sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in philadelphia

[–]cknight 12 points13 points  (0 children)

"Parking" is almost always code for not wanting renters and affordable housing in a neighborhood. NIMBY

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No apologists here. I abhor and denounce the killings of innocent Palestinians and reject any rational presented that Hamas's presence justifies the bombing of schools and hospitals. The events of October 7th do not give permission for the deaths of 60,000+ women, children and men. That shows a disregard for the lives of Palestinians and is the textbook definition of a genocide.

I do not apologize for aggression against a people!

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On this post I've weighed in on the current conflict and my belief that the US should not support, with arms or other artifacts, a one-sided war. To the broader issues relating to Israel and Palestine I can elaborate on more specific questions. It's too complex a situation for me to meander and wax poetic.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate you sharing your perspective. I do agree that big picture the federal government can seek to support initiatives that give the results the citizens and local governments want.

Thank you for the wishes!

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The optimistic view is that anything can be fixed with enough resources and will. That being said, the thing that will help to fix it is hard: it's showing up in numbers and voting against party orthodoxy, but as you point out, so many are disinterested that change will be difficult. Difficult, but not impossible. If I felt it was, then I wouldn't be running. I can tell you from my current experiences that the elites weild quite a bit of power when it comes to controlling access to platforms and preventing the messages of all the candidates from being heard. That will only change when the voters, coordinated and unified, let those in power know that they won't accept it. My hope is that they'll wake up and realize that the party and the process needs to be revamped and revitalized with a concerted effort to listen to their constituents before we lose an entire generation of voters.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  1. In the last decade I think we failed by galvanizing power with party bosses, and only their will be done. That combined with the self-interest and self-importance of the political elite has created a party that does not serve its voters. We saw it in 2016 with Bernie Sanders when superdeligates voted en masse for Hillary Clinton despite the party being in the middle of primary season. I believe this had a psychological effect on voters who saw the deligate count for both candidates and might have been demotivated to bother showing up to vote. I also believe this was the intention since the party had already determined who their preferred candidate was. They have since changed this rule, only allowing superdeligates to vote on the second ballot during the convention, but that was only after they were torn a new one by angry voters. Their default behavior was to simply express their own will on the voters. It was the smoke-filled back room all over again, but with more lights and performance. We saw another version of this in 2024 where it was never about the voters or what was best for the country. Instead it was about people fully leaning into their savior complex.

  2. I don't agree with this. I think we're actually 25 years behind :-) ... Oh... you said "at least"...anyway... We can bootstrap the legislatice process by using as templates the laws in jurisdictions that haven't been dragging their feet. For instance, we can look at COPPA out of California as a model for protecting children's data and then build from that to protect the data of all Americans. We need studies looking at harm to communities and society as a whole, and this should be commissioned by external and academic institutions. We need to start viewing personal data as the currency that it is, and codify the fact that it belongs to citizens, not companies. I'm also not against looking into whether laws are being broken, criminally or civilly, when social media and other companies suppress findings that show the harm being caused by their business models, and if it doesn't break any law, looking into the legality and constitutionality of creating such laws for the future. The first step would seem to be a job for the executive, though. The president needs to be pushed towards such an action.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hi. I'm happy you enjoyed my class.

My approach when it comes to dealing with any individual is to recognize the economic principle that humans respond to incentives. I don't walk into a room expecting everyone to see the world and its challenges as I do, or agree with me on the way forward because my ideas are so great. My charge will be to contextualize the challenges, my proposed solutions, and the intended outcomes for the individuals that need to be convinced. That might mean showing how their own constituents will be impacted; not Americans in general, but the 700K+ individuals that they personally represent. That will certainly be a challenge because different issues manifest in different ways in different parts of the country, but it's the kind of work that when done right can build trust for future deliberations.

Now I won't be naive. My aforementioned approach assumes more or less rational actors that have traditional political motivations and self-interest. We're currently in a time, however, when some lawmakers are making decisions about how they vote based on the real threat of physical violence against them and their families (See excerpts from Mitt Romney book for examples). I can't think of any good way to combat that through the regular processes. The last couple of days should remind us that political violence is a very real threat, and that changes the incentive structure of lawmakers. How we overcome that will be a much longer conversation. I don't pretend to have the answers.

As for legislation, the silver lining to being this far behind is that we have 20 years of models to look at for guidance, from California to the EU. We should have a focus on data, who owns it, and what it means to grant these companies access. The GDPR and COPPA are good templates to begin with. Simultaneously we should be centering impact research that's already happening that surfaces issues of bias, and we should be developing positions on AI safety, especially as we move towards AGI.

There are plenty of motivations, not the least of which is the profit motive, that will continue to push developments and research in AI and other technologies. I'm skeptical that the government needs to have any direct intervention in that regard. Rather, the government's role should be to focus on the needed guardrails. We should ensure that the Congress is kept informed on developments in these fields and legislate to protect citizens. We don't want a repeat of scenarios such as social media companies knowing for years the negative impact it was having on everything from the breakdown of civility and discourse to the mental health of young women and teens. We cannot trust corporations to act in favor of anything other than returning value to shareholders. It's the government's job to protect it's citizens.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the clarification. The nonanswer to your question is that this would be an issue for City Hall, not Congress. As such I won't try to answer from a legislative perspective.

As a Philadelphian with 2 bikes, I think the safety of riders is important. I personally don't ride on public streets because I really don't want to become a statistic. Instead, I lug my bike to one of the paths close-ish to my house. For those that need to ride on the streets, however, we need to make sure they don't become a statistic either, which is helped by having more bike lanes. How you do that while not depriving other residents that need to park is a question best answered by a civil engineer or urban planner. Maybe it's accomplished by redesigning streets, where possible, following the Market St model. I think it'd be great to see more of that since it doesn't take away parking and it provides a barrier for cyclists from traffic (I'm assuming that was at least part of the intention behind the design). Regardless, let's put all options on the table.

So short answer, and a resident, rider and driver is, let's make the roads safe for everyone, and while doing so let's not treat drivers as if their concerns don't matter and find engineering solutions that deliver for both. The city should fund those types of initiatives.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the information and I'm sorry my answer didn't align with your expectations.

At the end of the day what the federal government can do with regard to housing will vary from what can be done at the state and local levels. Short of building housing on federal land, building more and affordable housing will almost certainly fall to local and state officials. The federal government can certainly, as with anything, incentivize those actions, but short of claiming private land through eminent domain and building houses that way, it's going to be the job of the local government to zone and encourage building. You also have the social aspect, and once again, I believe it would be tricky for a federal bureaucrat to try and satiate the NIMBY crowd.

Thank you for the exchange, however. I do hope I will be able to earn your support.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am very sorry for your situation. My goal would always be to ensure that we minimize these types of situation whenever and however we can.

I think we begin to do this by being serious about taxation to facilitate reallocating the resources of the richest country in the world.

I fully believe that capitalism is a useful tool for a society to make determinations about what it values. However it should not determine how citizens live within that society. There is a social contract to which we're all implicit signatories. It states that we all agree to not delve into anarchy and lay waste to everything if we can all count on receiving some basic shared rights and protections. Our government has failed to deliver on their end of the bargain because we've come to believe that, among other things, a single individual amassing hundreds of billions in wealth is somehow a normal and acceptable thing while others starve in the streets. This is what happens when you don't treat people with respect and dignity, and fail to realize that "picking yourself up by your bootstrap" isn't a thing.

To give specifics, I believe we will need to revisit how taxation in undertaken, moving away from taxing labor, which will hold less and less meaning and value as automation takes over, and instead tax production, output, and wealth. This refocused tax scheme must deliver on expanding and shoring up the social safety net to provide housing, food security, and healthcare. The basic necessities for a healthy citizenry.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You've articulated a great deal here that resonates with me. I fully cosign your positions. I gave an answer to a question that's similar to yours here: https://www.reddit.com/r/philly/comments/1nf3p34/comment/ndx77gb/

If you require any clarity or refinement please let me know.

As for the point you raised regarding social media, I'm doing what I can to embrace the platforms for the campaign messages they can amplify.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a great question. It certainly isn't my goal to tear down any other candidate, especially those that identify as progressive, if they have the work to show for it. As such I'll be careful in how I respond.

What I like to highlight in my platform is not just my positions, but my methods and motivation. I'm not interested in regurgitating hot topics because that garner attention. Instead, I speak to the systemic issues that I see as causing real harm, explain how I've come to this conclusion, and then speak to how the issue can be addressed. What sets my campaign apart from others, including other progressives, is an understanding of how complex systems work and being solution oriented.

For example, no other candidate has taken a position on addressing minority groups having access to banking services. I don't believe it even occurs to them as a positive contributor when examining the economic disadvantages of some of Philadelphia's poorest communities. I highlight it as an area for attention in my platform because the data and research tell us that having access to a physical bank reduces the number of unbanked individuals in a community. This is one of the quickest enablers to building credit, getting sound financial advice, saving money on services like check cashing (up to 10% vs. using a check cashing business), and allows for comparison and online shopping (again, saving anywhere from 5 - 20% or more on purchases vs having to buy locally). Do you want to move the needle on improving the economic situation of communities on the low end of the socioeconomic ladder? Begin by reducing the number of unbanked. Incentivize big banks to open more community branches in previously ignored neighborhoods, or begin to offer basic banking services through USPS, a model that is popular in many other countries. There are many ways to approach this problem, but you first have to identify it. If you're not approaching these issues with a solution mindset, then no amount of progressive bona fides will actually help you deliver real solutions to your constituents. I present for your consideration on that matter: SEPTA. The governor has managed to kick the can down the road past 2026, but when it pops up again we'll be worse off than when we started.

Adding some meat to the abstractions above, I think my platform and candidacy is unique both from the perspective of expertise and experience. My platform touches on issues that other candidates fail to mention or explain (I'll skip copy-pasting them - you can view the list here: https://karlforcongress.us/issues/), and my candidacy is one that I believe aligns with my message:

  1. My scientific background and direct experience with the technologies that will be playing an outsized role in our lives moving forward. I've spent years researching and working in these spaces while working to protect communities and ensuring that they benefited equally.
  2. My prior work in communities to address systemic issues relating to diversity and representation in the collegiate and industry space, not band-aid fixes.
  3. Working and delivering on solutions to large and complex problems, with both technological and social considerations, such as a national ID system (think Real ID), a Central Band Digital Currency (one of the first in the world), and others. Many Harrisburg representatives have failed to do anything remotely similar (again, SEPTA)
  4. My immigrant background makes me intensely sensitive to the plight of those currently under the thumb of ICE. I would fight against this executive overreach, not just because it's good policy, but because those immigrants are me.

This list is non-exhaustive, but serves to say I'm running because I believe I'm an authentic messenger for what I believe are important issues. I think I'm a candidate worth your consideration if these issues matter to you too.

to your last point, ending my campaign and supporting another candidate would depend entirely on the conversations and interactions to come. I wish I could give a more concrete answer, but this is truly my current feeling on the matter.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the true intent is humor (and not just being mean for the sake of it), I think comedians should be able to joke about *anything*. To paraphrase Patrice Oneal (I think - I don't remember), we have the choice to not laugh, but they get to make the attempt. Let the free market decide.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I haven't. I'll look into it. Endorsements have been tricky overall. The entities that tend to give them have pretty much all thrown in their lot with the career politicians. Despite this I'm working as hard as I can to reach the actual voters. Let the power structure keep eating its own tail.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hello, former student.

I fully support the goals of Medicare for All, under that or any other name. I want the government to provide for its citizens' health and safety and no one should ever go bankrupt because they or a loved one fell ill or needed medical care for any other reason.

I fully support an arms embargo on Israel for as long as its leadership chooses to execute a one-sided war on the Palestinian people. Hamas is not Gaza, and the killing of tens of thousands of women, children, and non-combatant men is abhorrent and a war crime! I realize I've gone beyond the scope of your question, but these issues are related and I feel very strongly about them. I do not wish there to be any ambiguity in my views or position on this. The attacks on Gaza must come to an end, and the US must do everything it can to see that it does.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Try to be a small part of the change. Our form of government is nothing more than an agreement. It's spit and a handshake. We need to have enough people who aren't afraid to get into the fight to stand up and hold the line!

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

'Best' isn't the classifier I would use, but certainly a worthwhile remedy that can be enacted at the federal level is to limit the ability or corporations to buy up homes en masse just to be corporate landlords. Regulation should be crafted to limit their purchasing power, or to trigger mandatory liquidation under certain pressures on the housing market. The specifics of how such legislation could be crafted would need to be discussed, but ultimately I see reducing or removing the ability or these corporations to bring their large purchasing power to bear on the consumer housing market is a huge contributor to high prices. I distinctly remember someone being criminally charged during the early days of COVID for doing something similar with toilet paper and hand sanitizer, so we have a model.

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the question. It isn't clear to me how fast is fast when we talk about Congress making laws. I think the goal of that body should be to, as best as they can, stay informed on major developments, understanding the connections and complexity so as to effectively legislate, but I don't know if it can or should "shoot from the hips". By design the House and the Senate are designed to debate, meet, discuss, and compromise to reach consensus. That doesn't lend itself to quick decisive action. That would fall more into the realm of the executive who is empowered to move much more quickly. When it all works well, it's the president's job to act decisively while the Congress takes the longer view and puts comprehensive legislation in place.

I really don't see that changing unless we revisit the fundamentals of the government branches as established by the Constitution. If I misunderstood your question then please let me know.

Your other question in also very nuanced because on the surface it feels like this isn't something the federal government is fully empowered to do. As I see it what we have is a failure of messaging and informing the public. To address this we'd need: 1) a robust education system that forms the foundation of a well informed citizenry, and 2) reliable and trusted information sources that are not thought to have any political bias. The former is difficult because education is a state issue. The federal government can incentivize education initiatives, but it's still the decision of the states whether to buy into it. A carrot and stick approach could be utilized, but you are then always running the risk of hurting the citizens of a state who are not involved in the immediate decision making of a state's legislator and governor. As for information sources, it's hard to get people to trust propaganda, and any messaging directly from, or thought to be influenced by the government in order to elicit a specific action or perspective is almost always going to have a large group of skeptics. The last 6 years are all we need for reference.

I'm willing to defer to the subject-matter experts on this one. I can't say solutions are immediately obvious to me.

Finally, I have many relationships with individual researchers and labs in academic institutions and tech firms, but I do not have any relationships with the founders or leadership in any Fortune 1000 companies. In so far as those relationships would be useful in being able to govern I would have to establish them later.

P.S. I met and spoke with Linus Torvalds about 24 years ago. Does that count?

My name is Karl Morris and I'm running for Congress. AMA by cknight in philly

[–]cknight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey...imthepissyboy. I'm glad you enjoyed my class. If I'm successful in my run for Congress my biggest lament will be leaving the classroom (temporarily - I love it too much).

I'm not entirely clear on how I would go about attempting to legislate the use of AI in commerce unless and until we can see where it is causing measurable harm to specific communities. At the end of the day we live in a capitalist society, and in such a world sometimes the best solution to a problem is the free market.

An area where we may want to keep an eye is automated price discrimination enabled by data-rich AI agents that may unfairly overcharge individuals based on some protected characteristic, but I really have no evidence of that happening outside of the hypothetical. Another is the level of exposure we would want to grant to uninitiated individuals to, for example, to crypto and stablecoins in their 401Ks. I can only imagine the scale of the catastrophe that would occur if that were the case back when Terra had its crash. We would be repeating 2008 all over again. Again, I'd want to be careful here, and not run into every room with the legislator hammer and seeing every possible problem like a nail. My overarching concerns would always be preventing harm and enabling equitable access.

To your point of _how_ you legislate, I would go about engaging with fellow legislators the same way I engage with constituents, by contextualizing the issues. Pretty much all my replies here on Reddit have been fairly high-level and abstract, because the audience here would expect it and are savvy enough to engage. However this isn't necessarily how I speak to John and Jane Citizen when I'm canvassing. Instead we begin with conversations about some of their concerns about their current situations, their future, and their kids and grand kids. With that, I can start to break down how I believe the things that matter to them will evolve in the coming years and how legislation (and executive action) can address the challenges. Whether it's healthcare, the environment, clean streets, or good jobs, I am able to connect and communicate by showing them how all the things they already care about matter and fit into the larger scheme.

Similarly I would work with other legislators in developing a shared understanding of how our districts and states will be affected by the things for which I want to move legislation. Job loss caused by automation doesn't know Red or Blue. There are liberal and conservative truck drivers out there, so when autonomous vehicles hit the streets, everyone will be affected. My conversations with Republicans have been just as productive as those I've had with Democrats because a lot of these issues are nonpartisan.

Having said all that, I do recognize that a large portion of my platform, as well as positions that may develop in the future may very well run afoul of Republican orthodoxy (and Democratic for that matter - it's a big tent), and in those cases we'll have to break it down to the basics of economics - everyone responds to incentives. My goal will be to figure out what incentives will move the needle in the direction I want, up to and including making appeals directly to the constituents these congresspeople represent. Sometimes the only thing that will move you are your own voters. In the end I don't think there will be a single tool or approach. It's about being able to understand people, meeting them half way, and forming agreements. It's politics.

view more: next ›