I find the SSC "Too much dark money in almonds" post interesting because it starts from the premise that there obviously isn't too much dark money in almonds, an argument from incredulity, and uses this (and similar) to argue that there isn't too much dark money in politics, but
-
-
It's also factually incorrect. Municipalities, at times, have increased their homeless budget by more than $100/person and this has not solved the problem. But I'm pointing out the pattern because it's always intellectually dishonest, it may not always be factually incorrect.
-
But as with the almonds example, the magnitude of the error is striking. We've had efforts that increase annual spend by an order of magnitude more than SSC's suggested number that haven't moved the needle. How much more needs to be spent to solve the problem? Maybe 2 orders more
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.