mgraf1

Your analogy is missing something. Not letting a child explore the world has an opportunity cost. They miss out on opportunities to develop independence and psychological resilience. The book "The Anxious Generation" covers this in detail.

Then you keep in touch with them.

The best friend I've made as an adult was met through work. Then he took another job, and I moved across the country when I went remote. We still keep in touch and occasionally travel to visit each other.

This article boils down to "C# added new features that I don't like, so it's dying".

As someone working in C# every day, these new features are great, and C# is still a pleasure to write.

I'm curious what you mean when you say "leaving the far-Right shady people to run them (literally Mafia in many locations, and with the Teamsters)". How are you defining "far-right" in this context?

The point I'm getting at is that some places are much more desirable than others. In a market, it's prices that act as a mechanism for deciding who can live in a limited space. For example, way more people want to live on the beach than there are houses on the beach.

How would a non market based system work for housing though? How do we decide who gets to live in places like Honolulu or Boulder?

It's a bit of a joke. It was written by Matt Stone after all.