> My criteria were subjective but simple to understand: the language should introduce new concepts (as Principia Discordia puts it, ’tis an ill wind that blows no minds) [...]
I wonder how many people share this opinion. I derive as much if not more value from the refinement of existing concepts than the introduction of new ones.
Wanting new concepts just for it's own sake is wild to me.
> With attempting to bestow a half-trillion-dollar benefit on people who attended – and often graduated from – college when a majority of Americans – and an overwhelming majority of voters who needed to be convinced that Democrats aren’t a bunch of elitist twits – did not?
The fact that this is the most common argument against student loan forgiveness that I see doesn't do a good job of convincing me. The argument that we are somehow obliged to keep conditions bad to be fair to those who came before just seems petty.
Rather what are some actual arguments against this policy? I'm no expert, but it seems logical that we should want to help out those who are disproportionally less financially mobile. It is after all very key for innovation.
Sounds like you indeed didn't read beyond the first line - this article argues that it is not scrum (etc.) which is horrible, but the context in which these systems are used.
I wonder how many people share this opinion. I derive as much if not more value from the refinement of existing concepts than the introduction of new ones.
Wanting new concepts just for it's own sake is wild to me.