Viewing things as zero-sum is convenient. Simple, understandable, it makes us feel smart. Aware. So it makes sense why you would think in this manner.
But anyone who is a fan of freakanomics or other academic economics focused podcasts, the types of podcasts that find where the science meets the real world would know that viewing the world this way leads to much more wrong answers than right answers. Economics is a machine of indirect consequences.
There are not X number of limited housing slots. Houses can be built.
Or can they? Is someone stopping the building of homes? Or are there any events that reduce the supply of homes? Is anyone purchasing a large supply of them?
Immigrants are always used as a racist dog whistle to avoid having people ask such questions as I mention. And it worked well, on you.
But not me. I’m not so simple.
Let me end by congratulating you, you have found your simple answer. And I suspect you don’t focus too hard on scrutinizing your own ideas. Do you? You can feel they are true, you don’t need to examine them.
My only critique, you seem angry, perhaps you should modify your world view and give yourself a better life. The only person stopping you from seeing things differently is yourself. Good luck.
I dont claim its a zero sum game, that is obviously not true. And sure you can build houses, but you can only build houses so fast, and the government makes it harder to build houses. I dont kow the number, but if we are able to build 1.5 million units per year, and we have more people coming in legally and illegally and are being born, then that will obviously have a pressure on housing availability. The issue is that people like you dont understand what goes into building housing, and jsut think “Houses can be built”. Tell that to anyone in housing and they will laugh at you.
Immigrants are always used as a racist dog whistle to avoid having people ask such questions as I mention. And it worked well, on you.
Oh gotcha, you are one of those NPCs that calls everyone racist.
If you meet one asshole.
You met an asshole.
If everyone you meet is an asshole.
Who is the common denominator?
Same idea for racism.
If you get called a racist once.
Maybe you met an unhinged person.
If you are constantly called a racist.
Well…?
I don’t live in a world where myself or anyone around me gets called racist, ever.
Do you?
Finally, I never called you a racist. I called your comment a racist dog whistle, which it is. In my view, a non-racist person can say a racist thing and remain non-racist as long as they are willing to learn from it and grow. I judge actions, not people. However if such actions continuously are sourced from an individual, what is the rational conclusion to reach in that matter besides that the person shares the beliefs that generated those ideas?
To provide a bridging analogy, I don’t assume everyone holding a baseball bat is going to hit me with it, but if I go to a park and see a guy swinging his baseball bat at people. Is the correct conclusion to assume, “He’s not a person that hits people with baseball bats.”? You’re swinging the bat, if you want people to assume you aren’t going to hit them, stop doing that.
Viewing things as zero-sum is convenient. Simple, understandable, it makes us feel smart. Aware. So it makes sense why you would think in this manner.
But anyone who is a fan of freakanomics or other academic economics focused podcasts, the types of podcasts that find where the science meets the real world would know that viewing the world this way leads to much more wrong answers than right answers. Economics is a machine of indirect consequences.
There are not X number of limited housing slots. Houses can be built.
Or can they? Is someone stopping the building of homes? Or are there any events that reduce the supply of homes? Is anyone purchasing a large supply of them?
Immigrants are always used as a racist dog whistle to avoid having people ask such questions as I mention. And it worked well, on you.
But not me. I’m not so simple.
Let me end by congratulating you, you have found your simple answer. And I suspect you don’t focus too hard on scrutinizing your own ideas. Do you? You can feel they are true, you don’t need to examine them.
My only critique, you seem angry, perhaps you should modify your world view and give yourself a better life. The only person stopping you from seeing things differently is yourself. Good luck.
I dont claim its a zero sum game, that is obviously not true. And sure you can build houses, but you can only build houses so fast, and the government makes it harder to build houses. I dont kow the number, but if we are able to build 1.5 million units per year, and we have more people coming in legally and illegally and are being born, then that will obviously have a pressure on housing availability. The issue is that people like you dont understand what goes into building housing, and jsut think “Houses can be built”. Tell that to anyone in housing and they will laugh at you.
Oh gotcha, you are one of those NPCs that calls everyone racist.
And you call people NPCs.
I do, see above!
Sealioning again.
Do you know where that term comes from?
https://wondermark.com/c/1062/
If you meet one asshole.
You met an asshole.
If everyone you meet is an asshole.
Who is the common denominator?
Same idea for racism.
If you get called a racist once.
Maybe you met an unhinged person.
If you are constantly called a racist.
Well…?
I don’t live in a world where myself or anyone around me gets called racist, ever.
Do you?
Finally, I never called you a racist. I called your comment a racist dog whistle, which it is. In my view, a non-racist person can say a racist thing and remain non-racist as long as they are willing to learn from it and grow. I judge actions, not people. However if such actions continuously are sourced from an individual, what is the rational conclusion to reach in that matter besides that the person shares the beliefs that generated those ideas?
To provide a bridging analogy, I don’t assume everyone holding a baseball bat is going to hit me with it, but if I go to a park and see a guy swinging his baseball bat at people. Is the correct conclusion to assume, “He’s not a person that hits people with baseball bats.”? You’re swinging the bat, if you want people to assume you aren’t going to hit them, stop doing that.
Okay here it comes. I think you’re racist because the only opposition you can conceive of to immigration is race-based.
You see racism everywhere, because race is the lens through which you view the world.
But I’m sure this is your first one, so it’s not yet a pattern and you don’t have to address it.