Tyler's movie Reviews on Newgrounds

[TD-Double-Shot]

I LOVE Tech Dave

Raziberry responds:

thank you baby!

[Bobo and Mr. Bukkit]

It says comedy yet it never got funny.

DarqV responds:

Not in front of the kids. Not like this, Tyler.

[Iron Cock]

You found yourself a nice new style I see. I APPROVE GUY <3

Make a full game in this style !

Guy-Unger responds:

Thank you for your blessing Tyler 🙏 We're working on something!

[The Chaos Signals]

Art is very nice but not sure what this was supposed to be.

Not scary or compelling enough to want more

ClockworkPixel responds:

Fair enough, thanks

[TD-Hurting As One]

GREAT WORK AS ALWAYS, DAVE

Raziberry responds:

Thank oow mistuw tywuw nyaaaa~

[The Allies! - D-Day]

Good, cute animation. But the beginning minute was very identical to Saving Private Ryan ...

Twin-Tales responds:

Haha, yeah, it's a BIG inspiration for this episode.

[TD-Solitary Definement]

good work dave.

I HATE ALL OF THOSE ARTIST ARCHETYPES

and yea the alone thing is part of the game :'-)

Raziberry responds:

Thanks bud :D

[Butterfingering]

ivan is the king of shitposting

seriously though, amazing job on making something so silly so beautiful

IvanAlmighty responds:

Im so glad someone understood why :') thanks a lot Tyler!

[Basic Income for the US]

I’ll agree that inequality and poverty is a problem that MUST be dealt with. Crime skyrockets relative to inequality. To collectivists and the empathetic, solving it is a no-brainer. To the individualist who cares only about himself or his family, controlling poverty in his neighborhood is essential for the safety of people he cares about. We’re on the same page that inequality is a TERRIBLE issue in need of fixing.

I’ve evolved my understanding of the Basic Income concept since your last video and I am still highly skeptical of your argument.

1. As the world becomes more automated, certain jobs will disappear. You argue that mass produced jobs will continue to replace people as they cannot compete. However, your argument only works for mass-produced goods and assumes that everybody wants to consume the same goods. Artisan and niche desires are growing and I suspect, will do so more in the face of homogeneity; mass-production cannot fulfill the desires of the individualist. Automated industry is only profitable if people want the same goods, as it is cheap and easy to produced standardized goods.

You may or may not have noticed, but the sector of online entrepreneurs developing niche products has been booming. More self-employed individuals are empowered than ever before and modern technology makes it great to those who can adapt to this climate. I see plenty of artists, physical trainers, musicians, psychologists, service people, etc make amazing use of the internet for succeed financially. I'd say a lack of computer literacy is whats keeping most people out of the working game, currently.

2. You touch on hedonistic burn out, but never offer a solution for the purposeless humans a Basic Income adapted society creates. Humans are beasts of burden and without a purpose in society, many will check out. I believe you skimp around that argument deliberately as it is a problem that Basic Income will not satisfy.

3. In your examples, you cite the popular ideas of 1970; but popular ideas are not necessarily good ideas. 1970s was a time of was mass delusion where people thought they could create the world as they saw in their minds, not based on the way the world actually is. The major mindset of that time believed only the individual mattered; in their eyes self-fulfillment was all that mattered and so basic income fed that delusion.

4. Finally, why do you as a Canadian care so much about American economic model? Why does a employed animator in the Toronto government funded art industry think he understands whats best for the poor in a country he does not belong to?

Verdict: Flimsy argument on a serious issue that needs addressed. Charming animation by the way.

adamanimates responds:

Thanks for taking the time to write that out. I'll attempt to explain my reasoning.

1. The internet is a huge innovation for humanity and it's the reason we're here. It's also the reason I can do my own work from my own living room that someone on the other side of the world can see. I see a lot of benefits. The downside though, at least for animation, is that the jobs are easier to outsource to wherever the work is cheapest. So it's a race to the bottom. The only reason there are Canadian animation jobs like mine and they aren't all done in India is because of government subsidies. Whether or not you think that's right will depend on your views on capitalism.

You're right that hand-crafted, artisan stuff is becoming more popular compared to mass production. But I think it's a tough sell to ask the potential millions of unemployed truckers and taxi drivers to start doing handcrafted things to support their families. Like you say, lack of computer literacy is a massive problem. There will always be people who can't keep up. The question is what basics, if any, you think they should have to survive on.

2. This is Jordan Peterson's argument against UBI, and I think it's a rather disparaging view of humanity. Do you believe that paid employment must be the primary source of purpose in society? Joe Biden recently made this argument against UBI as well. But others think that there are many kinds of work that give us purpose. Raising kids, volunteering, building things, producing art, music, animation, whatever you believe is worth spending your time on. I believe the sense of purpose we require comes from having a place in the community. Jobs can sometimes do this, but they don't have to be the only way.

3. I find the history fascinating. This part is based on Rutger Bregman's book "Utopia for Realists." It's true that popular ideas are not always good ideas, but how do we reconcile that with democracy? In the case of a negative income tax, it's been supported by so many economists that I don't think you can make the argument that it's just the rabble wanting something that isn't possible.

4. The reason I made this is because Americans asked me to make a US version. I care about citizens of the US as much as citizens of Canada, and think nationalism is ridiculous. Everyone in the world is a stakeholder of US policies. I believe that if Nixon's basic income had passed in 1970 (or if McGovern was elected after that, who had a more progressive version of basic income) we would have a very different world. Other countries tend to follow the lead of the US, for better or worse. I'm not saying anything that Americans have not said thousands of times. My hope is to help illustrate the argument for UBI and some of its history.

[Why Basic Income?]

Decent animation and nice production quality. Fundamentally flawed premise: If everyone is riding in the wagon, who is going to pull the wagon?

1.You say that automation will destroy jobs, then later claim it will help people be more entrepreneurial. What?

2. Also flawed reasoning: the incentive is stripped from the would-be-entrepreneur. Why work when he can have things handed to him? Also, why bother becoming wealthy when his wealth will be taken from him? You are dooming the creative thinker to a life of mediocrity.

Nothing about nature is "equal"; you can't defy the laws of reality. All redistributive economics either fail (see Venezuela) or are currently riding off the success of capitalist countries (see Iceland).

adamanimates responds:

1. It sounds like a contradiction when put like that, but both things are true. My point is that people aren't lazier when you give them money. You were told that by the rich so they wouldn't have their taxes go up. There still will be jobs for a long time to come, and we need innovation and the basis for people to build on their ideas. One example of what I mean by entrepreneurial is that in the study in India, some people from poor villages were able to buy fishing gear and thus have a way to support themselves when they couldn't before.

Automation is also absolutely destroying jobs at the same time. All the repetitive, systematic stuff is getting automated as fast as it can. Maybe In the super long term, even that fisherman in India won't have a job because some machine catches the fish and sells them cheaper than he can afford to live on. What would you suggest then? I'd say that a portion of the massive gain in productivity should go to keeping people alive. In the case if everyone is riding in the wagon, robots are pulling the wagon. Until we get to that point, most of us pull with increasing help from machines.

2. Would you stop working after earning $12,000 in a year? That's the most common number thrown around for Basic Income. It could start lower than that, as it already does in the current system working in Alaska (about $2000). The work disincentive is a fiction. There's a lot of evidence about this, and it's all in the links up there. Basic Income is designed to avoid the current welfare trap, which is when people earn more by staying home instead of working. Once they start a job, a big chuck of their benefits disappear and it's not worth it. Basic income gradually tapers off the benefits until you make a middle-class salary, so there's no reason to not try and better your situation.

As for your ideas about redistributive economics, they are grounded in ideology and probably can't be changed by anything I type. But hey, I'll give it a shot. I think for Venezuela you have the cause and effect backwards. Venezuela's social programs are mostly funded by oil money, which accounts for 95% of exports. So what happens when oil prices go down? I don't see how it's the fault of the average Venezuelan for what the Saudis are doing with oil prices.

You're using the old arguments against communism, but Basic Income is a pretty capitalist idea. It was supported by who I imagine is one of your heroes, Milton Friedman. He wanted a way to simplify the massive bureaucracy of the welfare system. Turns out Basic Income is a more efficient way to do that. It almost was implemented in the States in 1970, but Democrats blocked it.