I think the concern about increasing dependency ratios (especially given increasing lifespans) is pretty compelling. Devoting ever increasing shares of the economy to elder care or immiserating the elderly are both bad options.

Though a wrinkle is that how long someone is dependent (in a loose sense) isn't necessarily the same for as a child vs as a senior. Nor that this is stable, e.g. longer lives could lead to a higher dependency ratio if it doesn't also increase how long it is reasonable to have people work for.

My intuition is that a stable fertility rate leads to a stable dependency ratio, and a changing one will increase it (either by increasing the number of ratio the young or elderly depending on the direction).

It's not a capitalism thing. All else being equal, as the dependency ratio increases, then either more work by people still capable of work has to go to providing for dependents (e.g. the elderly) or the quality of life for the them has to get worse.

Every time I'm asked to install something by piping a curl command into bash I feel like my faith in computers is being tested. Probably exactly what Abraham felt, I bet

dudes will refuse to click on links in email for security reasons but raw-dog terminal install anything from a blog that passes the vibe check

Though I think a big part of this is a malformed regulatory environment making it harder than it should be to build and connect renewable energy.

I think someone needs to take the Christmas romcom plotline and turn it into a horror movie where the female protagonist eventually realizes that if she stays too long, she'll end up as an ambitiousless husk who gives up on all her dreams.

The stepped up basis on inheritance should be removed. It's existence is a significant reason this is a thing.

Context collapse speedrun any %

I had a coworker who claimed that the letter naming scheme was better than descriptive names because descriptive names could get out of date and become misleading...

Median household incomes look like they just about recovered by 2023. In comparison, it took until 2015 for them to recover after the 2008 crash. So why the heck are people more pissed then they were before the great recession was fully recovered from.

It's a bit weird that the (vast) majority of people think they are doing well but think the overall economy is doing poorly I think? And, I don't think there is any evidence that people changed their preferences on how well other people were doing as a factor?

My recollection is that how people felt about the economy was really weird: they largely felt they were doing ok but the overall economy wasn't.

That's a pretty big strawman? I'm sure some were being dumb about it, but the people talking about the economy being good were not referring to the stock market, but instead (real) wage increases and, increasing and high (Prime Age) EPOP (among other things).

The complaint is about people who said they were ok with losing (get less/spend-more money) if it meant poor people would win (get more money).