tripu @tripu@social.cleverlibre.org
Technologist, Spaniard, male, 42
Joined May 2020
tripu
boosted
Remember kids, there's a pernicious reason why #Google redirects "http://maps.google.com" to "http://google.com/maps".
Because of this redirect, the location permission that you grant to Google Maps also automatically becomes available to Google Search - making your search queries more valuable to advertisers.
tripu
boosted
@olives Interesting, thank you.
I haven't laid out my “moral case” here, you don't know what that is.
I just answered to one specific objection, related to the economics of migration (ie, that “more and freer migration” and “the Sate providing safety nets” are “incompatible”).
/cc @mike805
Nueva reseña de #libro: «La pugna por el nuevo orden internacional»
> What worries me is unlimited asylum
But of course. Who's defending “unlimited” anything? I surely didn't.
> Immigration for skilled people is already pretty open
Where, outside of the Schengen Area (and that benefits “only” 420M people, most from countries that are quite wealthy already), is that?
I guess it depends on what one understand by “pretty open”.
I don't understand. I said “more and freer” migration. Not “unlimited” or “completely free”. Of course there are trade-offs and sweet spots. You are criticising a straw man, or someone else's view on this.
/cc @mike805
Many things that are vital for survival are in private hands, and that's right: most housing, most land used for agriculture, grocery stores, companies producing and selling clothing, etc.
/cc @freemo
Yes, I may be with you wrt education (it's an issue I haven't made up my mind about yet).
What other “government-issued grants” do you have in mind?
> Those two are contradictory
Not at all. “More and freer” doesn't mean “anyone can enter anytime with no conditions attached”.
Many prosperous countries could admit more migrants and also have a higher positive net impact on the economy.
Countries can impose waiting periods for welfare, reduced benefits, or a combination of both for migrants. Or they can let more of the most productive ones in.
Just a few ideas, it's by no means exhaustive.
I'm surprised you're in favour of subsidies for churches (or “any other nonprofit so long as they operate as a nonprofit”). I'm against subsidies for all those institutions in general — churches are just one category.
In fact, I take it even further: no subsidies for non-profits _nor_ for-profits, in principle. One possible exception (there may be others): industries that are vital for national security or for long-term survival etc.
I think monarchism is just one of many threads, I wouldn't boil things down to that.
But you're right about the labels being almost useless. I listened to a couple interviews with the authors of this book, and I am quite convinced of their thesis now (although it's very US-centric; it might be different in other countries):
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/62871369-the-myth-of-left-and-right
That, yes. I liked how Scott Alexander interpreted that meme:
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/which-party-has-gotten-more-extreme
A teaser:
* I want abortions to be not only legal but also publicly subsidised
* Ditto about euthanasia
* Ditto about hormone therapy and sex-reassignment surgery
* I am pro same-sex marriage
* I want more and freer migration
* I want the Sate to provide safety nets
* I am against the death penalty
* I want all drugs to be legal for adults (but also regulated)
* I think the State should be completely secular (no official religion, no subsidies for churches, no mentions of god)
* …
Most people are so binary in their thinking,
and the tenets of “the #left” and those of “the #right” have shifted so much (sometimes even exchanging places) in the last couple of decades,
that I want to write a post titled “Am I on the Right?”
(kind of [like #BrendanOneill did](https://medium.com/@burntoakboy/which-of-these-is-a-right-wing-position-4118046d7765))
listing all the views I have that would be automatically considered left-wing by many people today.
And then perhaps “Am I on the Left?”, too.
> _«No compartimos la hoja de ruta independentista por ser ilegal y unilateral»_ ([15/mar/2016](https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/709738798461140992))
> _«#Puigdemont y Junqueras, principales responsables de la fractura y el desgarro de la sociedad catalana. Todo para nada.»_ ([27/oct/2017](https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/923940544853790725))
> _«Puigdemont, si representa algo, es una de las peores hojas de la historia de #Cataluña y ya va siendo hora de pasar página»_ ([20/ene/2018](https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/954705405778759680))
> _«Si la única salida que plantea el #independentismo se llama Puigdemont, es que no quieren una salida»_ ([31/ene/2018](https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/958636457903689728))
> _«Nuestro proyecto de cambio político defiende el **cumplimiento íntegro de la ley** y la #Constitución. **La izquierda no puede alinearse con los separatistas**, es profundamente insolidario. **No hay ninguna causa de izquierdas en el independentismo.**»_ ([24/mar/2018](https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/977531422952050689))
> _«La #izquierda es europeísta, progresista e integradora. El independentismo, excluyente y aislacionista. Los que echaron a los socialistas del Ayto. de Barcelona plantean ahora apoyar un gobierno independentista. Vuelven a equivocarse. Anteponen la insolidaridad a la igualdad.»_ ([28/mar/2018](https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/978909746857201670))
> _«**#España necesita un Gobierno progresista que no dependa del independentismo**»_ ([11/jul/2019](https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/1149237272828698625))
> _«**Nadie está por encima de la ley. Puigdemont es un prófugo de la #Justicia.** Trabajaremos para que el sistema judicial español, con todas sus garantías, pueda juzgarlo con imparcialidad.»_ ([6/nov/2019](https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/1192078221191331841))
Technologist, Spaniard, male, 42
Joined May 2020
