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
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
-
-
What fraction of people care enough about homeless to donate money? I doubt it's even 10%, so at least 1 more order of magnitude there. And he's talking about a one-time donation. If you want to convert that to an annuity, that's another 1.5 orders of magnitude.
-
Your reply kind of illustrates my point, SSC, like other generalist blogs, is full of reasonable sounding things that often fall apart if you're familiar with what's being discussed.
- 5 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.