James

6.3K posts

James

James

@NZJamesS

NZ born, England educated. Middle-East raised. Home is all over the place. 🇳🇿, 🇦🇪, 🇬🇧, 🇧🇭/🇬🇧, 🇦🇪/🇬🇧, 🇦🇪, 🇦🇺, 🇬🇷, 🇬🇧, 🇳🇿

London / Auckland / World Katılım Ekim 2021
169 Takip Edilen188 Takipçiler
James retweetledi
Andrew Neil
Andrew Neil@afneil·
The politics of a country in decline. Not a single word about wealth creation, without which none of this nonsense can be financed. It’s deeply pathetic. If people fall for this left-wing populist drivel we’ve ceased to be a serious country.
Adam Cherry@_adamcherry_

The Burnham manifesto: •Rejoin the European Union •Break the fiscal rules to borrow more for defence. Thus destroying the fiscal rules… •Extensive devolution, including tax powers. •A wealth tax •Nationalise water, energy, utilities, and what remains of rail •A land value tax •A council tax revaluation •A ‘National Care Service’ •Rollout of nationalised bus franchising, modelled on Greater Manchester’s Bee Network •A £2 single fare bus cap •A fully elected upper chamber to replace the Lords •Bring in “free transport for teenagers in England.” •No welfare reforms. •Build more council houses. By borrowing £40 billion… •Scrap the whipping system in the Commons. An old favourite, truly barmy… •MAYBE: Proportional representation. Once behind the No10 door, people tend to lose interest in that one…

English
303
1.2K
6.1K
206.4K
James
James@NZJamesS·
@jackeckensviler @messedupfoods What do you mean? Service in Europe is so much better than the US as they aren’t interrupting your meal constantly, ignoring you because they aren’t “your server” & then hurrying you out of the restaurant so they can get another walking wallet in.
English
1
0
22
476
i like food
i like food@messedupfoods·
wait so you’re telling me the price on the menu is… the price???
i like food tweet media
English
94
1.1K
30.7K
406.9K
James
James@NZJamesS·
@NzFubar @Light42Lime As someone who HR reports into: the completely sensible and simple revised Holidays Act. Even if they had done nothing else this would be worth a vote of thanks! Other things are sorting out the bankrupting pay equality costs, charter schools & keeping Agriculture out of the ETS.
English
1
0
3
19
James
James@NZJamesS·
@au_border_force @farmgeek I am, by far, the wealthiest out of any of my ancestors and I am wealthier than the vast majority of people ever have been.
English
0
0
0
8
James
James@NZJamesS·
@au_border_force @farmgeek Can I drive the same roads as Bill Gates? Yes. Can I heat/cool my house to the same temperature as the King? Yes. Can I travel to a foreign beach for a couple of weeks? Yes. Can I call anyone anywhere for the same price as an Arab Sheikh can? Yes.
English
1
0
0
17
John Hart
John Hart@farmgeek·
This needs to be carved onto a stone tablet so future generations will know why our civilisation collapsed, seemingly at its peak (as they all do).
Elias Al@iam_elias1

Two economists just published a mathematical proof that AI will destroy the economy. Not might. Not could. Will — if nothing changes. The paper is called "The AI Layoff Trap." Published March 2, 2026. Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. Boston University. Peer reviewed. Mathematically modeled. The conclusion is one sentence. "At the limit, firms automate their way to boundless productivity and zero demand." An economy that produces everything. And sells it to nobody. Here is how you get there. A company fires 500 workers and replaces them with AI. A competitor fires 700 to keep up. Another fires 1,000. Every company is behaving rationally. Every company is following the incentives correctly. And every company is building a trap for itself. Because the workers who were fired were also customers. When they lose their jobs faster than the economy can absorb them, they stop spending. Consumer demand falls. Companies respond by cutting costs — which means automating more workers — which means less spending — which means more falling demand — which means more automation. The loop has no natural exit. The researchers tested every proposed solution. Universal basic income. Capital income taxes. Worker equity participation. Upskilling programs. Corporate coordination agreements. Every single one failed in the model. The only intervention that worked: a Pigouvian automation tax — a per-task levy charged every time a company replaces a human with AI, forcing them to price in the demand they are destroying before they pull the trigger. No government has implemented this. No major economy is seriously discussing it. Meanwhile the numbers are already tracking the curve. 100,000 tech workers laid off in 2025. 92,000 more in the first months of 2026. Jack Dorsey fired half of Block's workforce and said publicly: "Within the next year, the majority of companies will reach the same conclusion." Nobody is doing anything wrong. Companies are following their incentives perfectly. That is exactly the problem. Rational behavior. At scale. Simultaneously. With no mechanism to stop it. Two economists built the math. The math leads to one place. Source: Falk & Tsoukalas · Wharton School + Boston University · arxiv.org/pdf/2603.20617

English
5
35
88
3.9K
James retweetledi
Noa Cohen
Noa Cohen@NBC789·
I'm disappointed that the Jewish Community hustings in Camden this evening have been cancelled. I was hoping to put a question to the @TheGreenParty representative, so I'll ask it here instead 🧵
English
24
215
1.1K
130K
James
James@NZJamesS·
@au_border_force @farmgeek This comes about due to technologies making everything so much cheaper to consume. AI is just another technology that will do the same.
English
0
0
0
3
James
James@NZJamesS·
@au_border_force @farmgeek We are already quite a way there. Consumption inequality (the only one that matters) is very low already in the West. Yes, some people can afford more luxurious consumption, but pretty much everyone in sound mind can consume the same as everyone else.
English
1
0
0
10
James
James@NZJamesS·
@au_border_force @farmgeek No. But someone who doesn’t have all their needs met will do. Up until the point where you are, somehow, the only person in the entire world not having their needs met.
English
1
0
0
21
James
James@NZJamesS·
@entropydevil @PronouncedHare You can minimise these as they have done in Denmark (retirement aging rising to 70 for people born after 1971). They have the “Arne Pension” which entitles you to retire a few years earlier if you have worked a large number of years in a manual job .
English
0
0
0
7
Neil Morrison
Neil Morrison@entropydevil·
@PronouncedHare I think the algorithm for intergenerational fairness would burn through too many tokens but it makes sense to raise the retirement age. That has equity issues as well but so does everything.
English
1
0
0
198
Liam Hehir
Liam Hehir@PronouncedHare·
The best super reform we could do would be this: - Forget boomers. They are too entitlement loving to make any sacrifice. This has to exclude all people born on or before 1965. - From 2030, add 3 months to the eligibility age and just keep doing that every year. - Keep the KiwiSaver withdrawal age at 65 so people can bridge the difference if they have to.
English
39
4
60
5.1K
James
James@NZJamesS·
@au_border_force @farmgeek If people’s needs aren’t being met then why wouldn’t someone decide that there is an opportunity to make a buck to meet them? Or will AI completely destroy thousands of years of human nature?
English
1
0
0
19
James
James@NZJamesS·
@au_border_force @farmgeek It isn’t an assumption: it is a logic. The only way that there will be no jobs is if AI is used to meet the needs of everyone. Otherwise people will continue to have needs that aren’t being met, and if that is the case then there will be jobs to meet them.
English
1
0
0
36
James
James@NZJamesS·
@drowsyluma @bunburyoudoujp I respect the decision of someone who wants to end their life rather than live in a world in which some authority can force them to make such a binary choice. It is disgusting that some blue pushers don’t.
English
0
0
2
75
John
John@drowsyluma·
@bunburyoudoujp reds must be catty. bc I don't buy that you could be so dull as to not recognize that ppl pick blue bc hitting a 50% threshold to prevent up to 4 billion deaths is far more practical than j condemning every kid, priest, medical practitioner, plain normal person that picks blue.
English
6
0
3
812
FUBAR nz
FUBAR nz@NzFubar·
Every single police officer involved in this shambles, needs to resign. Nobody was ever getting done and Tom should never have been executed. All for a movie… fuck the @nzpolice
FUBAR nz tweet media
English
12
22
135
2.7K
James
James@NZJamesS·
@untimelysalts If blue won then I would feel sorry for all the blue button pushers who no longer wanted to live in a world where someone had the ability to force everyone to press one of two buttons: but who are then forced to by idiots pressing the blue button even though they want to live!
English
0
0
0
298
essentialsalts
essentialsalts@untimelysalts·
The thing about pressing red is that I'm fine with blue winning. Good for blue if they pull it off. I suspect that if there was an actual threat of death, though, far less people would vote blue than in some fake poll.
English
74
54
3.2K
40.1K
James
James@NZJamesS·
@graphtheory The trick is that there is nothing red button. Or if it is it simply isn’t connected to anything. It is quite simply the “carry on with your life as if this weird wizard capable of putting buttons here didn’t exist” option.
English
1
0
3
357
graph 🏴‍☠️
graph 🏴‍☠️@graphtheory·
Someone choosing a ~50% chance of suicide is not the same thing as you killing them because you chose to live btw
English
51
65
2.6K
39.4K

Keşfet

@jackeckensviler @messedupfoods @NzFubar @Light42Lime @au_border_force @farmgeek @TheGreenParty @entropydevil