misguided in my opinion. The blame should be put on the actual drug cartels and sellers. You may argue that the users are supporting the industry and fueling the terrible externalities of said industry, but I see the users generally as victims, and I don't think they are willfully supporting the cartels.

    2 votes

  10. Comment on Botswana mulls lifting elephant hunting ban in ~enviro

    Nabu
    Link
    I was generally very against hunting until I saw this intelligence2 debate on the topic. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, here's a summary of each side's main arguments (left is pro,...

    I was generally very against hunting until I saw this intelligence2 debate on the topic. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, here's a summary of each side's main arguments (left is pro, right is against): https://i.imgur.com/TMnn8N8.png

    I think there are ethical ways to hunt that would increase well-being for not only humans, but animals as well. And although it may sound counterintuitive, I think the arguments are strong enough to warrant the selective murder of animals, as horrible as that may sound.

    1 vote

  11. Comment on I've taken the leap from Reddit in ~talk

    Nabu
    Link
    With all due respect, I think you're being a bit hyperbolic. Public discourse has not magically died, and I think you may be looking at the past through rose-colored glasses. I, too, have been on...

    With all due respect, I think you're being a bit hyperbolic. Public discourse has not magically died, and I think you may be looking at the past through rose-colored glasses. I, too, have been on Reddit for around 8 years and things don't seem too different. I definitely remember many posts that were stupid and reached the front page. It's how it's always been.

    As a community becomes larger, the posts that appeal to the general public will be what's popular. That's just how it is and there's nothing you can do about it. If you're looking for serious discourse, you're going to need to look to something a bit more specialized than Reddit.

    3 votes

  12. Comment on What do you *dislike* about current trends in leftism? in ~talk

    Nabu
    Link Parent
    I don't like this phrasing. Anything that's progressive changes the status quo and will naturally upset people who don't like change. That's very true, but it shouldn't necessarily be seen as a...

    We (the left) should be trying to unite others to the cause of caring for our planet, not dividing & pushing people away because of our preferred use of social terminology.

    I don't like this phrasing. Anything that's progressive changes the status quo and will naturally upset people who don't like change. That's very true, but it shouldn't necessarily be seen as a negative. For example, someone getting angry because trans people want to be called the gender they identify as, is not necessarily a person we should worry about offending.

    Other than that, I think I generally agree with you. Saving the planet should probably be a priority, even though we can probably focus on social issues and the environment simultaneously.

    It's just difficult to tell someone to suffer in the short term because a long-term issues is more pressing.