farright's comments

I was only pointing out that Schiff funded the Bolsheviks because of his political views that were related to bring an American Jew. And there seems to be plenty of evidence in the Wikipedia article for that asking.

I never made the claim that Schiff was particularly important. Can you point to something specifically in my post that if incorrect?

Also comparing three terms on google trends suggests the left haven't been nearly active enough in promoting either concept:

https://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=Jewish%20lobby,milit...

Given this I don't think it makes sense to say that the Russian Revolution was funded by "Wall St." but rather that it was supported by a wealthy Jewish American who opposed the Tzarist regime.

Here's a nice piece of fake news I saw circulating among my progressive friends on facebook: http://www.snopes.com/2016/11/22/controversial-cnn-chyron/

Which side do you think would disagree or are you just trying to bluff me out with technical terms you don't fully understand?

As to funding, can you point to major sources of funding for academic econ research that would introduce bias?

This is absolutely no different to the anti vaccination movement.

People are simply too lazy and arrogant to listen to what the economics profession has to say, and ignore that fact that the methods, organization and incentives of the economics profession are identical to the rest of academicia.

Same goes for Walmart. If you've been to Walmart and Starbucks it's pretty clear that most Walmart workers would never be able to get a job at Starbucks.

It could also mean that black people are not especially target by the police and that outrage at law enforcement is misplaced. For example we know that the rates of police violence against black people vs white people roughly mirrors arrest and conviction rates.

Now you might consider this incorrect, but I think it's a debate that has to be had in the open and not shut down by calling people racist.

The latter view is rarely argued in academic circles so I've never seen it rigorously defended. But it is passed off as fact to the general public.

Now I am not able to correct this later group because if I do so, not only will they attack me as racist, but the former group will not defend me. In fact the former group will say "the only reason you would present this fact in isolation is because you want to imply black people are genetically inclined to crime". This would most likely result in disciplinary action in my workplace.

But the left has the ability to get you fired if you question their assertions too much. So their falsehoods are actually more effective

This is exactly the kind of misinformation bubble that people are talking about. Kevin Allred is clearly misrepresenting his original tweet.

I guess it would be expensive, probably too expensive for Uber drivers. Maybe it could still be used in luxury vehicles while full autonomous operation is in the works.

I didn't get this effect with less intense games like Space Pirate Trainer.

Does anyone else get really tired of stuff like this? Why is it that every possible difference is celebrated except within liberal circles, with the exception that nerds are considered objectively bad. In fact the article comes across as body shaming.

The idea is that people get a "bubble" but that when people vote, hopefully they take into account both quality and how similar the post is to their own. So people get a better version of their own views, which hopefully also allows them to see similar but non-identical views.

You can see that sites like reddit which tend to have high quality posts, but many subreddis have very strong biases as well. Letting people live in their own bubble means that people can write the best quality posts they can without worrying if their bias matches the subreddit they are writing in.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegative_democracy

I don't know why this would even be controversial, it's basic economics. All developed countries prefer higher paid workers cause those workers pay more tax (and probably have bigger contributions to total surplus). Having a cap and letting it fill up randomly with lower income employees like those from contracting companies, instead of high income employees at big tech companies, is just leaving money on the table.