But if you want to have a less philosophical and more pragmatic discussion, I'd raise the issue of the billions of people who count themselves among the "working poor." For billions of people, modern work doesn't guarantee that you won't be poor.

Most people living today take it for granted that modern "work" is the way it is and the way it should be. Few people have the context of understanding that modern work, where you directly trade labor for money and money for the goods and services you need to live, and where your identity and social standing is largely based on your profession, is something only a minority of human beings have experienced.

In my experience, most people seem to treat human development as a one-way spear of progress. The dawn of agriculture, the industrial revolution, etc. are all just stops on a linear path that is the right path.

But maybe it's just a dead end. "Primitive" hunter-gatherer societies survived for way longer than our modern-day society has existed, and things aren't looking so promising for us right now.

Probably not, but it just adds another measure of normalization for something all the evidence suggests is insidiously harmful to the development of a young brain.

Modern concepts of "work" and how we relate to work are quite new and it's just an assumption that we're "on the right path."

Look at the birthrates and economic trajectory of the world. The grandchildren won't have the luxury of forgetting. They'll be living in the rubble.

Humans have a high baseline intelligence (as compared to other animals) and are an inherently adaptable species. This is what has allowed us to survive and thrive despite the fact that we're pretty vulnerable physically.

People in wealthy countries are often more impressed with the resourcefulness of people in poor countries than they have legitimate reason to be. That's because, again, humans are an inherently resourceful species. We are literally hard-wired to be able to survive in resource-constrained environments.

The conveniences of being wealthy significantly reduces the need to be resourceful in the ways poor people have to be, so people in wealthy countries are often amazed by resourcefulness that is fundamentally human.

About the car example: most middle class folks don't live in places where there's a substantial market for these types of cars. The availability of these types of cars is environmental.

Care to elaborate?

This is a reasonable assumption if you've spent your life in places where the average person is well-educated, but, if we're being honest, it falls apart when you go to places where the average person is poor and/or uneducated. Think: places where people express eagerness to elect a certain person to a third term.

I do think there's a distinction to be made between "stupid" and "uneducated" but in terms of how you experience interactions, it's a distinction without a difference.

There is no doubt that the Trump administration has hurt America's appeal, and that Indians in particular face a pretty tough road ahead.

But you're overstating so many things. China's system is working as designed. The US system has a huge backlog. Those are not the same thing.

And you still don't want to acknowledge a simple fact: a US green card provides a real pathway to citizenship and full rights for your children. China has no similar path for immigrants.

The numbers simply don't lie: despite Trump, the US issues more green cards in a year than China has issued its closest equivalent in 20+. China has had net negative migration for 50+ years. The US population will be modestly higher in 2100 than it is today, while China is going to lose as much as half of its population in the next 75 years.

Source: the UN's 2024 World Population Prospects

This just isn't true. There's a K visa for young STEM professionals, which is about a year old. It's a bit more flexible for this very narrow group, otherwise you need a Z visa and work permit. You need a job first before the provincial labor authorities will approve a work permit. There's a points system, salary requirements and age cap.

There's no practical path to permanent residence in China. The Chinese "green card" equivalent has been issued to under 15,000 people since 2004. Even under Trump, the US issues about 10x more green cards in a single year than China has in two decades.

The numbers don't lie: in a country of over a billion people, there are well under 1 million foreign workers. There's a massive problem with youth underemployment and unemployment and net migration has been negative for 75+ years.

Even countless Chinese in China don't want to do this.

Why pay for what you can take for free?

The Strait of Hormuz has entered the chat.

So much of American "power" in the past few decades has been based on perception, not reality. And other major powers, including China, have largely played along because it has suited their interests too.

But it's a mistake to assume that just because other major powers haven't sought conflict with the US, it means they're not capable of challenging America's power credibly in certain regions and domains.

Of note: the US doesn't even have an aircraft carrier in the Pacific right now. The only thing keeping China from, say, moving on Taiwan, is Pete Hegseth's testosterone.

You cannot identify idiocy if you are an idiot.

Until they get laid off and suddenly discover their moral compass.