Iron dome is only effective against dumb rockets and mortars, with minimal range.
Nobody is going to shoot those at the us. What a waste of money.
EDIT: I’ve read the actual executive order. Iron dome is a metaphor, he’s actually covering things like hypersonics too.
My company costs the government billions each year for weapons that haven’t been used in nearly 80 years. Talk about inefficiency!
Nukes and nuclear nonproliferation.
Shout-out to republican department of energy head Rick Perry who wanted to get rid of the DOE thinking it was just solar panels and windmills. TEXAS MAN THINK GOVERNMENT ENERGY BAD.
God the center of that must feel like being in a carwash with the spinny bristles.
Additionally, the average brain is about 1300 grams. 0.5% of 1300 is 6.5 grams, and plastic credit cards weigh roughly 5 grams.
0.5% is really hard for me to visualize. A credit card in everyone’s brain is unfortunately easy…
Fun fact, the average adult brain also has a credit cards worth of plastic inside. So that bacon has some company!
I’ve made NO false assumptions
Article states:
It is one of the largest crisis response programs in the country, with 130 employees.
Your assumption: they have always had 130 employees.
Reality: In FY 21, they had funding for 18 people, in FY 22 they had the funding for 61 people.
That sure does seem like an assumption that turned out to be false.
So when I said “even if you 8x”… I didn’t account that there could be additional workload?
That’s a good point - how did you come up with that number? Also, how did you come up with an acceptable number of diverted calls? Did you compare the value to those of the programs peers?
Taking even your infographic where they claim that they’ve done 3296 calls .
Okay, let’s make sure our homework is done again. How many people do you know we’re employed at this time? Should your analysis be qualified as a worst case value? How many folks do you think should be on call?
Moving goalposts
Lmao, it can say a lot about your approach if real world corrections to the initial values are considered moving goalposts. If your focus is on being “right” in the context of the article regardless of being wrong in the context of real life, I can see that being upsetting.
Here’s the thing. You’re the one asserting that it’s inefficient, so it’s really up to you to make sure your evidence and reasoning is right.
You keep asking for analysis from me, but I don’t need to provide my own analysis to point out the false assumptions you’ve made in yours, resulting in potentially misleading analysis. The correct action to take is to either correct the assumptions, or state that those are assumptions you are making in your analysis.
The fundamental thread behind your analysis is that 130 employees don’t divert enough calls to justify their existence, when in reality you didn’t realize that those calls aren’t the sole responsibility the group has. So how much water does the analysis even hold?
I’m not saying you’re a bad person. I’m saying you’re looking to “offer a more realistic view of what this actually is” before having a full understanding of what it actually is. The acs page linked to the article has a transparency page with regular reports like the one I shared. I’d consider those to be good primary resources. Go ham!
I’ve replied to another one of your comments.
There are many reasons why I think you’re analysis is misleading.
This infographic has more relevant info from 2023.
Also note that taking calls isn’t the only thing the group is responsible for. They do things like needle pickups, homeless outreach, etc additionally, acs doesn’t only respond to 911 calls:
While responding to 911 calls is our primary focus, ACS responders will be dispatched through additional methods, including referrals, self- dispatch, and 311 tickets. ACS will also respond to calls from 988, the national behavioral health crisis hotline, when it launches in 2022.
Taking some good news and immediately trying to portray it in a bad light is not exactly the way to push society forward. Actively looking to portray the start of such programs as “inefficient” and being a waste of taxpayer dollars can discourage other such programs from starting, which is a shame especially if the analysis wasn’t fully informed.
You’ve taken their current employee count, as the biggest department of its kind, and assumed they started with that on day 1, which is an unrealistic assumption to make without evidence.
Imo anyone considering a Tesla won’t really care about the price and quality, for the reasons you describe. They’re there for the brand.
Apparently Tesla’s on board with this. Their thinking, which I think is correct, is that the rebate benefits other manufacturers more since Tesla is much more established as an EV brand.
Idk what the exact definition of a full lock in is, but if you have to break a window to get someone out I’d think it still qualifies since the locks were all engaged.
Agreed on all counts. Thanks for the conversation and differing perspectives. I hope you have a good weekend!
Yes, I’d agree that for it to be a punishment entitlement would need to be involved - for example nobody feels punished that they didn’t win the lotto by buying one ticket.
Entitlement can take the form of the status quo, whether or not that’s justified is not a conversation I have enough critical thinking for.
I think what I haven’t seen cleared up in this thread is there are actually two reasons for 4b floating around - one is to try and bring about societal change by crashing the birth rate, but the other is simply out of safety and self-preservation of women. If we focus on the latter, it makes sense that women in more dangerous societies will choose 4b more often than those where they feel safer.
The conclusion I come to is that 4b will be more common in states that do not value the bodily autonomy/safety of women, which I’d say largely points to conservative states.
In a way, if safety and bodily autonomy is the reason for choosing 4b, it will self-regulate to not “punish” or affect those who generally vote to pass policies treating women properly.
I think there was some nuance that was lost in the call for “all” women to participate in 4b
A punishment requires a penalty or deprivation, and since dating is not a requirement, there can be no deprivation occurring.
Fwiw, a common example of a punishment removing something that is desired but not required is temporarily taking away X from a rowdy kid, be it phone, snacks, etc, which does poke a hole in that assertion.
Yeah, others have portrayed that as the goal here.
I just feel like I wouldn’t feel particularly attached to the fate of a country raised by brainwashing conservative families anyways, so it’s a scorched earth approach. Yes, you’ve broken the system, and it can be remade now, but those doing the remaking likely won’t carry your values…
Cute (I actually laughed, haha), but the assumption that meme makes is that it’s clear the gal doesn’t want to participate in the conversation due to body language.
There’s none of that when you’re commenting in a public politics community. You’re not posting in a community for 4b, for example. Additionally, you’re the one that made the initial comment.
By attempting to talk over and belittle others who respond you’re acting like the guy in the meme.
Hey but props to them for their swift action.