pull down to refresh
Yeah I think both books have chapters on public financing of stadiums, though I'm not sure yet what their perspective on that is.
Maybe the moral principle that doesn't get enough attention is calibration.
If glorification of the state over the individual gave us fascism and world war 2, then it makes sense that the next generation will run away from that and turn to radical individualism. But radical individualism has problems too, and I would argue is not consistent with biblical morality (which I subscribe to).
So part of the responsibility of each generation is not to overreact to the failings of the previous generation, but rather to have a calibrated response.
I don't think the boomers did well in that. And now we also see extreme responses, with the rise of the alt-right, Christian nationalism, white supremacist groups... again, probably as an overreaction to the liberal excesses that the boomers gave us.
I actually wrote about this in a book review here: #933342
Every generation has its moral foibles. The silent generation (or the one before them) might have been worse, since their contemporaries are the ones that gave us fascism. They may have glorified the state over the individual, the strong over the weak. Eugenics was more fashionable at that time, for example.
That doesn't absolve the boomers of their own moral failings, which I would say is an elevation of the pursuit of self gratification as the only duty of life, and a casting off of social and familial responsibilities.
But isn't the moral of that meme that you can't really get to the great men without the weak men?
The meme is descriptive, not moral. Even if the cycle feels inevitable, that doesn't necessarily mean we should desire it. And the cycle can be postponed if weak men somehow learn to be strong. I don't know what would trigger that besides a crisis, but if the generation who inherits post-crisis wealth (i.e. boomers) had been less decadent and more careful about preserving the social institutions that created that wealth, then they wouldn't be receiving so much scorn right now.
This is definitely a "be careful what you wish for" thing.
I'd argue that it's not morals which cause violence, it's miscalibrated morals.
It's not that the boomers are all doing great financially, it's that they are the generation that presided over a general decline in morals and familial responsibility, as well as continuing to hold back necessary political reforms via their economically self-interested voting patterns.
@satwize's selection and stock has really grown!
impressive.
Time 2006 Person of the Year
Editor in Chief of ~the_stacker_muse
Credit to @Aardvark for the idea
Big get!
Munger was a prof when I was in grad school and I had some classmates who were working with him.
that's terrible haha
I mean everything just points to the growth of a new aristocracy. DoorDash is just distributed servanthood. Let me know when it's time to storm the Bastille
"Mr Ramsey’s advice, however, is puritanical in its attitude to debt"
Yes, he doesn't quite grasp that you need debt in order to short the currency, riding the fiat-currency bubble all the way down. #994746
Even stackers, who should understand debt as shorting the currency, still react badly to the idea of debt: #1280919
I think it's deeply ingrained in human nature
The risk/reward ratio for bots posting freebie comments or 1-sat cost comment is really skewed towards reward. If even one stacker accidentally zaps say 40-100 sats, that pays for 40 to 100 one-sat comments just on its own.
That being said, I am not sure how many of the bots are economic bots vs. someone's personal lab experiment.
whole course. 15 weeks 30 lectures