2. Why do you equate "capital investment" with "productivity"? If anything, the current situation should show you that record capital investments (in AI, mostly) are completely decorrelated from how the real economy is doing (which isn't great).

3. I never claimed that such taxes wouldn't cause harm to the economy, simply that cutting transfer payments would be much worse and wouldn't be enough to solve anything. We've been doing austerity for 50 years, it's time we think of something better.

If you want a healthy economy, you have to reduce inequalities. Transfer payments are a way to do it, wealth taxes are another. Cutting "entitlements" only worsens the problem.

* There's lots of profit for military contractors and other insiders, which is the entire point!

Billionaires know that and are already starting to speak against such taxes[0], before there's even any real possibility of them being adopted. They would rather see everything turn to shit than give back a single cent.

[0] https://paulgraham.com/winc.html

Please, try.

Meanwhile: Hyperloop, Boring company, everything app, Mars colonies, FSD... Maybe he'll end up delivering on some of these (most probably partially, at best), but with Musk, overpromising and underdelivering in the norm. There's nothing to be confused about.

Corruption? Musk is already down a quarter of a billions in donations to the GOP for these incoming elections.

> Also those https://research.wmz.ninja/projects/phd/index.html style games are a bit vapid.

I agree, but please try to engage with what I'm saying. Both the PhD game and TFA are made with the goal of teaching an issue to a broader audience. Do you think TFA is an effective tool of communication? Don't you think its messaging could have been better conveyed had it been designed with more intent, less focused on piling on feature after feature for a game that isn't designed to be replayed more than once?

Both TFA and the PhD game should be considered "educational", people won't come back to those again and again because of how fun they are. They're designed to appear in HN feed, be played once, learn maybe a thing or two in an amusing way, and never be opened again. Do you understand now why I find this complexity so counter-productive? It's fine for a game to be complex, if it's designed for players that will sink hundreds of hours into them. It's not fine for a silly project to demand the same learning effort from its players.

> This runs into the reality that the game maker knows who his target audience is, but you don't.

Have you considered that TFA was vibe-coded, and maybe the "game maker" hasn't put much thought into who his target audience could be, like, at all, and just asked Claude to make a game about NIMBYism?

There's no reason a "housing crisis" game couldn't have been done like that, with simple choices and immediate reactions. A game that respects the player's time, is easy to pick up and makes the point effectively.

> Every rule, vote count and case in this game is drawn from the public record. Sources are in docs/research/ in the project folder. Neighborhood politics scores and the economics are simplified for play.

Nice, I'm happy to hear that, Claude. This kind of silly game is supposed to help you understand a complex issue in a fun way. But this is missing the plot entirely. Why is this so overwhelmingly complex? Why would I spend time learning this ugly, convoluted and verbose UI? Who is this for??

EDIT: I'll link to an example of what I think this game should have been: https://research.wmz.ninja/projects/phd/index.html

A game made with intent, that is easy to pick up, respects its player's time, and makes its point effectively.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41072330