Completely agree and the usual solution most people come to is different people to run government and not less government and more freedom for the individual.
"With a Robin Hood redistribution system, we begin the process of fracturing our society, fighting to decide who benefits and who gets plundered.
Those who come to depend on the government in some way or another will remain loyal supporters of whichever leader or party is most likely to preserve their government-dependent way of life.
No political party can make any meaningful reform to such a system because if they do, they will upset all the beneficiaries of this gravy train and automatically lose at the polls, which is why their rhetoric may differ but there is remarkable continuity between their governing policies no matter who gets elected.
Politicians can try to gain new supporters by adding more programs to cater to additional special interest groups, but they can't dismantle anything without upsetting the applecart. And so, the system becomes a one-way ratchet towards less freedom, ever greater taxation, ever greater regulation, and ever greater social engineering schemes to keep the beneficiaries of the system happy, while the productive members of society must bear an ever-growing burden. And the permanent propaganda to convince you of the morality and necessity of accepting that burden."
You've interviewed Erik Vorhees a number of times, he has told you and your audience what chatGTP is - censored & not private. What good is that? Why not use Venice.ai that he created which is both uncensored and private?
It doesn't serve you or the world to default to chatGPT when there are other options like venice.ai which are much more aligned with your spoken values.
I also use Venice, it depends on what I am working on and whether I care what is being seen. ChatGPT is way ahead of Venice on certain things and I think the language - grammar and spelling suggestions are better..
Completely agree and the usual solution most people come to is different people to run government and not less government and more freedom for the individual.
Worth sharing something from Julius Ruechel
https://www.juliusruechel.com/2024/10/the-great-unravelling-why-democracy.html
"With a Robin Hood redistribution system, we begin the process of fracturing our society, fighting to decide who benefits and who gets plundered.
Those who come to depend on the government in some way or another will remain loyal supporters of whichever leader or party is most likely to preserve their government-dependent way of life.
No political party can make any meaningful reform to such a system because if they do, they will upset all the beneficiaries of this gravy train and automatically lose at the polls, which is why their rhetoric may differ but there is remarkable continuity between their governing policies no matter who gets elected.
Politicians can try to gain new supporters by adding more programs to cater to additional special interest groups, but they can't dismantle anything without upsetting the applecart. And so, the system becomes a one-way ratchet towards less freedom, ever greater taxation, ever greater regulation, and ever greater social engineering schemes to keep the beneficiaries of the system happy, while the productive members of society must bear an ever-growing burden. And the permanent propaganda to convince you of the morality and necessity of accepting that burden."
hi Peter, why do you use chatGPT still?!
You've interviewed Erik Vorhees a number of times, he has told you and your audience what chatGTP is - censored & not private. What good is that? Why not use Venice.ai that he created which is both uncensored and private?
It doesn't serve you or the world to default to chatGPT when there are other options like venice.ai which are much more aligned with your spoken values.
I also use Venice, it depends on what I am working on and whether I care what is being seen. ChatGPT is way ahead of Venice on certain things and I think the language - grammar and spelling suggestions are better..
Excellent article Peter, thank you!