I expect most of them knew this out of the gate. It's just that none of them were brave enough to tell Trump.

That's likely true, but has bad long-term outcomes. Dem primaries have to resolve policy disagreement across the whole political spectrum. GOP primaries go ever-further down the rabbit hole, and general elections remain referendums on rule of law, with the pro-law side fragmented on policy.

That's what "financialize everything" means, in VC

Tickets are too much overhead. It should just fine you, continuously, by micropayment. Say, $1 per mph over per minute.

This seems a lot like having electric baseboard heat in the homes, except that:
1. internet search doesn't work as well
2. someone had to dig a hole
3. a few guys made billions

TBF, this is what Trump has always wanted. If we'd let him have an infinite budget, legal immunity from contract issues, and cultural immunity from being a horrible person as a civilian real estate developer, he likely would have stayed in that role his whole life.

A key element of every Trump strategy is lying prodigiously about how well it works. This was true before politics. He was noted for "making his own ratings" on The Apprentice, simply by lying about the ratings

We all know this, but it still works, a bit. The omission you mention may be an example

I'm personally guilty of believing Murc's Law in this case. I can't imagine them even _trying_ to improve conditions. That's just not something they do.

I can imagine them:

1. sending out checks signed by Trump
2. starting a war
3. starting a domestic meltdown equivalent to a war

This strikes me as a Murc's Law violation so severe that editors for major media outlets would get the shakes even thinking about it, much less publishing about it.

Things being what they are, I'd settle for them not being richly rewarded (with increasing value of the stock that makes up most of their pay and held assets) for blurting out the bullshit.

Yep. "Efficiency" *could* mean good things,of course, but in a buisiness context it almost never does. What business is efficient at is concentrating value so owner-class people can take it.

To give that maximum sacred cow butchering phrasing: "efficiency is bad, actually." It precludes redundancy, flexibility, unused reserves, and preemptive maintainance. A maximally efficient system in one set of conditions is extremely fragile when conditions change.

The last sentence is the key bit.

Confomity and normality aren't viable paths to belonging in a changing world. That's fine. Unless you built your identity around using your perceived normality to treat nonconforming people like shit, and now worry you'll die by that sword.

Three years into the owner class picking a new tulip madness to satisfy their terminal addiction to speculative stock growth, and shockingly people are hesitant to make their whole lives about tulips. Who could possibly have seen this coming!?

I'm less aure about this for AI, but this was clearly the worse danger of Fox News. Sure, they convinced some people of some lies, but much worse, they convinced many people that everything is a lie, objective truth is non-existent or unknowable, and they should stick with their biases.

There's some stuff in there I don't agree with, but the unavailability of non-luxury options really is a big deal.

Obligatory individual expenses (e.g. transportation) are too.