Riggs
@bigrigg47.bsky.social
Bad at video games, but I play too many of them anyway (I do not play league! the banner is a lie!)
occasionally work on stuff on riggsmarkham.com
occasionally work on stuff on riggsmarkham.com
Who knew that people who constantly use “it was a different time” to defend their historical heroes might not be criticizing “relativism” in good faith?
January 6, 2026 at 10:38 PM
Who knew that people who constantly use “it was a different time” to defend their historical heroes might not be criticizing “relativism” in good faith?
Live service games seem like a far more stable development environment than “mass layoffs on release day” and at least it’s not gacha/microtransaction bullshit, so I can’t really be too mad at it.
January 5, 2026 at 9:29 PM
Live service games seem like a far more stable development environment than “mass layoffs on release day” and at least it’s not gacha/microtransaction bullshit, so I can’t really be too mad at it.
This has been Paradox’s business model for the last decade and half (at least since the release of CK2 in 2012)
January 5, 2026 at 9:25 PM
This has been Paradox’s business model for the last decade and half (at least since the release of CK2 in 2012)
We can still hate stupid people, even if their existence is completely unsurprising.
January 1, 2026 at 10:15 PM
We can still hate stupid people, even if their existence is completely unsurprising.
Sorry, I was calculating for the average worker/household, not the average person (no need to include children or poor retirees).
December 30, 2025 at 10:11 PM
Sorry, I was calculating for the average worker/household, not the average person (no need to include children or poor retirees).
Or, I should clarify, the $25k estimate that I was giving was per household, not per person (no need to include people who don’t pay much in taxes, like children).
December 30, 2025 at 10:09 PM
Or, I should clarify, the $25k estimate that I was giving was per household, not per person (no need to include people who don’t pay much in taxes, like children).
Current revenues are about $4T annually. Current spending is about $6T. M4A will need around $2T in additional spending (bringing total federal healthcare spending up to $4T).
So, yeah, doubling taxes sounds about right.
So, yeah, doubling taxes sounds about right.
December 30, 2025 at 10:00 PM
Current revenues are about $4T annually. Current spending is about $6T. M4A will need around $2T in additional spending (bringing total federal healthcare spending up to $4T).
So, yeah, doubling taxes sounds about right.
So, yeah, doubling taxes sounds about right.
It’s more like $10-12k a year just to stabilize the debt (and SS), and then $12-15k more for M4A.
December 30, 2025 at 9:43 PM
It’s more like $10-12k a year just to stabilize the debt (and SS), and then $12-15k more for M4A.
I think you misunderstand. This is explicitly not a call for additional spending, just additional taxes.
We need to increase taxes to fix the deficit. If you want more spending, we would need *further* tax increases.
We need to increase taxes to fix the deficit. If you want more spending, we would need *further* tax increases.
December 30, 2025 at 9:36 PM
I think you misunderstand. This is explicitly not a call for additional spending, just additional taxes.
We need to increase taxes to fix the deficit. If you want more spending, we would need *further* tax increases.
We need to increase taxes to fix the deficit. If you want more spending, we would need *further* tax increases.
Well, dismantling those tax-exempt retirement accounts would also be a fantastic source of additional revenue.
December 30, 2025 at 9:33 PM
Well, dismantling those tax-exempt retirement accounts would also be a fantastic source of additional revenue.
If interest rates are lower than tax receipt growth, there’s no real need to actually pay down the debt.
December 30, 2025 at 9:20 PM
If interest rates are lower than tax receipt growth, there’s no real need to actually pay down the debt.
The middle class pays really low taxes; they can absolutely afford to pay more and it won’t strangle them.
December 30, 2025 at 9:17 PM
The middle class pays really low taxes; they can absolutely afford to pay more and it won’t strangle them.
Higher taxes are absolutely economically sustainable by themselves; US taxes are rather low compared to other developed countries.
December 30, 2025 at 9:16 PM
Higher taxes are absolutely economically sustainable by themselves; US taxes are rather low compared to other developed countries.
“I’ll never have a depressive episode” - person who could absolutely have a depressive episode.
December 30, 2025 at 8:45 PM
“I’ll never have a depressive episode” - person who could absolutely have a depressive episode.
He’s obviously wrong.
December 30, 2025 at 7:56 PM
He’s obviously wrong.
Sounds similar to the Irish STV system. The country is split up into constituencies electing 3-5 seats each. And STV is basically just a cleaner version of that 5/5 rule that you're proposing.
December 23, 2025 at 11:58 PM
Sounds similar to the Irish STV system. The country is split up into constituencies electing 3-5 seats each. And STV is basically just a cleaner version of that 5/5 rule that you're proposing.
So would you prefer STV or Spain's PR system?
December 23, 2025 at 10:30 PM
So would you prefer STV or Spain's PR system?
I'm not saying that the voters did anything wrong. Just the party.
And the decision to run fewer candidates wasn't really about the electoral system per se, it was mostly that SF wanted to save money (by not campaigning everywhere) and focus their efforts on their least scandal-ridden candidates.
And the decision to run fewer candidates wasn't really about the electoral system per se, it was mostly that SF wanted to save money (by not campaigning everywhere) and focus their efforts on their least scandal-ridden candidates.
December 23, 2025 at 10:28 PM
I'm not saying that the voters did anything wrong. Just the party.
And the decision to run fewer candidates wasn't really about the electoral system per se, it was mostly that SF wanted to save money (by not campaigning everywhere) and focus their efforts on their least scandal-ridden candidates.
And the decision to run fewer candidates wasn't really about the electoral system per se, it was mostly that SF wanted to save money (by not campaigning everywhere) and focus their efforts on their least scandal-ridden candidates.
Because they're relatively moderate and prefer the center-right to the further left?
They lost seats to the 2 largest parties in Ireland who subsequently formed a government. And SF certainly had more people that they *could* have run; the number they picked was a (incorrect) strategic choice.
They lost seats to the 2 largest parties in Ireland who subsequently formed a government. And SF certainly had more people that they *could* have run; the number they picked was a (incorrect) strategic choice.
December 23, 2025 at 9:06 PM
Because they're relatively moderate and prefer the center-right to the further left?
They lost seats to the 2 largest parties in Ireland who subsequently formed a government. And SF certainly had more people that they *could* have run; the number they picked was a (incorrect) strategic choice.
They lost seats to the 2 largest parties in Ireland who subsequently formed a government. And SF certainly had more people that they *could* have run; the number they picked was a (incorrect) strategic choice.
Some to smaller left-wing parties, some to their main opposition parties (Fianna Fail and Fine Gael). Overall, it resulted in 2-4 extra seats for FF/FG.
December 23, 2025 at 8:08 PM
Some to smaller left-wing parties, some to their main opposition parties (Fianna Fail and Fine Gael). Overall, it resulted in 2-4 extra seats for FF/FG.
That doesn't solve everything, and especially in districts with only a few seats, the results can get more disproportionate.
A good example is the 2020 Irish election, where Sinn Fein didn't expect to do so well and ran too few candidates, losing them ~3 seats.
A good example is the 2020 Irish election, where Sinn Fein didn't expect to do so well and ran too few candidates, losing them ~3 seats.
December 23, 2025 at 7:54 PM
That doesn't solve everything, and especially in districts with only a few seats, the results can get more disproportionate.
A good example is the 2020 Irish election, where Sinn Fein didn't expect to do so well and ran too few candidates, losing them ~3 seats.
A good example is the 2020 Irish election, where Sinn Fein didn't expect to do so well and ran too few candidates, losing them ~3 seats.
I personally prefer a open-list PR system where candidates are selected via STV only by the voters that chose that party in the party list part.
December 23, 2025 at 7:44 PM
I personally prefer a open-list PR system where candidates are selected via STV only by the voters that chose that party in the party list part.
The main reason is that it's not *that* proportional (especially if parties run too many/too few candidates for their vote share).
Also, it can make ballots really long (there's a tradeoff where making voters rank more candidates makes it more proportional and vice versa).
Also, it can make ballots really long (there's a tradeoff where making voters rank more candidates makes it more proportional and vice versa).
December 23, 2025 at 7:39 PM
The main reason is that it's not *that* proportional (especially if parties run too many/too few candidates for their vote share).
Also, it can make ballots really long (there's a tradeoff where making voters rank more candidates makes it more proportional and vice versa).
Also, it can make ballots really long (there's a tradeoff where making voters rank more candidates makes it more proportional and vice versa).
That's only an issue in closed list systems; open list systems are very common (Japan, Brazil, Italy, Poland, Indonesia).
(and parties/factions are pretty essential to the parliamentary process)
(and parties/factions are pretty essential to the parliamentary process)
December 23, 2025 at 7:30 PM
That's only an issue in closed list systems; open list systems are very common (Japan, Brazil, Italy, Poland, Indonesia).
(and parties/factions are pretty essential to the parliamentary process)
(and parties/factions are pretty essential to the parliamentary process)