>Chapelle has an outdated view of trans issues but doesn’t call for violence, which is Netflix’s line.
Chapelle has a logically correct view of trans issues that's up to date. It's probably the view shared by a silent majority but it's politically suicide to even hint at, as he covered in his special. You can rob a pregnant woman at gun point and be considered a saint, but if you hurt a trans person's feelings, you're literally Hitler.
Please stop posting flamewar comments and using HN for ideological battle. We ban accounts that do those things, regardless of ideology, because they destroy what this site is supposed to be for.
I'm not going to ban your account right now but if you continue to post flamewar comments or ideological battle comments, we'll end up having to. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and correct this going forward, we'd appreciate it.
The last 50 years of politics across US and Europe have proven over and over again that you ignore "silent majorities" at your peril. They have an annoying habit of making mincemeat of arguments for radical change when you least expect it. I'm sure there are parallel realities where 60s/70s counterculture stops Reagan and Thatcher from winning (twice), but this isn't one of them.
Lay out your case for change, by all means; but you should always assume that you start from a position of minority until proven otherwise.
You are equating "silent majority" and "hardcore right wing". That's not how it works in practice - this is something that both right and left can and do get wrong.
You're assuming left vs right, The only side that feels there is some universality here is the right. The left is HIGHLY fragmented - always has been, always will be. That gives people on the right this messed up "silent majority" notion that just isn't true.
The right has definitely fragmented in the past five years (older conservatives, Trumpers, the alt-right, etc.). You're again getting this wrong and can only think in a "left vs. right" framework (typical of leftists and alt-righters).
The "silent majority" exists in this case especially around wedge issues like trans sports inclusion [0].
"Since they were racist in the past, we get to be racist NOW!" At least you admit you're not morally against racism, you're quite for it, just targeting Whites is perfectly OK.
>You might think it's unfair
There's no "think", it is logically and factually racist, unfair.
The reason why you're seeing this more and more is because White liberals are the only self-hating subgroup [0].
"Remarkably, white liberals were the only subgroup exhibiting a pro-outgroup bias—meaning white liberals were more favorable toward nonwhites and are the only group to show this preference for group other than their own. Indeed, on average, white liberals rated ethnic and racial minority groups 13 points (or half a standard deviation) warmer than whites."
We need more electricians as well. Got a quote to add a car charger last week and it was a hilarious four figure sum, with a month and a half lead time.
You could always do it yourself if you feel it's overpriced.
It's no different than software engineers charging $300/hour consulting fees. Sure, they're just typing on a keyboard (or running some wires in this case), but you're paying for more than just the marginal cost of that particular job. You're paying for the investment that the specialist had to make to gain the experience required to be able to do the job.
Installing an EV charger (which are supposed to be installed in every new house built in California) versus consulting fees for an enterprise software build out are not apples and oranges, it's apples and horses.
6-10 hours?! One is basically adding a 220V outlet, and usually in a place that's very close to the box full of circuit breakers (the garage). In our case, the charger is about three feet from the breaker box. I would have done it myself if it wasn't installed for free (because $REASONS). As it was, took the pro about 30 minutes.
Now, that's not to say there aren't more difficult installations. But I imagine in a lot of cases in the U. S., where a lot of breaker boxes live in the garage, it shouldn't be anywhere near a four figure installation sum. My guess is a lot of contractors of any kind can pretty much name their price right now. Or they do I used to do when I didn't want anymore consulting work: jack up the quoted price enough that I would drop other clients to do the job at that rate should the potential client be desperate enough to pay it.
Are you aware of the requirements needed to be a licensed, bonded electrician? In my state you need at least 4000 hours of training bare minimum, higher tier licenses require more. This usually entails getting average pay for very dull work, for 2-4 years. Then you need tools, insurance, a vehicle (usually a diesel truck with lock boxes on the sides here), and a reliable employer. If you're starting your own small company and training others, that's a bit of a gamble as well.
Also, most electricians make more money doing new construction, especially condo or apartment buildings. You're getting charged that much because they could have made the same amount of money (or a bit less) putting those hours towards a bigger, longer term project. As someone who works in a skilled trade, I can guarantee they just didn't think your project was important or worth it (and they're right). They see someone who can afford an electric car, and they know what it's worth to you to charge it.
But hey, you could always just google it, do it yourself and hope the inspector doesn't notice. What's the worst that could happen?
>Are you aware of the requirements needed to be a licensed, bonded electrician?
Yes. I'm also aware of their average income in the Bay Area, and it absolutely did not justify the price.
>Also, most electricians make more money doing new construction, especially condo or apartment buildings.
Barely any of that in the Bay Area.
>I can guarantee they just didn't think your project was important or worth it (and they're right). They see someone who can afford an electric car, and they know what it's worth to you to charge it.
Market is white hot for them, not going to lie.
>But hey, you could always just google it, do it yourself and hope the inspector doesn't notice. What's the worst that could happen?
Not where I live, need a city permit and a licensed installer. I'm leasing so that's what the home owner requires.
what did you think it's supposed to cost? i can't imagine it would cost less than $1000, even just running conduit inside the walls, instead of doing drywall.
>I see nothing wrong with this proposal (I mean, I proposed it, right?).
No problem with denying illegal immigrants student IDs because they have to be at the same standards required for other voting IDs? Awesome, glad we agree.
>Illegal immigrants going to CC wishing to pay resident rates will have to prove their residency just like everyone else, as is the current situation.
Correct, except now they'll have to prove lawful presence, and residency if they are to be the same standard as other voter IDs. They can't prove lawful presence because they immigrated illegally, so my point stands.
>I don't see an issue with that. Do you?
Not at all! Tax money for citizens and legal immigrants should absolutely not go to illegal immigrants. No issues here, glad we agree.
>Which is fraud and can be detected and caught easily.
Apparently not. There are hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants defrauding the government by using other's social security numbers, etc. and it's been tough to stop it.
>If legislatures wanted to fortify the requirements to make them more uniform across counties they could have. They didn't. And it's telling.
They did... What are you talking about? This is a state standard that is the same across all counties. It's telling that you have absolutely no clue here.
>Shot down?
Yes, national IDs, voter ID laws are continuously shot down by Democrats, or are tampered in committees etc.
>You mean free as long as their time is worthless, right?
Just like voting, buying a gun, etc. It's not 100% free in time to exercise your rights.
>Because they already have an ID that should qualify,
Except they don't, as I have laid out above. Student IDs are not valid practically anywhere for identification such as airplanes, bars, buying alcohol, purchasing firearms, etc.
>but doesn't because of "reasons"
Yes, "reasons", also known as "uncomfortable facts that go against the narrative."
>Where those reasons are vague and unsupported by fact and evidence.
Those reasons are well defined and support by facts, logic, and evidence.
>After all, we have no evidence so far to support the idea that students are committing widespread voter fraud.
Thankfully because they're not allowed to use their student IDs, glad we're treating them like normal citizens.
>Republicans can't seem prove such a thing is happening despite decades of searching for it (gee, maybe because it's not happening).
Cool, same how there haven't been illegal weapons purchases with student IDs because they're not allowed for that either. Glad the Republicans are being consistent.
Chapelle has a logically correct view of trans issues that's up to date. It's probably the view shared by a silent majority but it's politically suicide to even hint at, as he covered in his special. You can rob a pregnant woman at gun point and be considered a saint, but if you hurt a trans person's feelings, you're literally Hitler.