Youtube comments of HomerOJSimpson (@Homer-OJ-Simpson).
-
490
-
244
-
171
-
158
-
158
-
148
-
133
-
119
-
117
-
105
-
99
-
94
-
81
-
74
-
69
-
68
-
53
-
53
-
52
-
45
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
35
-
32
-
32
-
30
-
30
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
25
-
24
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@nikomann88 I do not agree with your statement that the wealthy and well connected will invest in the agricultural or financial sectors, but never in the more complex industrial sector. in fact, agricultural sectors are probably not a sector that the wealthy usually want to invest in. In Argentina, they probably avoid the industrial sector because they don’t have trust in the government And the economic policies. Argentina is remote, but so is Australia, and they are very rich and chile is right next to Argentina, and had very strong success in the last 30 years.
Deregulation is how Asia has gotten rich and yet you think it’s bad for Argentina? It seems to be that there is a lot more going on.
I do agree that Argentina’s demand first world worker rise and salaries, but had to compete with for example, Brazilian society, and other such countries . This is what I mean that Argentina’s economic issues are related to populism where the government gives everything that the people demand which then turns into issues, which they try to correct only to return back to populism. Rinse and repeat.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thepunisher2988 more info: With the barley ban failing to produce the desired response, China doubled and tripled down. Beef was next, with several Australian producers losing their export licenses. More tariffs were applied to wine, while customs bans were slapped on wheat, wool, lobsters, sugar, copper, timber, and table grapes. Chinese importers were instructed to stop purchasing Australian coal and cotton, and electric utilities were encouraged not to buy liquefied natural gas on the spot market.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@discord stuff just wanted to add one more thing that was implied. The right wing party, the Republican Party, is mostly inline with Trump or his type. The old previous generation republicans are disappearing like John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Bush jr and Bush Sr. Those are right wing economics, moderate social and behave like what you expect of politicians— well mannered, keep false information claims within reason, etc. Replaced by cultural conservative, nationalist, brash / mean behavior types that don’t necessarily have traditional right wing economic views (I guess they are right wing nationalist economics?).
The left wing party Democrats are what’s called a big tent party. It’s basically anyone that doesn’t fall under Republican Party. It includes some of moderate former Republican Party voters (right of center economic but moderate on everything else), it includes Biden moderates (moderate economics and left social), Bernie types (strong left on everything) but also includes cultural progressives of all back grounds. It also includes immigrants who would generally be republicans with their more conservative social beliefs and right of center economic views but despise the republicans for being anti immigrant.
Big tent parties are going to have a problem deciding on a leader and Biden was the compromise.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@H J
- Hugo Chavez also took several steps that precipitated a long and steady decline in the country’s oil production, which peaked in the late 1990s and early 2000s. His decision to fire thousands of experienced PDVSA workers who had taken part in an industry strike in 2002–2003 gutted the company of important technical expertise. Beginning in 2005, Chavez provided subsidized oil to several countries in the region, including Cuba, through an alliance known as Petrocaribe. Over the course of Chavez’s presidency, which lasted until 2013, strategic petroleum reserves dwindled and government debt more than doubled
- he ended term limits, effectively took control of the Supreme Court, harassed the press and closed independent outlets, and nationalized hundreds of private businesses and foreign-owned assets, such as oil projects run by ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips. The reforms paved the way for Maduro to establish a dictatorship years after Chavez’s death.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lightup6751 "Mexicans obviously know to make Mexican tacos". Yes, and they don't forget the moment they cross into the US.
"But more often that not the flavor changes because the food is being adapted to the local palate. " Sometimes yes, sometimes no. There are mexican restaurants who don't adapt to the local palate just like there are those that do. Historically, adapting to local palates was cheap versions so think Taco bell style tacos though now you are seeing 'upgraded' or modern versions. Better ingredients like higher end cuts of meats.
"Tacos in LA typically do use different recipes, ingredients and taste not quiet the same. Of course, even inside Mexico the flavors can totally differ."
I am Mexican American. I'm also a bit old compared to the typical person leaving comments on youtube (which are usually teens or 20 something year olds). I don't live in LA but I've been there a dozen times (work plus have some family in the area). I've grew up going to Mexico to visit family every summer and then didn't go to Mexico (not counting cancun strip lol) after high school until I was around 30. I've been to different parts of Mexico the past 6 or so years from local spots in riveria maya (not the tourist area) to San Luis Potosi to Guanajuato to San Miguel de Allende to Queretaro. The tacos are often a little different everywhere but are still generally the same and you can find similar tastes and ingredients in the US with some Mexican tacos. But that's not to say all so called authentic tacos in the US are the same as Mexico but there are certainly many of them in Mexican neighborhoods, including LA. The biggest difference is just that in the US, most authentic tacos stick to roughly the same 6-8 meat fillings. In Mexico, while most taco places have 3-6 meat fillings at their location, they often vary from restaurant to restaurant (or cart to cart). That's where Mexico easily outshines the US -- you can walk around and find many different fillings. If it's an actual store (taqueria), they might have 20+ fillings as options with half of them rarely found in the US if at all. But overall, if it's the same fillings, there isn't much difference between between a typical taco in mexico and a typical one in the US from a true authentic Mexican restaurant.
My ex is from China. She sees some of the same with Chinese food. There are of course lots of Chinese American restaurants. She dislikes people calling them Chinese but she things some are good like PF Chang or for being fast food, she thinks Panda Express is good value. She mostly dislikes the hole in wall old Cantonese restaurants. Those have been made cheap and Americanized heavily. But we would go to restaurants she picked that she found to be very authentic. Those restaurants would sometimes have two menus -- traditional/authentic and American Chinese. One thing Chinese restaurants in the US do better than Mexican restaurants is that authentic Chinese restaurants offer far more options that are typical in China which is why their menus can be huge. Mexican restaurants, as I said, even when authentic tend to just limit what is served so you will miss out on some foods from Mexico.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thomasherrin6798 That sounds like the perfect response that captures the problems and the changes. Yes, EU was very dominated by Germany & France before 2022. But they have been basically on the otherside of most of the rest of the EU. If just simplification sake, Germany and France each have 15% of the power of the EU for a total of 30%. They will need over 20% to get majority of the total EU power in their direction (20%pts out of 70%pts thus 29% of remaining power). Usually that 30% is enough to get a few others on their side to get the EU to do what they want. But almost everyone else is in disagreement with Germany and France and I think that's causing both to lose power within the EU where it once was 15%, it's now 10% each. And it's not just on Russia, much of the rest is also worried about China.
>, it is with little suprise that France cannot see the danger in a petulant and hostile China towards Tawain and how that might be disastrous for Europe at present because as with its dependency on Russian Energy and it's subsequent scramble to an alternative, Europe is also heavily reliant on Chinese and Taiwanese exports
Yes, even if they wanted to be neutral, a military conflict there would disrupt not just supply chains from these countries but critical components.
And the issue goes well beyond just exports reliance on China and Taiwan. It would also disrupt supply chains from other countries. And that's not the whole of it --- if China gets or attempts to get Taiwan, that means they are danger for far more especially when you consider they are allied with Europe's biggest near concern, Russia. The US leaks showed there was communication between China and Russia planning possible sending of árms. They are just trying to figure out how to do so without China getting caught which would lead to sanctions on them.
Does France and Germany think that China will just stop after it gets Taiwan? Even if France and Germany don't support sending troops to defend Taiwan, you don't publicly say it (want to keep China guessing) and you most certainly don't say you won't be involved in anyway becuase it's none of the EU's business. All why they want others to help join at least economically against Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@XiaoPangZi Great famine. Holdomor and Soviet famine. Gulags. North Korea famine.
>When it comes to Vietnam though the only mistake was giving up. No one today would argue that fighting with SKorea was bad, today NK is a horrible place
Yes. But also, it was too much of a cost for Americans. It dragged on for far longer than the US involvement in Korea. Defending SK also had more justification -- there was a treaty and it was broken by the North when they invaded.
>If USA had not given up and kept on defending SVietnam there might today have been a very rich, technologically superior souther Vietnamese ally.
I agree. I have been having this debate for over a week on this channel with a person from Vietnam that defends Russia. It was the weakest arguments I've seen. He will say he's not defending Russia in Ukraine but each time brings up things to blame the west. He says he overall supports Russia because they are an ally -- but even after I pointed out that Russia will support China over Vietnam in a conflict that is number one concern for Vietnam, he acknowledged that was true and yet says they are some he has faith in. At the same time, when I pointed out all the US is doing to contain China and defend Vietnam and others in that region, he was ungrateful and said 'So? they are still expanding so US cannot be tr1usted". He also tried to defend his support for Russia by criticiing the US and saying "they don't have their allies back. Look how they didn't help Argentina in 1982 Falkland". I pointed out to him that Argentina wansn't the ally, the UK was. I also pointed out that Russia cannot be counted on at all because they have a defense agreement with Armenia and didn't come to their defense. Then he just pivoted to "US didnt' come to support the UK in 1982 and UK is part of NATO, so how can any have tr1ust in them?!". Then I pointed out that the UK didn't ask for support and NATO specifically says that nothing in the southern hemisphere will be included in article 5 clause where members are to help each other if attacked. That exclusion of the south and some other areas was because it was not meant to defend colonies in 1940s when it was written.
After a while I asked him he likes that northern vietnam won over south vietnam despite the fact that northern vietnam from the 1950's until the end of the war in 1970's were specifically "eliminating" (from life) 220,000 civilans and the fact that by the late 1980's, Vietnam started to ditch actual communist policies. He said he supports NViet because he is glad Viet didn't become a p^^üpp^^et of the US or any other nation. Which I then point to the fact that if Vietnam would have been alied with the US, they would have been as rich as Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan plus have all those rights. He just said Vietnam is better off but no longer able to keep finding excuses.
That's a long way for me to say that 100% sure Vietnam would have been better off yet the people just follow whatever their government says because their government is one responsible for all the news they get.
>When it comes to Afghanistan again the only mistake was pulling out the troops.
Going in was not a mistake but I do think it was too much cost for the US to keep going once Taliban made a resurgence around 2010. The government was just too c0rrupt and the country is too fractured into tribes.
>Iraq was a mistake.
I agree. I was against it then mostly because I kept thinking if our allies in Europe are not that sure Iraq has WMDs, then maybe Bush is wrong and we should start a wár with that much uncertainty. Huessein was bád and I do think in the long run it will be good for Iraq they they no longer have a brütál dictátõr. They already are better off today than 2002 but it did come at a big cost for the US and Iraqi people.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@skydragon23101979 In summary, here are the contradictions and bad arguments made by Choon:
New to the list:
1. States that my point in asking why ASEAN and EAST Asia want support at least in a part to defend against CN because I didn’t state why they wanted protection. Thus arguing that they do indeed all want US prescensse and support but you are not sure if it’s for CN or someone else. At the same time you said it wrong for US to be in the region.
2. Argued that anyone seeking support from US is v@ss@l and not acting out of their own interest. Thus no one has agency if they ask for help unless it’s help from CN like RU is doing.
3. US leaks show CN is doing arms deals with RU
4. Choon agreed with Marcon was describing how Europe is pressured (i.e. coerced) to cooperate with the US but then say ASEAN could not be coerced because cooperation means no coercion. Choon literally argued Europe needs more self-autonomy which is suggesting they forced to cooperate. Otherwise, Europe is doing EXACTLY what it wants.
5. Unable to provide me source that ASEAN said they clearly do not want external interference regarding their affairs. And could not explain why they are working with the US or have US bases if they don’t want external interference.
6. Argued that if someone doesn’t literally admit to using a certain tactic or doesn’t admit to saying a specific thing, it means they are not doing that at all. Thus Choon is 5 yr old brain – I’m not arguing anything about intelligence, right? Because I didn’t use the word intelligence.
7. Continues to argue that all CN positions are valid and must be respected. Anyone tht does not respect that position, CN is in the right to use force. But others cannot do the same and for example destroy the bases of CN in the West Philippine Sea.
8. UN ruled against China’s claims and actions against Phillipne. Yet Choon thinks CN is in the right to continue to @tt@ck anyone that goes in that area.
9. Choon argues that SK, Japan and Philippines have no agency and can not ask for US support so the argument Choon makes all the time is no one can ask for help, it’s only forced on them. You are right thought that the US doesn’t have a base in TW, they just have troops.
10. Singapore allows their base to be use by US, UK and India – all countries trying to contain CN. But they don’t allow CN. Why is that?
And also:
1. Unable to say why all those countries in East Asia and ASEAN want support against CN.
2. ASEAN is cooperating and not coerced into cooperating with CN because cooperation only happens if not coerced....but Europe is forced into cooperating with US because cooperation can be coerced.
3. Without a source or quote from ASEAN, ASEAN said they are clearly do not want external interference regarding their affairs all while ASEAN is indeed working with the US.
4. Argued that the starting point to the East Vietnam Sea is whatever position CN takes and THEN one has to discuss/negotiate with CN.
5. Blamed Philippines for CN attacking their boats even thought an international community voted against CN.
6. Is interested in defending CN & RU while pretending to care what’s best for Europe.
7. All of your arguments are that CN is right about everything and thus anyone that doesn't bow to their demands, it will be their fault if CN acts with military or other means.
8. Says that the US and world should not get involved in other countries issues while CN is allowed to become THE issue for other countries.
9. still refuses to say why SK, Japan, Taiwan, Phillipines and Singore have US bases and why Vietnam is working with the US -- all in part to contain CN.
1
-
@skydragon23101979 > Your number one point is invalid you never pointed out why they wanted protection against the chinese.
Invalid because Choon said so. And you just confirmed that they do want protection by asking me why they want protection. Can Choon make up his mind? You’re now agreeing they do want protection but disagreeing on why?
And your argument is saying that if someone wants help from the US, they are a vassal? Wow, what an easy way to ‘win’ a debate!
> best evidence for that is the recent leak
The leaks that showed CN is working with RU regarding CN sending them support such as arms? Okay, good that you agree.
I don’t know how you got that the US coerced them by eavesdropping but considering Choon said Europe is coerced to cooperate while at the same arguing that ASEAN isn’t coerced because cooperation means they aren’t coerced.
> Nope I never said Europe is being coerced I said Europe is blindly following the position of the US without consideration of their interests.
Marcon, who you defended, literally argued they are pressured to follow the US. Are you saying Macron is wrong? You literally argued that Europe needs more self-autonomy which is suggesting they forced to cooperate. Otherwise, Europe is doing EXACTLY what it wants.
> ) I already said Asean made a statement clearly you can google
I told you I did and was not able to find it. Why can’t you find it? Your VPN is clearly working.
> Nope i never said starting point is whatever China said
You’re right, if someone doesn’t say they did something, it means they didn’t do that. So If I said Choon is 5yr old brain, don’t reply back that I said Choon is not smart.
> without diplomatic communications, it always reverts to law of the jungle whoever is stronger militarily gains
No it doesn’t. It means that Choon believe that CN positions are valid all the time and if anyone disagrees, they have to negotiate with CN. So if CN declares tomorrow the Sea of Japan belongs to CN, then anyone that wants to use it must get approval from CN.
Which other country is hitting fishing ships in the region at the rate CN does? This is also the CN that illegally sends it’s fishing ships into the economic waters of South America.
> International community voted against China? where did you get that info? I have not heard of any international organisations that voted against China.
Maybe because SeeSeePee doesn’t allow coverage of that. It was from the United Nations. Specifically from the Law of the Sea Treaty… is an international agreement that establishes a legal framework for all marine and maritime activities. As of June 2016, 167 countries and the European Union are parties.
> That’s your perspective
No, you are literally defending everything about CN.
> why don’t you tell me from Europe’s perspective why does it benefit for Europe to be involved in the affairs of the south China sea or Taiwan and making an enemy of China?
Why didn’t you answer how CN benefits acting as part of the axis of ev1|. 80% of world trade goes though the East Vietnam Sea including lots of trade that ends up in Europe. TW also has 80% of Chips and war would cause a major shortage leading to economic disaster. And last, EU is asking the world to help against RU so EU needs to help others in order to ever get support.
> )Nope my arguments are based on facts and pragmatic solutions
You mean based on the assumption that any position CN takes must be accepted and if one doesn’t, CN is in the right to use force against them.
> Nope what I am saying is that you let the countries involved decide for themselves
No, you have consistently argued that the US should stay out of the region. So, CN is allowed to be bully but US or anyone else cannot or should not help those bullied – that’s the argument Choon made.
> South Korea, Japan, and Philippines have US bases those bases are there since after WW2
Yes, literally to contain CN. And SK, Japan and Philippines are free to kick the US out but instead they have continued to allow the bases and even expanded. Philippines just did a few weeks ago.
> Singapore does not have ZuS base
Changi Naval Base is open to the US and UK and just this year they opened it up to India. No China. Why? Funny how US, UK and India are all 3 countries trying to contain CN. Coincidence?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@skydragon23101979 "Why do you want to be a busybody about other countries internal affairs" Oh, so that CN can do and get what it wants? Great argument.
>Where did you get info that many want protection against China
First, you already pointed out the various military bases in the region so it's an odd question. Second, maybe in CN they don't allow you see a the evidence? That US is gifting and then later selling Vietnam ships to help patrol the East Vietnam Sea. That Vietnam has ran naval exercise with the US. That Indonesia has raised serous concerns about CN and has been in communication with the US. Or the Philippines giving the US more bases. Or that Singapore allows US military ships to use their ports but not China.
Also, I'm coming from the world perspective. Unlike Choon, I care about the people of Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Singapore.
Why cant Choon answer why all those countries seek protection against CN?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1