Comments by "" (@TheHuxleyAgnostic) on "David Pakman Show"
channel.
-
273
-
249
-
200
-
170
-
123
-
115
-
109
-
102
-
85
-
83
-
82
-
81
-
80
-
78
-
73
-
66
-
63
-
61
-
59
-
56
-
45
-
45
-
43
-
42
-
41
-
39
-
39
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
@Zackattack94 One thing about obesity is that it's not contagious. Another is that some countries, with universal healthcare, have added junk food taxes, as both a deterrent and to help them pay for their increased healthcare costs. Similar for smokers (who can also pay fines, higher life insurance, and are pretty much banned from smoking in any indoor public spaces). So, sure, treat the unvaccinated, but maybe have them pay more taxes, pay more life insurance, and ban them from public spaces.
35
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
31
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
@gizroc How is it "opinion"? Countries like Vietnam, S Korea, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand, responded amazingly. Countries like Norway, Denmark, Canada, Germany, and others, responded decently to mediocrely. The US would have had 200+k fewer covid deaths, just responding in Canada's mediocre fashion.
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
Start with using a more honest left-right measure, in the US. By Canadian standards, US progressives are centre to centre-left, US corporate Dems are centre-right to right of centre, and US Republicans and Libertarians are right of centre to far right. While there are a fair number of US politicians who spew far right Ayn Rand philosophy, there's no actual far left calling for complete economic equality, equal ownership of property, resources, and means of production, and an end to capitalism.
Corporate Dems aren't "left", at all. Even right of centre politicians in other countries support things like universal healthcare and gun control. Many US corporate Dems are right of them.
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
@wombatcitystudios Except there are zero far left politicians, calling for complete economic equality and an end of capitalism. On the other hand, there are multiple far right politicians, spouting Ayn Rand crap. The US political spectrum ranges from far right to centre-left. There is no real left wing in government. The "radical" progressives point at developed centrist countries to emulate, not the USSR or anarchist Spain.
Even outside professional politics, the "extreme" left is tossing milkshakes, destroying property, and getting into some fights. The extreme right is running over people with their cars, shooting up mosques, shooting up synagogues, shooting up black churches, is behind a rise in hate crimes, and behind a rise in domestic terrorism.
You seem to be spouting some false equivalency.
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
@Halon's Razor Americans have been going by the AP call, since 1948, including Trump, who went by it in 2016, excepted victory on the 8th, accepted Clinton conceding on the 9th, and accepted an invitation to the White House on the 10th, to talk transition. He was even using their calls to brag about which states he had won on election night, this election. Ivanka even congratulated daddy, a couple days ago, when the AP called Alaska for him ... after all you whiny babies started crying about the AP doing what they've done for decades.
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
Just to clarify what "government" means, in this case ...
In 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism. He predicted, based on the entirety of history, that the natives would fight said colonialism until the bitter end. He didn't care what would come of the natives, and claimed their colonialism was morally "good". Something that should be differentiated, is the colonialists can't ever really be "victims" of natives. Natives wouldn't be able to attack you, if your colonialist aggression hadn't put you there.
On top of the colonialism, Israel's next building block is terrorism, by groups like the Irgun and Lehi. They killed many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Those terrorist groups were merged into the new nation's military and intelligence. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, terrorist leader of the Irgun, who bombed the King David Hotel, as their PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". They literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, that terrorists are heroes, and now cry that it's not, and they're not ... if Palestinians do it.
Israelis have been voting for their governments, since its inception. They hold some responsibility for its actions. Due to mandatory service, almost every single Israeli is, was, or will be, a militant. Israeli militants kill Palestinians, including children, on a regular basis. Israel has hundreds of thousands of reserve militants (valid military targets) "hiding" amongst civilians, using them as "human shields". Israel also has a policy of blaming the families of Palestinian militants, and unleashing collective punishment, but cries foul, if this is done to them.
That a Jewish nation is running an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, is just about the most vile thing, about Israel. Becoming the thing they fled, is a very dark part of history.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
@josephpeeler5434 Any government involvement in the economy doesn't make it fascism, dumbass. Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, and others, were backed by business leaders, large land owners, and even royalty and nobles. Hitler promised his rich backers that there's be no real redistribution of wealth downwards. In fact, the wealth fascists seized from Jews, communists, socialists, unionists, etc., was redistributed upwards, to those rich backers. When those rich backers were worried about prominent party members who were calling for redistribution of wealth, Hitler, literally, killed them off, on the Night of Long Knives. Not only did Mussolini describe fascism as the "complete opposite of Marxian socialism" (non authoritarian stateless socialism), which makes it authoritarian hyper nationalistic capitalism, but he also described it as opposed to democracy. I don't recall FDR doing away with democracy, like the others, and right wingers keep calling past, and current, New Deals socialistic. Please don't tell me you're one of those utter morons who thinks fascism is a variation of some kind of socialism.
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
UBI is a good idea, but his methods for how to fund, and distribute, a permanent UBI were terrible. A VAT is specifically designed to NOT tax businesses in order to avoid double taxation. Without giant corporations paying into the dividend, as he falsely claimed they would, then they'd only get the benefits of the dividend being spent, funneling money to the very top faster than ever before. And the fact that some very poor people, especially some permanently disabled people on both SSI and SNAP, would be no better off, or even worse off, with his not having UBI stack with either, was nonsensical. Meanwhile, people making hundreds of thousands a year would have a bit more shopping spree, or vacation, cash.
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
-
Higher unionization, higher wages, successful retraining programs, universal healthcare, free college, mandatory parental leave, more paid vacations, double the percentage of the population working public jobs ... prepared for, and even welcoming, automation.
https://www.boyden.com/media/automation-and-jobs-the-swedish-perspective-3770222/index.html
But, hey, if you prefer someone who doesn't even know how his key tax works, all the power to you.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@ajaxaceofaces So Jews and Muslims fleeing the Christian Spain, where they were given the options of conversion, death, or exile, fled to the Ottoman Empire, which took them in. Where Jews lived for centuries. An empire that okayed limited Zionism. An empire that decriminalized homosexuality when many Christian countries still considered it a crime or mental illness. Etc. An empire that was as, or more, liberal than a number of Christian empires.
The West took that empire and carved it up into little countries. The Brits handed most of their bits to backwoods ultra-conservative Wahhabi dictators. No, they didn't create the ultra-conservatives, but they did put them in power. The French left a democratically elected government in Syria. It voted against an oil pipeline, so the US backed a coup to take them out. In Iran, a democratically elected PM was taking power away from the puppet dictator Shah, and was going to nationalize Iran's oil, so the US and UK backed a coup to take him out. In Iraq, a popular revolutionary had overthrown their puppet dictator, and was going to nationalize Iraq's oil, so the US backed a coup to take him out. In Afghanistan, communists overthrew their puppet dictator, and wanted to increase education and women's rights to the poor, so the US backed and trained religious extremists, including Bin Laden, to take them out. Etc. Etc.
The problem with being more liberal, is that liberals will also tend to lean more left economically. The West has been taking out the more liberal Muslims, backing the more conservative Muslims, and poking their noses in ME affairs, pissing many of them off.
You, seriously, don't think the US has fueled any hatred against itself? Supporting an Israel invasion of Lebanon wasn't what pissed people off, and got them bombed in Beirut? Bin Laden didn't list US intervention as a reason to declare war on them? Iranians didn't blame the US for decades of support for the dictator Shah?
8
-
@alexlifeson1321 Ze'ev Jabotinsky, a leading Zionist, in 1923, fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism. He also predicted, based on the entirety of history, that the native response to said colonialism would be to fight it until the bitter end. He did not state these facts to deter people away from Zionism, which he argued was morally good. He was basically pointing out that, to support Zionism, you have to not care about the consequences for the natives. Was Ze'ev, a Zionist himself, anti-Semitic?
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
@TheRedStateBlue Writing, and saying, things can be a crime, if you bring even one other person in on it. That's conspiracy to commit. Simply by bringing in one other person, that's enough to indicate you're actually going to try and do it. It can also be a crime if you write, or say, something to the someone you're going to commit a crime against, if the police think it's a credible threat. Someone putting out threats towards specific individuals in a book, should probably have been investigated.
With one person it's harder, but writing, or saying stuff, can also get you arrested, if you take any action that indicates preparation, or even just show up at the place in question, where you've said you're going to do something illegal. Police can arrest your for things, before you get to the last stage of carrying out that thing. You've probably seen the stings, where they arrest someone for showing up to meet an underage teen, or something.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@mediamattersismycockholste562 Moron.
Nazis loosened gun control for citizens. They just no longer considered Jews citizens, kind of like right wing nuts who question Muslim citizens' loyalties, or don't stick up for the black guy who carries and gets shot by police. Those people don't count.
Nazis were perfectly fine with insulting people of other religions, other races, other politics, etc. They just shut down negative media representations of them, with shouts of "fake news". They did not believe in safe spaces for those other people, just themselves.
Nazis were leaders in privatization, dumbass, turning tax dollars into private profits. They were backed by Germany's leading industrialists. They were anti-globalization, Germany first, type nationalists.
Infanticide? Again, Jews didn't count, to them. Just like many right wing nutters are fine with killing hundreds of thousands Muslim children, pardoning war criminals that kill Muslim children, etc. P.S. 1. An "infant" is birth to 12 months, so fetuses don't count as "infanticide". 2. Nobody is forcing abortions on people, you stupid wingnut. 3. Nobody is even promoting the idea that all fetuses of any group should be aborted. "Pro abortion" isn't actually a thing.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@caseypdx503 Nope. He is objectively not good at it. It is an objective fact that Zionists were colonialists. Early Zionists, like Ben-Gurion and Ze'ev Jabotinsky, fully acknowledged that fact. Ze'ev also predicted based on the entirety of history that the native population would fight said colonialism, until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them. Colonizers are never not the aggressors. It would be impossible for natives to attack them, if they weren't there doing their colonialist aggression, first.
It is also a fact that, on top of the colonialist base, Zionists formed terrorist groups, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets, killing many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into their new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, who also bombed the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis still celebrate those terrorists as heroes, to this day.
Anyone who makes out like Palestinians started the violence on Oct 7, is objectively bad at it. Even this year, alone, Israel had already killed over 200 Palestinians, prior to that. Hamas didn't start anything, and didn't do anything Zionists haven't resorted to.
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
-
james colvin You idiot. There were anti-fascists in the streets, and fighting with the brown shirts, in Germany, too. Claiming anti-fascists are the fascists makes you stupid. US independence was founded on protesting, confronting authorities in the streets, tarring and feathering loyalists, burning their houses, and destruction of property. When a red coat feared for his life, and shot a protester, it led to all out war. Were the founding fathers fascists?
Aside for that being bullshit, you don't have a right to be on Facebook or Twitter. There's no protections for political leanings. They can boot whoever they want. Don't like it, then try to get political leanings protected, like race, sex, religion, etc. Oh wait, protecting people from being discriminated against would probably be against your political leanings. You're likely in favour of private companies having the "right" to discriminate against whoever they want.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Dragon1717 It was only a "civil war", because the North won, were victorious over the South, and the union stayed together. For the South, it was a war of independence. They declared themselves to be a separate country, and that country, the Confederate States of America, with its own constitution, enshrining slavery, its own flags, its own uniforms, etc., was defeated. It was a victory for the union, keeping the union together. It was a victory for the United States of America over the Confederate States of America. Why shouldn't the USA celebrate that?
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Eric Moore Watched for years. "Real" lefties promote Trump as the better option for progressives, not caring if 10m of the poorest Americans are thrown off Medicaid expansion, and not caring to add 40m Americans to Medicare expansion, in 2016? "Real" lefties back Tulsi and "Medicare choice" rather than Bernie and M4A? "Real" lefties run attack ad campaigns against Trump's only viable remaining opponent, in 2020? "Real" lefties slander progressives that have done more for M4A in a few years than he has in his entire lifetime? "Real" lefties go on far right MSM, not to challenge them, but to agree with their right wing nonsense? "Real" lefties, after slandering other progressives for weeks, and making out like they're no longer allies, over a single tactic disagreement, turn around and promote making allies with far right ancap Boogaloos, who are the complete opposite on economics? "Real" lefties promote going the third party route that hasn't won the most popular third party a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence and, at best, would peel away enough progressive votes to let Republicans rule for decades?
Why does a "real" lefty seem to benefit the far right most?
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Mari Jayne The FBI had been under the direction of Republican presidents for 6 of the last 10 terms. They said Russians were interfering in 2018 and 2020, as well. Mueller, a Republican, indicted 29 Russians and 3 Russian companies. He presented some 200 pages of non conspiracy level information sharing (collusion), and they only didn't indict Jr and Kushner because they said it would be hard to prove they "willfully" broke the law, not because they didn't break the law. He also presented evidence for what could be considered obstruction, but said a sitting president couldn't be indicted.
You'd rather believe that the FBI, the DNC, Australian officials, and Republicans like Mueller, were working together to make a false case against Trump, so that they could make Pence president?
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@LiquidDestruction No, there aren't scholarships that say "white", but there are scholarships for people of different European heritage. For example, scholarships for German Americans ...
https://www.theclassroom.com/scholarships-for-kids-of-german-descent-13607461.html
The thing about the vast majority of blacks in America is that they don't have a previous specific heritage they can draw from. They were brought over from Africa, all tossed together, and quickly blended together. Their heritage is now only that of the black experience in America. So, not only is it a racial grouping, it's also become a cultural, heritage, grouping, on par with that German American grouping. There are also German clubs, and German festivals, celebrating German heritage. There are German American schools. And, the same goes for numerous other European American groups. And there's no such thing as "white" heritage or culture.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
The fascists of WWII considered resistance to their fascism to be "terrorism". Resistance groups sometimes killed civilian "collaborators". Natives of North America got sick of the European colonialism, ethnic cleansing, etc., and decided they wanted to push the Europeans back into the sea, and sometimes attacked civilians. The colonialists (who also attacked civilians, like Israel regularly does), on the other hand, considered them "Savages!".
The colonialism, fascism, etc., comes first. The "savage" "terrorist" attacks are a response. The only real way to end having a response, is to stop doing the things thay cause a response. Or, utterly destroy the responders.
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
-
@ncwordman Have you never read the OT? Whether you think the laws no longer apply, or not, that's supposedly the same god ... committing genocide; ordering genocide; ordering to bash people in the head with rocks, for non belief, for speaking of other religions, for working, even doing chores, on the Sabbath; okaying enslaving non Israelites for life, and passing them down as inheritance; etc., etc., etc.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
The left is opposed to colonialism, no? While I think Hamas' actions are morally, and strategically, wrong, it's hard to say they weren't expected. Almost no natives respond to colonialism like Ghandi. Ze'ev Jabotinsky recognized this fact, in 1923, when he fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and predicted exactly how the natives would react ... fight it to the bitter end.
On top of the colonialism, Israel is also itself founded on terrorism, by groups like the Irgun and Lehi. Instead of condemning the actions of those terrorists, Israel elected terrorist leaders, like Menachem Begin, who led the Irgun and bombed the King David Hotel. Even further from condemning their own terrorism, Israel actually celebrates those terrorists. Israel has taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood.
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
-
Antifa: property destruction, punching, and milkshaking
White supremacists: property destruction, punching, shooting up mosques, synagogues, temples, black people in church, Hispanic people shopping, driving into crowds of people, and behind much of the hate crimes and domestic terrorism
Yeah, the first sounds way worse.
5
-
@DumbAssSpeakingWithMansVoice The covid mortality rate has always been estimated at about 1%, 10x deadlier than the flu (which has seen it's own pandemic years, in the past), with even higher verifiable case fatality rates.
If the US had a mediocre response, similar to Canada, Norway, Denmark, Germany ... their deaths per million rates would translate into 300+k fewer covid deaths in the US. If the US had an amazing response, similar to Vietnam, S Korea, New Zealand, Australia ... their deaths per million rate would translate into 500+k fewer covid deaths in the US.
Right wingers continuing with their death panels, deciding certain people have passed their expiry dates, so it's okay to kill hundreds of thousands of them.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Sez B 20 years? They both jumped further right with McCarthyism, the Red Scare, and the Cold War. The Democrat party ditched being the union party for workers, and joined being another corporate party. More Democrats, now, might be slightly left of Bill Clinton, but he was well right of FDR.
The Republicans have gone crazy far right, keeping that McCarthyism mentality, along with a theocratic mentality, adding in Southern racists, adding in Tea Party nutters, working up an 8 year racist frenzy against Obama ... and then, after creating this crazy core, Trump came along and hijacked it, playing on all their worst attributes.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@runner6500 Dimwit. The original antifa was fighting against fascism in Italy, Spain, and Germany. Just saying people protesting, even rioting, equates to fascism, is beyond stupid. That would make every uprising in history "fascists", including colonial Americans protesting, rioting, tarring and feathering, destroying private property ... all because they didn't want to pay an extra tax specifically to fund the police/military.
Removing what people are fighting for, from the equation, is idiotic.
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
-
@MedicineMan510 So, you think the way the US treated Cuba, and other countries in the Western hemisphere, was right?
Russia was the one who started interfering in almost every former USSR state, right from the get go. Not odd, for them to then look for help. They had already invaded, and taken part of the Ukraine, before. And had their own fascists take over those Eastern provinces. They started economic warfare against the Ukraine, just for them wanting to join the EU (not NATO). But, yeah, Ukraine bad, for wanting help.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Evirthewarrior True, there are 2 axis, and Marxian socialism is libertarian left. The complete opposite of that would be an authoritarian right.
"Fascism is the complete opposite of Marxian socialism" ~ Mussolini
They cut taxes. They privatized numerous things (fascist governments were leaders in privatization). They teamed up with monarchists, industrialists, and large land owners. They sidelined independent unions and created government run unions, outlawing strikes ... the government took over labour, not the means of production, and stripped it of power. Employer syndicates, on the other hand, were given the freedom to control production, distribution, and expansion. Simply controlling the economy doesn't equate to socialism, if it's geared towards making rich people richer. That's crony capitalism.
"The corporative State considers private initiative, in the field of production, as the most efficient and useful instrument of the Nation."
People who portray fascists as socialists, should also be weary of wartime economies. The British government also took more control over its economy and production, during war. It had nothing to do with them attempting to become more socialist. It simply had to do with trying to keep their military armed and their people (not Indians) fed.
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
-
Right wingers have made laws against BDS; they've made laws against CRT (which isn't even taught in public schools); there is a government agency still protecting delicate conservative sensibilities from naughty words and nipples; they are fine with a president (head of government) firing, or threatening to fire, those who contradict him; they are fine with state legislators threatening local governments; they are fine with making protesting harder and more dangerous; ... that's all kinds of government power they use to control people's speech. Conservative religious types have been using government power, to cancel people, businesses, and things, they don't like, for millennia.
On top of all that use of government power, they also call for people to be fired, and call for businesses to be boycotted out of business. That "cancel culture" is something new, or primarily left wing, is complete and utter bullshit.
3
-
3
-
3
-
His stance isn't "objective". If there are 1200+ Palestinian hostages, being held indefinitely by Israel, without charges, prior to Oct 7 ... if there are 200+ Palestinians killed, this year alone, by the IDF and settlers, prior to Oct 7 ... if there are never ending settlements, colonizing the West Bank, prior to Oct 7 ... if Israel is operating an ongoing open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza, prior to Oct 7 ... then, in what reality, did Hamas "start" the aggression? In what reality is Israel "defending" itself, if they're the aggressor?
Also, legal objectivity ... Israel is considered to be occupying the Palestinian territories, according to the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. International law actually gives those being occupied the right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it does not give the occupier the right to use collective punishment. It is objectively against international law, to use collective punishment. It is also against international law to colonize occupied territories. Israel is, objectively, a rogue occupier nation, that constantly violates international law, and faces no consequences, in large part due to US vetoes.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@nostrum6410 Conservative types have been cancelling things for centuries ... other religions, other denominations, women's ankles, women's knees, women's thighs, women wearing pants, women in the workplace, women's votes, foul language, gays, trans, PDA, sex, tons of books they didn't like, music they didn't like, unionists, socialists, blacks, black votes, etc. It's insanely hypocritical, when they complain about "cancel culture".
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I have been watching, and after the Oct 7 attack, you threw anyone offering context usnder the bus with those outright cheering the attack. You said you didn't want to hear any explanations, then proceeded to give an explanation as to why and what Israel would do. You spent a show saying the bombing of the first refugee camp was bad, not the following refugee camp bombings, but basically ignored all the other bombing, as if that was perfectly normal. That first show, after the attack, you also did the standard bit about Israel being "progressive", and stuff, and Muslims not so much. Fascists, operating an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, aren't progressive. Colonizers aren't progressive. A country, where the actual majority was ethnically cleansed from, and never allowed to return, is no more democratic than Hitler having an election after purging his political opponents. You've been acting like an "enlightened centrist", both sides-ing, when Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@KingoftheJuice18 "Non authoritarian", "authoritarian", "capitalism", and "socialism" cover a lot of things. They're just overview words. Fascists: ultra-nationalistic, anti-communist, anti-socialist, anti-unionist, anti-feminist (promoted traditional home life), anti-democratic, pro-military expansion, pro-police expansion, backed by big business (crony capitalists), backed by religious extremists ... pretty much everything Cruz is.
I think the US needs a major wake up call. It's Overton window goes from far right to centrism ("radical left", "communism", "far left", etc.). And, it's authoritarianism, compared to other developed countries, is insane. Those nutters should be called what they are, and be held accountable for what they just incited.
3
-
3
-
@SimonTBam Trump and most Republicans are not completely unfettered capitalists. They want the state to fund their massive military and policing. They back fed controls on the economy. They back "socialism" for the rich, sharing their losses with the nation, but not their gains. They're crony capitalists, wanting to benefit those who already have a ton of money, most, including their giant corporate donors. Libertarians are the ones who want unfettered capitalism, with a minimalist government, military, and justice system, no fed. Ancappers want unfettered capitalism with no government. Only a few Republicans consistently act more like Libertarians, the rest spew words, but then consistently vote to increase government power (Patriot Act, ICE, military, police, endless wars, their own pork items, etc).
Hitler was backed by leading industrialists, who were definitely out to make a profit. He handed them confiscated wealth and businesses from Jews, he handed them conquered businesses and resources, he handed them slave labor, he destroyed unions and outlawed striking (workers' power), etc. They made a killing, before he started losing on them. Some huge German corporations, that are still around today, came out of WWII pretty well off.
3
-
@KingoftheJuice18 You were literally spouting strawman nonsense that I never said, and repeatedly trying to broaden category beyond what I said to a point where you could then imply I'm labelling too many people, when it was you who did it. I assumed you weren't dishonest, and simply misread and misunderstood. If you prefer me saying you're dishonest, then so be it. A guy named Mussolini conveniently wrote the doctrine of fascism, as well as an Italian encyclopedia entry on what is fascism, describing what he meant by "fascism". Plus some extra characteristics from common historical actions (Me not limiting characteristics strictly to what Mussolini wrote actually lessens who would be a fascist. I can broaden the category to only what he wrote, if you want.). If you don't allow that it can be identified by certain characteristics, then you don't allow that it exists.
Republicans have checked off almost all those boxes, for decades. They took in the extreme anti-socialist McCarthy types, they took in the southern racists, they took in the religious extremists, they took in the Koch backed Tea Party nutters, and now Trump cultists and Qanoners. They've been fed so much propaganda that FOX viewers are less informed than people who watch no news at all. Even gerrymandering, disenfranchising, and suppression, already made them somewhat anti-democratic. Now, 28% of Republicans outright don't want Trump to concede under any circumstances, over a hundred Republican lawmakers wanted to overthrow an audited and certified election, that all election officials were saying was secure, and you're just not quite sure, yet.
What would it take?
3
-
3
-
For one, anecdotal evidence isn't evidence. Canada has less crime than the US. Almost as diverse. In fact, lots of countries have less crime than the US, including many non-white, non-asian majority countries. A number of non-white, non-asian countries have a lower crime rate than Poland. Saudi has a lower crime rate than Poland. Monaco has a lower crime rate than Poland. Kuwait has a lower crime rate than Poland. Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Malta, ... Plenty of white and Asian majority countries have higher crime rates than Poland. What's wrong with them? If it's "science", then it should be consistent. "Scientifically", aren't SA and Caribbean Latinos and Hispanics largely white descendants of Spaniards and the Portuguese? What the fuck is going on down South?
Walking around Poland and declaring it wonderful isn't any kind of science that needs refuting. It's just personal opinion.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@neutrino78x No, I want those in power to respect human rights. You know full well that if there was a domestic terrorist group, criminal gang, or whatever, they wouldn't just willy nilly blow up a f*cking block, full of civilians, to get them. Because they actually care about not killing their own civilians or, at least, care about the reaction of their own civilians. If you're intentionally dropping a bomb on civilians, you're intentionally killing civilians.
And, again, Israel has hundreds of thousands of militants hiding amongst the populace, using them as "human shields".
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@luchi.el.zorrito Strong voter ID laws are directly classist. Poor people are less likely to have a driver's license, so it's a hurdle you're adding for them, before they can vote. Poor people can less afford to take a day off to go get ID. "Free", except for that time off you won't get paid for, and your transportation costs. Hispanic and black Americans have higher percentages of poverty, which would make it indirectly racist, if that wasn't for the fact that is common knowledge, before the fact.
While Georgia isn't going back to zero drop boxes, and drop boxes are "expanding" from 2016, the 2020 election obviously made voting too convenient, so they're drastically reducing it from the amount they allowed for in 2020.
There are already fewer polling stations per capita in poorer districts which, again, disproportionately affects certain minority groups, making them have to stand in line longer. And now people can't bring them any food or water, as if they're going to change their vote in line, due to a water handout. Not sure why this would be an issue, if handing out food and water were a bipartisan activity. Oh wait, it's not, because right wingers don't give two shits about the people in line for hours.
But you've probably heard, or read, this kind of stuff before, and are just playing stupid.
3
-
@turanamo Yeah, I don't get why people think he actually cares if they get healthcare. In 2016, he did what he could, from promoting Trump as better than Clinton to promoting Stein as having a chance of winning, to get Trump elected, not caring if that would lead to the ACA being repealed and millions losing their healthcare. During the 2020 primaries, he promoted Tulsi ("Medicare choice") over Bernie (M4A). During the 2020 general, he basically ran an attack campaign against Biden, Trump's only viable opponent, again not caring if Trump won and that could lead to the ACA being repealed, not caring if Trump killed thousands more Americans, not caring to get millions more covered by lowering the Medicare age. Now, he's slandering the most progressive politicians in congress, especially the one who just used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, the very thing that actually moves you closer to passing M4A. And, he wants to start yet another third party, that likely won't even get a single seat for decades, let alone M4A, and could simply split the vote enough to let Republicans rule and destroy people's healthcare more.
If anyone is a "fake", "shill", and "wimp", it's the guy who basically campaigns for Republicans and stabs progressives making small gains in the back.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@EbluestarE It's stupid when you have say one smoking causes cancer doctor and one smoking doesn't cause cancer doctor, and make out like they're equally valid points, that the public should debate and decide, instead of a consensus of doctors.
No ivermectin "study" has been deemed sufficient to conclude ivermectin is an effective remedy. They've been deemed insufficient, biased, and even outright fraudulent. You don't need to both sides it, as if they're equally valid, and have an ignorant public debate whether it's effective, and decide for themselves. Peer review and scientific consensus have nothing to do whether an opinion wins a public popularity content. All you really need to report is what's holding up under peer review, and what the scientific consensus is.
The unvaccinated aiming for natural immunity, are letting 1% of their population die, and letting millions get long covid, to get their individual natural immunity ... that also wears off, like vaccines, and then you have to let people die, and get long covid, again, just so you can get natural immunity again. It doesn't deserve equal time.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The Gilded Age through to the Roaring 20s created massive economic inequality. Leading into the Great Depression, there were all kinds of labour riots, etc. Democrats sided more and more with the workers. Then came the crash, depression, FDR, and his New Deal. Unionization spiked, and Democrats were the party of workers and their unions. HUAC started upping it's game against "leftists", and then came McCarthyism in the early 50s. Things started shifting to the right, again, as did the Democrats. Reagan came along and pushed things even further right.
Economically, the two parties became not all that different, both right wing, Democrats swapping union support for corporate support as unionization rates dropped. They differed more and more on social issues (Republicans taking in very religious views, and taking in the Southern racists). The Tea Party nuts took the Republicans to an even more extreme right, leaving Democrats right wing, but left of them.
Progressives want to return to the true centrist position, like FDR. A truer centre between all out capitalism and all out socialism. The current "centrist" corporate Dems want to stay in the "centre" between Republicans and Progressives, and stick with their now corporate backers.
3
-
3
-
@RuckFussia They aren't at war. All the Palestine territories are considered occupied by the International Court of Justice, the UN GA, the UN SC, and even the individual governments allied to Israel. Israel controls the Gaza borders, airspace, ports, electricity, water, imports and exports (only people are allowed to cross Rafah), and Bibi even controls the money coming from Qatar, having turned it off and on, whenever he feels like, before. This is an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. This is like bombing one of those ghettos, to root out the Jewish underground. Palestinians are under the occupiers' protection.
The world did not begin on Oct 7. This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank. But hey, go ahead and pretend like Hamas "started" something.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The crime rate jumped in 2020, under Trump, dumb dumb.
Averaged out, Trump had more border crossings per year than Obama. He sucked worse than Obama at the one thing racists voted for him for.
Trump also ended zero wars and dropped more bombs per year than Obama. Plus, pissed off Iran, backed out of nuke deal with Iran. Ignored his dictator buddy in N Korea, who is estimated to have built 30-40 nukes under Trump's watch. Gave Putin secrets about Israel. Gave some rando billionaire donor nuclear secrets. All his "peace" deals were nonsense, between countries that weren't really fighting.
By Trump's own favorite measure, the stock market, his biggest gains were in his first year, under Obama's last budget. When his own first budget, and tax breaks for the rich and corporations, kicked in, the stock market almost flatlined.
Dumpty had one of the worst pandemic responses in the world. Both, in terms of health and economic support for the people.
Inflation and gas prices are up around the world. Nothing to do with Biden. The US is actually doing better than most.
On top of all that, Trump is actually a lifelong criminal. His daddy had him committing tax fraud, when he was in diapers. He had to settle 2 suits for not renting to black Americans. He racked up $10.5m in fines, for improperly running his casinos. He and daddy were fined for gaming fraud, when daddy bought $3m in chips and didn't cash them in, to try and bail out his incompetent son. Settled suit for grifting his own Trump University fans. Guilty of rape and defamation. Guilty of bank fraud.
That's not even getting into how divisive he is, with his hate and fear mongering.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@hwajuhwarang I didn't argue a VAT doesn't generate revenue. So, you're not actually making a counter point. Just a strawman.
I argued it doesn't tax corporations, as Yang falsely claims. That also makes his claims that a VAT will have corporations paying you for your data, paying you to show you ads, or paying you for every automated truck mile, false. That also makes his comparison between his dividend, which won't have corporations paying into it, and the Alaskan dividend, which is paid for by corporations, a false equivalence.
Since he won't have corporations paying into the dividend then they will only benefit from the dividend being spent. Amazon would make an extra $60b a year from $3t in increased consumer spending. That's extra billions a year they could invest into automating even faster. It would make Bezos an extra $6+b a year. He could buy a brand new $1b yacht every single year, paying $100m in VAT, and still be in the plus $5.9+b. That would increase the speed of inequality.
That's not a sustainable plan.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@gabedude68 If they're still running a hotline, fishing for evidence of widespread voter fraud, then they don't have evidence of widespread voter fraud. If they just put up a reward, fishing for evidence of widespread voter fraud, then they don't have evidence of widespread voter fraud. Every election there is a miniscule percentage of voter fraud, and them going to court over all of that, before conceding, is just wasting people's time, and won't change the results. Out of 150m votes, finding a dozen here, or even a hundred there, is an absolutely ridiculous thing to put the entire country through.
Trump baselessly claimed widespread voter fraud in 2016, as well. His own election integrity commission found nothing of the sort.
He's a proven con artist ... proven in court ... and 70m people are buying his bullshit.
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
-
@dudeguy7347 Do you think something that can't have conscious thoughts, can't feel pain, can't form memories, is it exactly equivalent to something that can? Sperm are unthinking, unfeeling, living organisms, with the potential of becoming humans, if you don't interfere with them, so why are you okay with killing them with birth control?
The vast majority of the fertilized eggs (conception), used in IVF, fail to take, or aren't used. Do you consider that the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of "babies" per year?
3
-
If the US had responded as well as S Korea, Vietnam, New Zealand, or Australia, their covid deaths per capita would translate into under 20k total US covid deaths. A mediocre response, like Canada, Germany, Norway, Denmark, or Finland, would translate into 400+k fewer US covid deaths. His pathetic response is responsible for 400-600k deaths.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@michaelarmijo4112 Do you grasp basic math? There are zero extra votes to be gained to the left of progressives. It is absolutely impossible to pass a bill without votes from the most conservative Dems, like Manchin. On the flip side, there is the entire Republican party to try and draw extra votes from, to the right of conservative Dems. If they can bring enough Republicans onto a bill, then they don't need progressive votes to pass the bill. Expecting even 100 progressives to be able to pass whatever they want, is nonsensical.
What about her voting record is it that you think is highly problematic?
When did she "promise" to remove Nancy? How is that even possible, when even the entire progressive caucus doesn't have enough votes, within the Dem caucus, to pick a different speaker candidate? Blocking the house speaker vote just paralyzes the house, until a speaker is elected. It doesn't change who the party puts forth as a candidate. The corporate Dem majority could keep picking Pelosi over and over and over, or someone even worse. All you'd be doing is paralyzing the house, indefinitely, rather than ousting the party speaker candidate.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@cqtaylor Some might argue that, if the US hadn't entered WWI, there might not have been a WWII, because stalemate negotiations wouldn't have as hard on Germany, which played a big part in the rise of Hitler. So, that might cancel out the WWII things they were "needed" for.
The US has also caused more problems in, and around, Israel, and the greater ME, than it has solved. Oooo, a treaty ... but they helped overthrow multiple democracies, as well as committimg and supporting many war crimes in the area.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@nerodia Denmark, for example, has a 35% public sector workforce. On top of that, they have a 70+% unionized workforce, which isn't ownership, but does give more power to workers, to determine what they're worth. On top of that, they have multiple socialized sectors of the economy (healthcare, education through college, nationalized wind power, etc.). Like I said, "social democracies" seem to have paused around centrism, which isn't exactly just a kind of "capitalism". It's a fairly even mix of both capitalism and socialism.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Netanyahu is the biggest Hamas supporter, and Israel is objectively the aggressor by every relevant measure ...
Actual Hamas supporter: Netanyahu promoted, and helped fund, Hamas, to weaken the Palestinian Authority, to avoid a potential peace, so he could continue his colonization project. This is very much like the US promoting and funding religious extremists in Afghanistan, and that ending up biting them in the ass. Plus, he was warned by Egypt and, instead of strengthening the Gaza border, he moved Gazan troops to the West Bank, to support his colonization. Almost like he wanted his pet terrorists to actually break through.
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "your" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@-NoneOfYourBusiness Dore knobs have proved that ftv was pure bullshit, and that they weren't actually going to do anything with a list of no voters. The $15 got a vote, and all they've done is kept whining about those who voted for it, rather than doing anything about those who voted against it. Just keep trashing those who have done more for M4A in a few years than Dore has in his entire lifetime.
When the UN, UN inspectors taken from around the world, NGOs like doctors without borders, amnesty, HRW, independent investigators from various countries, hundreds of victim witnesses, dozens of healthcare witnesses, and various human rights legal groups representing victims, have hundreds of accounts of Syrian chemical weapons use, since 2013, and you try to portray a big conspiracy based on two "inspectors" (one wasn't an official inspector, and one never left the base because they didn't finish training) that were involved in a single inspection at a single site, but weren't involved in the last 7 months of the investigation ... all to defend Syria, along with Russia ... then what's the better answer? Are Dore and Aaron just stupid?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
NEAR TERM EXTINCTION - HUMAN There is already a pretty clear list of who hasn't signed on for M4A. AOC just used her platform and PAC to help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress, going against DCCC backed corporate Dems, exactly what you'll still have to do after a failed vote. Jimmy rewards doing the exact thing that's needed to actually get M4A passed, with calling her a "fake", "shill", and "wimp". To actually pass it, you need to replace about 100 people in the house and senate. If Jimmy has 100 new candidates in his back pocket, he should have run them in the election that just happened. I'm sure AOC would have done what she could to help them get elected too.
Yeah, paralyzing the house, if you don't get your way, isn't really politics 101. There hasn't been multiple speaker votes in about a hundred years. Resorting to that, during a pandemic, could backfire and be used to make you look bad.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@5thElement0560 This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Making out like nothing was going on, prior to Oct 7, is moronic. If Israel had cared about its civilians, then they wouldn't have done any of that, right? Right?
Also, the IDF has its largest base in a shopping mall, cowardly using civilians as human shields. The IDF has over 400k militants (reservists) hiding amongst its civilians, cowardly using them as human shields, maybe even at a festival.
Be careful justifying killing civilians, because it can work both ways, and you might justify something you don't want to.
2
-
2
-
Jambi Love Take a country, like S Korea, who flattened their curve quickly. They quickly mass produced masks, and trace tested at a rate of 50+ people per confirmed case. The US, on the other hand, let themselves have a mask shortage, and tested at a pathetic rate of 5 people per confirmed case, for months, only recently getting that rate up to a still pathetic 10 people per confirmed case. The US hasn't tested at a rate fast enough to get ahead of the virus spread. New Zealand, and Australia, also used 50+ testing rates, and flattened their curves quickly. The US is playing behind the curve, and might be too far gone to catch up, due to incompetence.
2
-
@ChollieD Hey, there were a few black slave owners, I guess enslaving black people isn't racist. Hey, there were a few Jews who joined the Nazis, I guess tossing Jews into ovens isn't racist. Hey, some natives helped colonialists, I guess ethnic cleansing isn't racist. Etc.
Point being that, even with the worst, most extreme forms of racism, you could find some supporters of that race on the side of the racism. Your line of argument doesn't even come close to proving someone isn't a racist.
Also, Latino and Hispanic are cultural groupings. There are native, black, white, and mixes there of, amongst Latinos and Hispanics. Finding yourself a bunch of Ted Cruzes to support you sure as hell isn't evidence you're not racist.
Aside from that, the most obvious is that, since a recent Pew survey showed similar support as 2016 (Trump 8% black, 29% Hispanic), that suggests more black and Hispanic Democrats didn't vote, rather than suggesting Trump has won over large percentages.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@embedded_software Well, Sanders' is like a sales tax on Wall Street. It would be as unavoidable as the VAT, but the consumers, in that case are 84% the top 10%, 50% the top 1%. Corporations doing buybacks would also have to pay it.
Someone might be able to avoid Warren's wealth tax by redirecting anything over $50m through charities, but that would still cut down on hoarding.
A VAT doesn't affect hoarding, at all, it also doesn't tax giant corporations at all, which is why, when mixed with the UBI, it would end up benefiting giant corporations and the super rich.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@bravesirkevin You seem to be moving the boyfriend into the position of the publisher, or whatnot, and giving him the ability to outright stop her from associating with someone else, completely against her will, rather than simply giving her an ultimatum, and letting her choose.
If she's the one making the decision, and he's the one giving an ultimatum, then she's the publisher. She's the one with the power to make the final decision. You seem to be ignoring that she could choose to keep the friend and ditch the boyfriend. You're trying to deny his right to say "it's me or them". You're trying to deny his right to not want to associate with the other person she has brought into his life, allowed into the space he's in.
You've also repeatedly agreed that it's okay to give an ultimatum, with every example I've given that includes what you agree is a valid reason to do so. Which, again, means your "analogy" could only come anywhere close to actually being analogous if there was absolutely zero valid reason for giving the ultimatum. Who decides that?
And, the whole point of bringing up the Dixie Chicks, was to point out hypocrisy. Those pro war nationalist right wingers made out like they had a valid reason for trying to cancel the Dixie Chicks, and now many of those same people are crying about "cancel culture", as if cancelling is always wrong. You seemed to be straddling that same hypocrisy line, where you agree to cancelling if you agree with the reasons, but we're still trying your damnedest to make out like cancelling, in general, is "abuse".
Again, who is asking for people to be cancelled for absolutely zero reason? It's not really a thing, right? So, you are determining that reasons you agree with are valid reasons to cancel, and reasons you don't agree with are "abuse". You need to be arguing against specific reasons, arguing why you think it's wrong for those reasons, and give up making out like it's always wrong, because you already completely failed in that department.
2
-
2
-
2
-
I'd go back to the 50s. They gave a home to extreme anti-socialist McCarthy types, then southern racists, religious extremists, gun nuts, neocons, Tea Party nutters, extreme obstructionists, the Trump cult, and now Qanoners. It's increasingly a party of lunatics.
Trump did pull off the most Big Brother like propaganda campaign in US history though, I think, convincing tens of millions of people not to believe any media, any judges, any lawyers, any election officials, any doctors, any nurses, any scientists, any other politicians ... anybody ... even to not believe their own lying eyes, if they contradicted Supreme Leader. As well as convincing many to embrace overt fascism, and bring an end to the democratic process.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@BattousaiHBr When has CNN, NYT, MSNBC, etc., represented complete economic equality for all, equal ownership of property, resources, and production, and an end to capitalism? That's the "far left".
They barely seem to tolerate the centre-left, like Bernie. The US has no "far left" politicians, pushing for outright Marxism, or something. On the other hand, the US has numerous US politicians who spout Ayn Rand crap. The US political spectrum goes from "far right" to centre-left, with almost all politicians being right of centre, to some degree.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@President Houseplant He outright promoted Trump as the better option in 2016. He spent the 2020 general basically running an attack ad campaign against Trump's only viable opponent, which could only benefit Trump. Didn't care if 10m of the poorest Americans lost their Medicaid expansion, and didn't care to add 40m older Americans to Medicare, but makes out like he's the one true champion of healthcare. Slanders the most progressive politicians in congress, which can only benefit corporate Dems and Reps. Also promotes third parties, which only really benefits corporate Dems and Reps. Goes on right wing talk shows, not to challenge their ideas, rather to agree with them. Trashes the DSA, which has been having M4A rallies. After slandering the most progressive politicians in congress, and progressive organizations, making out like they're no allies, all because of a tactics disagreement, turns around and makes out like some far right ancap Boogaloos would make great allies, even though they completely disagree on economics, don't want anything socialized at all.
What makes him left wing, exactly? Just him saying so?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ashwynnair6812 Yeah, we have exemptions on staples, here in Canada. There's still a VAT on most things.
Being from the UK, you know why things are priced higher in the UK and Canada, then, yes? Companies will cover their costs. Corporations, especially those he constantly mentions, won't be paying the tax.
I'm talking about the upper middle class and up, who do spend ridiculous amounts per month. The higher you go, the more they'll simply save, hoard, get paid in stocks, etc., which isn't taxed by a VAT, because they aren't spending it. The 1% will make even more, with Yang, while the next 19% will pay the most into the VAT.
The alternative is not to bullshit people. Sure, a VAT is a way to bring in a lot of federal revenue. No, a VAT is not a way to make Amazon or Bezos "pay their fair share", as Yang keeps saying.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Also, how is saving 68000 lives not an increase in quality, as well as access? If you're getting zero access, then you're getting zero quality, until you need emergency care. You're just leaving millions of people with no, or limited, access out of the initial quality metric. So, what metric are you using for quality, if not overall life expectancy, infant mortality, maternal mortality, etc.? Shouldn't the quality of healthcare measured in its capacity to keep people alive, first and foremost?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@annalisemaya8464 Oh geezus. There were protests and riots during the early labor movement. There were protests and riots during the civil rights movement. Hell, American colonists protested and rioted over funding the police/military and disenfranchisement. It's the reason and goals that make something insane, or not.
What's insane about wanting to end police brutality and have a more just justice system? US police kill citizens at 4 to hundreds of times the rate of other developed countries. The US has the largest prison population in the world. That's fighting against authoritarianism.
Trying to overthrow the democratic process to keep Dumpty on as an unelected dictator is fighting for authoritarianism.
And aside from that, who on the left is outright completely batshit crazy, waiting around for zombie JFK Jr, blathering about Jewish space lasers, spewing religious gobbledygook, thinking Bill Gates is microchipping everyone, etc., etc., etc.?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@gelpen7882 Holy crap, Americans need to learn how a VAT actually works. Corporations, like Amazon, would totally avoid a VAT, because they aren't paying it. They collect it, from the consumer, and pass it along to government.
People benefitting from the UBI will spend some percentage of that extra money on Amazon, making them even more money. That, in turn, will make Bezos more money. The more money he has, the more he'll hoard, and hoarded money isn't affected by a VAT.
Table 1 shows how a VAT (GST) actually works. It's the final consumer who ends up paying the entire VAT.
http://publications.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/BP/prb0003-e.htm#A.%20Taxing%20Mechanism(txt)
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@edwardz.rosenthal9946 Yeah. I get the frustration, feeling like it's slow going. But, the progressive caucus is only about 10 more seats away from becoming the majority of house Democrats. Some of their most vocal members could protest vote Pelosi, now, but even as a whole, they don't actually have the majority to swap her out in caucus. Pelosi has said this is her last ride as speaker. So, the next caucus speaker election will be up for grabs anyway, and the progressive caucus could have the majority by then, if everyone sticks by them, and elects some more. Letting someone like Tim Ryan get his foot in the door, now, and take over the job could make things tougher. He's even more anti-progressive than Pelosi. Paralyzing the house now could be propagandized against progressives. Pushing corporate Dems to have to work with Republicans to dodge paralyzing the house could make things worse for progressives. There are risks to forcethevote.
If they get the majority of the Dems, next election, and Dems get the majority of the house again, they could pick a speaker who could put the M4A bill up for a vote as many times as Republicans put the ACA repeal bill up for a vote. They could put progressive policies up repeatedly. They're close.
Promote the forcethevote idea. If they go for it, they go for it. If they don't want to risk it, they won't. Still stick together, do all that stuff you can still do anyway, and you can start now ... pressure any Rep not signing on, have and promote M4A rallies, find good candidates to take out anyone who won't sign on, spread proper information, etc. Don't set fire to the ship, jump overboard, let it sink, and start from scratch, over a secondary tactics disagreement. Jimmy isn't a good figurehead for a movement.
The Libertarian party will soon be turning 50 years old without ever having won a seat in congress. The Green Party is 20 years old without ever having won a seat in congress. That's the reality of third parties in the US, atm. Need to get people on the inside to change how elections work, get big donors out of politics, etc., before third parties can really be viable, I think. It may seem like a revolutionary idea in the moment, and you have grand ideas of everyone jumping onboard and it being a short trip to your destination, but it's actually a long road to nowhere, as the system works now. Sticking with progressives is the shorter route, even if it seems slow.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@legion999 It depends. Some cultural naming patterns leaned towards naming the first born son after the father's father, and the second born son after the mother's father. Say Michael son of John, has two sons, and he names them John and Joseph. John and Joseph would then both name their first sons, Michael. All good, if there's no repeating names.
But, if the wife's father's name was the same as her husband, then you're heading for trouble. Michael's kids would then be John and Michael (after the wife's father, not him), and that Michael's son would be Michael, and then you're off on an endless string, until someone breaks with tradition.
Someone, like Trump, is obviously not attempting to honour his father, or following a tradition, so likely ego, yeah.
2
-
2
-
2
-
It seems like you're just trying to avoid the term "socialism" and/or the term "centrism". You can have partial socialism, just like you can have partial capitalism. Seriously, what do people think centrism is in the centre of? What do people think a mixed economy is a mix of?
If you socialize a sector of the economy, say the health insurance industry, making it publicly owned and operated, then that sector is then run in a socialist fashion. Privately owned and operated schools are run in a capitalist fashion. Publicly owned and operated schools are run in a socialist fashion. Privately owned and operated electric companies are run in a capitalist fashion. Publicly owned and operated electric companies are run in a socialist fashion. Etc. If you went 100% with either, you'd have full blown capitalism or full blown socialism. Centrism is a mix of the two.
"Social democracy", to me, doesn't seem to really describe an economic position, at all. The economic position you described is centrism (the real centre, not the centre of the US's almost completely right of centre political spectrum).
You want to get to central station. The democratic socialist train is heading in that direction. You can take it as far as maybe 50/50 capitalism/socialism, but then you can jump off the train at Central station. And that's fine. It's democratic. If the majority of people aren't ready to move further, then that's fine. That's what a democracy is about. That's the current destination Bernie is headed for, and hasn't suggested going any further, at least not for now.
The Republican train, on the other hand, just keeps chugging further and further right, currently taking the country with it. While the corporate Dem train wants to take you to a fake central station, that's actually between the real central station and the extreme right station, and not truly central, at all.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The Ghey Mantis "Fascism is the complete opposite of Marxian socialism." ~ Mussolini
It sounds like your triangle doesn't allow for anarchism ... anarcho-socialism, anarcho-communism. The Marxian ideal is a non authoritarian, stateless, democratic, socialism/communism. That ideal does not share a desire for government power with fascists, in the least. Its complete opposite is an authoritarian, nationalistic, anti-democratic, capitalism. Fascists promoted bootstrapping ... denied class warfare, promoted accepting your lot in life and work hard for the country, and that hard work might pay off. There was not much agreement on equality, either.
It's like you don't actually know what the two things are.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Canada's system needs improving. We only rank better, overall, than the US, amongst developed countries, so pointing to Canada isn't some big gotcha. It's a federal/provincial partnership, with the provinces being in charge of their own healthcare systems, and the federal government adding funds to it. A province like Quebec actually has more private involvement than Ontario, but has higher wait times. So, it's not simply single payer = longer wait times.
We don't have tens of thousands dying due to being uninsured, don't have hundreds of thousands going bankrupt from healthcare debt, and don't have millions going to other countries to find healthcare they can afford. If some Canadians with money decide they don't want to wait for non life threatening elective procedures, and go elsewhere, so be it. That's still rare. Most Canadians who get healthcare in the US, happen to already be in the US, and need healthcare while there, like all the elderly Snowbirds. They don't actually go to the US specifically for healthcare.
It's like triage, where those who need it most go first, instead of those who can afford it most go first. We have higher life expectancies, lower infant mortality rates, lower maternal mortality rates, etc. By the most common measures, used to rate healthcare worldwide, Canada beats the US in outcomes.
If your superficial comparison was valid, all single payer countries should have longer wait times, but the UK's system (the most socialized and usually rated #1) scores better than the US in timeliness of care. They also produce more medical papers per capita, than the US.
We also have room to almost double the amount of money invested into our healthcare, to make improvements, before hitting US cost levels. A number of issues with single payer systems come from conservative parties not funding them enough.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Okay, but a $10m salary isn't really "super rich". That's just "rich". Also, getting a salary doesn't tend to go hand in hand with "indolent". The actual indolent super rich billionaires don't tend to get a taxable salary, or claim a low taxable salaries. Bezos claims a salary of about $80k. Tesla claims a salary of about $24k. I don't think Gates even gets a salary anymore, nor much of the Walton family. Billionaires live on non-taxable lines of credit taken out against their stock values. So, while you might be raising the social security percentage on high end entertainers, doctors, lawyers, millionaire business owners, etc., who do work for their money, indolent super rich billionaires living off stocks and options will still pay jack shit into social security.
2
-
2
-
@ValleyPooch If everyone wanted to be entirely accurate, they'd admit that almost every country in the world is running a mixed, capitalist-socialist, economy, where some sectors are privately owned and operated, and some sectors are publicly owned and operated. The only entirely capitalist countries are the remaining absolute monarchies. There are no entirely socialist countries ... not Venezuela ... not Cuba ... not China ...
If everyone wanted to be entirely accurate, they'd admit there's no actual "far left" in US politics, and Bernie is a centrist, centre-left, while most Democrat politicians are right of centre, and many Republican politicians are extreme right, promoting the ideas of Ayn Rand (about as far right as you can get).
Really, the only difference between social democracy and democratic socialism is how far you want to go. Up to a certain point, they look pretty much the same. And, seeing as how they're both democratic, it's really up to the voters to decide whether to hold, or move forward. There are far more inaccurate terms being used.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@whyamimrpink78 You only listed one factor, in your defense of Florida ... older population. Now you're just moving the goalposts. You get that Alaska is largely empty, and that the vast majority of the population is actually packed into a small portion of the state, yeah? Over a third of the population lives in one city. The British Isles are islands, and dimwit Boris had a crappy initial COVID response, until he caught it himself. Mississippi is the worst state, and comes in 37th in population density and 32nd in median age. Arkansas is the second worst, and comes in 35th and 33rd. Oklahoma is third worst, and comes in 47th and 35th. They are, however, redder than Florida.
West Virginia is tied with Vermont, for 4th oldest population. They are 29th and 31st for population density. West Virginia is the 5th worst state. Vermont is the best. WV, however, voted 68% Trump, while Vermont voted 66% Biden. Face it, dimwitted Republicans have been killing themselves.
2
-
Look at countries that are flattening their curves. They've gotten ahead of the virus by testing beyond those showing symptoms. Their total infected and confirmed infected numbers have to be close to the same, to get ahead of the spread, and largely contain it. S Korea's mortality rate is about 2%. Australia's curve appears to be flattening, and their mortality rate is about 1%. A cruise ship also provided us with a control group, almost all of who were tested in Japan. Their total and confirmed numbers are the same, and they had a mortality rate of 1.5%. The virus appears to have an actual mortality rate of about 1-2%, which is 10x deadlier than the flu. Factors, such as an older population, more smokers, more diabetics, more people with heart disease or asthma, more pollution, etc., could increase that rate. Likewise, less of those things could lower that rate.
So, if 26k deaths is 1-2% of the actual total infected, then the US would actually have about 2.6-5.2m infected and, unless you speed up testing and find most of those missing hundreds of thousands of infected, quickly, they will go around spreading the virus, and those numbers will just keep increasing. Personally, I think the US is too far behind the virus, and is fucked. You should be at, at least, double the number of total tests, by now.
2
-
2
-
2
-
The single state solution would actually be easier. You'd only have to convince the Palestinians. Israel, well before Netanyahu, has shown no desire to compromise, and give back land it had stolen, to make a two state solution possible. For a single state solution, Palestinians would just simply have to surrender. Israel has indicated it wants to own the entirety of Israel/Palestine, so let them. They are now the government of Palestine, as well. Demand equal rights, a right of return for Palestinian refugees, and part of the federal budget, to raise the Palestinians' standard of living.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Evirthewarrior You seem to be doing what you accused others of ... moving the dial left, just because a government becomes more authoritarian. Even if a government forces a company to make something, but lets the company keep the profits, in what reality is that socialism? No changes in classes, and an end to the class struggle. No worker control. No wealth redistribution. You just seem to be equating "state" to "socialism", and therefore it can't possibly be authoritarian state capitalism.
Fascists were leaders in privatization ...
http://www.ub.edu/graap/bel_Italy_fascist.pdf
https://daily.jstor.org/the-roots-of-privatization/
Fascism isn't even trying to be socialism, at all, let alone some perfect version of it ...
"Fascism is therefore opposed to Socialism to which unity within the State (which amalgamates classes into a single economic and ethical reality) is unknown, and which sees in history nothing but the class struggle."
"Such a conception of life makes Fascism the resolute negation of the doctrine underlying so-called scientific and Marxian socialism, the doctrine of historic materialism which would explain the history of mankind in terms of the class struggle and by changes in the processes and instruments of production, to the exclusion of all else."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@thegheymantis8702 He convinced tens of millions of people not to believe any media, any politicians, any judges, any lawyers, any election or other governmental officials, any doctors, any nurses, any scientists ... anybody ... even not to believe their own lying eyes, if any of those contradicted him, Supreme Leader. He pulled off the most Big Brother like propaganda campaign in US history. He also convinced 28% of Republicans surveyed that he shouldn't concede to Biden, under any circumstances ... to embrace overt fascism and stay in power as an unelected ruler. And a number of those psychos actually stormed the capitol, to try and make that happen. How much more would it take for you to recognize extremism, on your own?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MrPhilsterable Yang has math problems. Not only won't a VAT tax who he claims it will tax, but his plan adjustments, since he started, seriously affect his revenue projections, which he hasn't adjusted.
He started out not having UBI stack with anything. Eliminating government services was supposed to pay for a third of his UBI. He now has it stack with SS, SSDI, and VA. All he has left to eliminate is under $400b. Nowhere close to an $800b projection.
He started out with a VAT on everything. He's now going to exempt staples. That will lose him some other needed tens of billions.
A third of the UBI didn't even start with initial funding, running a deficit of upwards of $800b a year, until the economy expanded enough. With his plan adjustments, it will be more like half that doesn't have initial funding, and start with a deficit of $1.2+ trillion a year. That's well over his expanded economy projection, and doesn't even account for whether the UBI is supposed to keep up with inflation, or not, or increase if there any major unemployment issues.
2
-
@thenumbersss Bernie's proposals are what a number of other developed countries do, before they tax consumers with a VAT. Scandinavian countries have high unionization rates. Norway nationalized oil resources. Sweden has corporations pay in for retraining. Denmark has double the percentage of government workers. Numerous countries have over double the US's minimum wage. More paid vacations. More paid parental leave. Etc. Etc. That's how you make businesses pay in. Then you put a consumption tax on better paid, higher living standard, consumers. Yang is clueless, and has a very superficial plan, that won't actually make corporations pay in.
Yang doesn't have UBI stack with SSI disability, or SNAP. SSI can stack with SNAP. A disabled person on full benefits, plus kids, could be getting over $1000 a month. SNAP, alone, has a cost of living adjustment. A single parent of 3, in Alaska, could be getting over $1000 a month. Whatever the exact number, you're good with making some very poor people worse off, while handing people getting by just fine a monthly spa fund, a sportscar, or something?
Yang could run as a Republican, because his plan will benefit couples, even those without kids, more than single parents, because he doesn't adjust for kids; his plan will benefit less urban, lower cost of living, areas more than urban areas, because he doesn't have an adjustment for cost of living; likewise for states with lower state taxes that do as little as possible for their citizens; a VAT doesn't actually make corporations pay anything they don't want; ...
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Nalgitas86 Adding yes votes to congress is exactly what's necessary. It's the only possible way to ever pass a bill. If you, or Jimmy, has an extra 100 pro-M4A candidates in your back pocket, why didn't either of you pull them out for the election that just happened? There was already a list of names that hadn't signed onto M4A, that needed replacing.
You know corporate Dems don't have to fold to the threat, and can just let progressives paralyze the house, and then blame them for no new covid relief, no new unemployment extensions, no new vaccine funding, etc., during a pandemic, right? And you're already going to get a new list of people that won't sign onto M4A when the bill is reintroduced in the new session.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jojomany5792 You shut up.
The Anuna, the seven judges, rendered their decision against her. They looked at her -- it was the look of death. They spoke to her -- it was the speech of anger. They shouted at her -- it was the shout of heavy guilt. The afflicted woman was turned into a corpse. And the corpse was hung on a hook.
After three days and three nights had passed, her minister Nincubura (2 mss. add 2 lines: , her minister who speaks fair words, her escort who speaks trustworthy words,) carried out the instructions of her mistress (1 ms. has instead 2 lines: did not forget her orders, she did not neglect her instructions).
...
"They will offer you a riverful of water -- don't accept it. They will offer you a field with its grain -- don't accept it. But say to her: "Give us the corpse hanging on the hook." (She will answer:) "That is the corpse of your queen." Say to her: "Whether it is that of our king, whether it is that of our queen, give it to us." She will give you the corpse hanging on the hook. One of you sprinkle on it the life-giving plant and the other the life-giving water. Thus let Inana arise."
The gala-tura and the kur-jara paid attention to the instructions of Enki. They flitted through the door like flies.
...
They were offered a river with its water -- they did not accept it. They were offered a field with its grain -- they did not accept it. They said to her: "Give us the corpse hanging on the hook." Holy Erec-ki-gala answered the gala-tura and the kur-jara: "The corpse is that of your queen." They said to her: "Whether it is that of our king or that of our queen, give it to us." They were given the corpse hanging on the hook. One of them sprinkled on it the life-giving plant and the other the life-giving water. And thus Inana arose.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@michaelgrimm2121 Policy wise, progressives haven't promoted any policies that would move the US left of Denmark, which is centrist, at most. It seems to be the right wing fascists that are using the government to ban bds, ban crt (which isn't even taught in public schools), ban abortions, ban life saving measures, make protesting harder and more dangerous, etc. They're also the ones who's leader called for overthrowing the democratic process, who's majority of lawmakers tried to overthrow the democratic process, and who brainwashed tens of millions of followers into believing a lie that led some to try and violently overthrow the democratic process. And you're whining about someone who wants you to have free dentures?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@tyronesmith3991 If your supreme leader has convinced millions of people not to believe any media (even right wing), any courts (even Republican appointed judges, even judges he appointed himself), any election officials (even Republican ones, even ones he appointed), any politicians (even Republican ones that had been kissing his ass), even your own lying eyes, if any of them contradict him, then you're in a cult. Trump pulled off the most big brother like propaganda campaign in US history.
Trying to get state politicians to find votes, trying to encourage the VP to not recognize certified election results, inciting people to try and stop the reading of the election results, is trying to completely overthrow the democratic process to keep an unelected ruler in power. That's the last box Republicans needed to check, to embrace overt fascists.
There have been no racists at events like the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville?
There have been no right wing religious extremists trying to get Christianity back in schools, fighting to keep religious monuments on government property, Blathering about a war on Christmas, arguing congresswomen need to swear on a Bible, constantly threatening abortion clinics and doctors and even committing acts of terrorism, fighting for the religious "right" to discriminate, etc.?
Q: https://www.mediamatters.org/qanon-conspiracy-theory/here-are-qanon-supporters-running-congress-2020
You're living in some alternate reality.
2
-
@kylemcdonnell86 On top of mask using countries doing better, countries with higher testing rates did better. Countries like S Korea, New Zealand, Australia, that quickly flattened their curves, quickly got their testing rates up to 50+ people per confirmed case. Some countries in Europe, and Canada, that had slower flattening, but better than the US, tested at rates of 15+ people per confirmed case. The US tested at a rate of 5 people per confirmed case for months, only recently getting that testing rate up to about 13 people per confirmed case. You just can't get ahead of the virus at 5 people per confirmed case. It's a pathetically low rate of testing.
2
-
@KB Harrison Proposing to not strip people of their right to vote in the future, is different than currently registering felons, dumb dumb. They are not doing the later. Saying so is a lie. Voting is a citizen's right, here in Canada, no matter what. What are you afraid is going to happen?
Who is now waving Confederate flags, trying to save statues of Confederate "heroes", shooting themselves in the process with their open carry guns, etc., for the most part? Who is most likely to propose laws making it legal for businesses to discriminate? Who is most likely to be against black people protesting? Who is most likely to defend violent cops? If you think it's still Democrats, and don't recognize that a switch happened, then you're a moron.
2
-
2
-
For a third party to ever become viable, you have to be willing to let Democrats, or Republicans, lose, accept the consequences, and hang tough. As a Canadian, who votes NDP, I think fearmongering people away from third parties is bullshit. A vote for someone else is NOT a vote for Trump, as numerous commenters are saying. Yes, scoring a goal for team C means you didn't score a goal for team B, but it also means you didn't score a goal for team A.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@fittzie Yes, administrative costs disappear, if a single payer system is easier to operate than a multipayer system. Pharma costs disappear, if you set a lower maximum price they're allowed to sell at. Turning non-profit makes the cost of paying for a profit disappear. Some costs will just vanish. Private insurance costs have been increasing at almost double the rate of Medicare costs. That's without Medicare even, currently, negotiating down drug prices. Private insurance is a shit show.
You're buying right wing bullshit. The US has tens of thousands dying due to lack of coverage, hundreds of thousands going bankrupt due to medical debt, over a million travelling to places like India for healthcare they can afford, and you're all worried about wait times for non life threatening procedures. The supposed tens of thousands of Canadians going to the US to avoid wait times? A myth. A few rich people might go to hurry along their hip surgery, or have some other non life threatening procedure, but the vast majority of Canadians getting healthcare in the US are elderly Snowbirds, who spend winters in Florida or Arizona. They're getting healthcare while in the US, not going to the US for healthcare. And, their Canadian coverage might still be picking up some of those bills.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@FuddlyDud 1) Corrected me about what data? I didn't post before yours. Glad we agree that we can also reduce pediatric flu deaths with covid measures. Win win.
2) Yes, what I said is actually true. I described lab results, and you didn't debunk those results. Lab results are the best for telling whether masks are effective, if used properly, because there are generally also other measures taking place out in the real world, so it's harder to dissect. People doing things wrong doesn't debunk that masks are effective. It's not an argument that masks don't work. It's an argument that some people are incompetent at mask use. If I build a car with improved safety features, proven in testing, you driving it off a 1000' cliff and obliterating the car and yourself, doesn't prove the car didn't have improved safety features. Masks are effective in reducing spread.
The US had a pathetic pandemic response, and there is a good percentage of partisan anti-maskers in almost all communities. Why would anyone really want to use real world stats from the US? Canada had a better adherence to covid rules, including mask use. Their covid deaths per capita rate would translate into 400+k fewer US covid deaths. Japan has had a heavy reliance on mask use, and their covid deaths per capita rate would translate into about 45k total US covid deaths.
France, Italy, Spain, and the UK, all didn't take the virus seriously enough, at first, much like the US, and let it get well out of control. Germany took it a little bit more seriously. Like other Western countries, none quickly resorted to mask use, and had mask shortages even for medical staff. They, instead, started resorting to quarantines and lockdowns. Germany's were more effectively implemented. It's not like Italy quickly jumped to its current rate of mask use, and it completely failed them. Italy and Spain currently have high mask rates and are currently below Germany in 7 day covid cases per capita.
How quickly countries got their testing rates (tests per confirmed case) up, also factored into isolating and quarantining carriers. The US, UK, Italy, Spain, and France had pathetic testing rates, for months, as the virus spread. The US and UK still have shitty testing rates.
Numerous Asian countries, besides Japan and China, quickly turned to masks, at a high rate of use, and have amongst the best covid outcomes in the world, even though the virus started in their region, even if they share a long border with China, like Vietnam. Before it even hit S Korea, their president was talking with corporate leaders to increase mask production. That mask use has included kids in school. Covid amongst kids in Japan actually increased 3x during their August summer break ... up from the school rate. Mississippi (pop 3m) alone had more student covid cases than all of Japan (pop 126m), in Aug. Florida (pop 21.5m) beat out Japan's entire month in just one week of Aug. It's as if Japanese kids followed the rules while in school, and those rules actually helped, and then they let loose a bit during break.
What are you even talking about with FL and CA being the same, anyway? FL has an above US average 2366 deaths per million, while CA has a below US average 1720 dpm. FL currently has a 74/100k daily cases average, while CA has a 27/100k daily cases average. Florida is the only state where more people are dying now than at any previous time during the pandemic. What are you looking at that makes you think they're close to the same?
3) What? Billions earmarked for schools have been in every covid relief bill. Florida simply didn't submit a plan, to get the funding before school started. They didn't have a back to school covid plan.
Still no clue why you're comparing CA and FL.
2
-
@FuddlyDud Was there a Part 1?
Locking down doesn't simply have to do with time, ffs. Italy didn't implement major widespread lockdowns until they hit hundreds of deaths. Germany implemented major widespread lockdowns when they hit dozens of deaths. Germany was quite clearly the more cautious of the two, and you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
Oh, give me a break. The weather quite obviously doesn't have much to do with anything, like some people made out. Didn't Trumpty Dumpty say it would magically go away when the warm weather hit? Shocker ... it didn't. Doctors and scientists still don't know if there's any actual seasonality to covid. There's no evidence what you're saying actually plays a major factor. FL is hotter than California, on average, in the summer, and currently has more cases and deaths per capita. Italy and Spain are hotter than Germany, and Germany currently has more cases and deaths per capita. Covid has clearly shown it likes all weather, and you clearly don't know what you're talking about. Less developed countries like India and Brazil, that get very hot, but have much less air conditioning, still have horrible covid rates.
The UK is clearly islands, and they clearly sucked ass. The US is clearly effectively an island, relative to China, and they clearly let the virus come in by flights, not walking across a border, and clearly let it spread like wildfire within its own borders. It was Canada and Mexico that didn't want Americans coming into their countries, for most of the pandemic. You ignored Vietnam, which clearly isn't an island, and clearly shares one of the longest boarders directly with China, and has one of the best covid outcomes. S Korea clearly isn't an island. Canada and Germany clearly aren't islands and did much better than the US. Clearly Denmark, Finland, and Norway aren't islands and clearly did much better than the US, not to mention having 5-10x fewer covid deaths per capita than their neighbor, Sweden. There are a number of Carribean countries, that are clearly islands, and clearly aren't having as good outcomes as the non island countries I mentioned that had decent to excellent outcomes. You clearly have no clue what you're talking about. You're flinging poop and hoping it sticks.
Japan is actually an outlier, amongst countries the had excellent covid outcomes, in that its testing rate is actually low. They clearly relied more heavily on mask use, and other measures, and you clearly still don't know what you're talking about. On top of that, you sound paranoid. And, the topic was mask effectiveness, not mandate effectiveness. What difference does it make if the mask use is cultural? You're the one changing your argument, dumb dumb. You're moving the goalpost. Masks proved to be effective in Japan.
The outcome for an entire country, isn't quite "anecdotal", and on par with you comparing outcomes from two different states, dimwit. You're also the one who called for real world data. Not only are you completely clueless, you're a walking contradiction, a hypocrite.
What the hell are you talking about? Florida has about half the population of California, and they did spike up to about 20k in the winter while California spiked to about 40k. Florida clearly did not have a similar spike last Aug. They had a spike in July, as did California. California is having an Aug spike now, too, but Florida's is clearly far worse, with almost 50% more cases and almost half the population.
As I clearly mentioned, there is a good sized percentage of anti-mask idiots in every US community, making the US a shitty country to use real world data from, for an example of following covid rules. Do you have reading comprehension problems, on top of your other issues? Why isn't there a much larger disparity between CA and FL? Because there is a large minority in CA that are idiots and a large minority in FL that aren't idiots.
Apparently, you literally didn't read an article saying Florida was one of 5 states that didn't submit a plan, by the deadline, that would have handed them a couple billion from the covid funds dedicated to schools.
Seriously, your just pulling crap out of your ass.
2
-
Rofl. I explained that dates don't indicate whether one was a more conservative response than the other, and you just come back and say to look at the dates again. Closing down at dozens of deaths is objectively the more conservative response than not closing down until hundreds of deaths. Italy had 366 deaths by the time of their major March 8 lockdown. Germany started various lockdowns between Mar 13-22. Germany was at 55 deaths on Mar 22. Your argument is beyond moronic.
I wasn't citing Trump as saying anything factual. I was citing him as another example of weather spewing stupidity. Just how bad are your reading comprehension problems?
I literally pointed out that Florida and California had similar spikes, relative to population. Were Floridians all huddled in their homes, due to the freezing cold Florida winter? I understood perfectly well, which is why I pointed out that it's hotter in Italy and Spain than Germany, but you wanted to reject the current trend there, because it's currently the opposite of your nonsense weather narrative. Canada had spikes in the fall and spring, as did Greece and France. Japan's last little uptick was in May, which is neither their hottest or coldest month.
You said I was wrong about the US letting the virus fly in, and countered with the fact that the US let you fly in. You're spewing gibberish, at this point. If covid was brought in by border crossers, the US spread would have looked a lot different. Japan, reported their first case within a day of the US. The US' first case was someone who flew into Washington state from Wuhan. The virus did not walk into the country. It flew in. By Mar 3, Washington state (pop 7.6m) had over twice as many deaths as Japan (pop 126m). Initial East coast clusters were traced to a Wuhan-Italy-US trip, also flying in. There's no actual evidence that the US' problem was having land borders. Yes, an ocean between China and the US, "effectively" makes it an island "relative" to China. Do you know what "effectively" and "relative" means?
Canada shares a long land border with one of the shittiest covid outcome countries in the world. Germany shares land borders with some of the shittiest covid outcomes in the EU. Vietnam shares a large land border with the virus's country of origin. Norway and Findland share borders with the shittiest Nordic country. The UK, French Polynesia, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Aruba, Sint Maarten, Bahamas, British Virgin Islands, Saint Martin, Seychelles ... all worse than Germany. Those, plus Ireland, Trinidad & Tobago, Malta, Curacao, Saint Lucia, all worse than Canada. There are about a dozen more, including Jamaica and Bahamas, that are worse than Vietnam and Norway. Plus, even Australia, Japan, and New Zealand, have worse numbers than the country of origin, China. How a country responded played a bigger factor in how good an outcome they had, than being an island had to do with anything.
Yes, I do understand that Vietnam and S Korea are actually prepared for epidemics, unlike many other countries, and have plans in place, including mass mask use.
You sound like a psycho. Vietnam's covid deaths per capita rate would translate into under 60k total US covid deaths, instead of over 690k, and you're more worried that the government might be able to track you through the covid app on your cellphone, that you're already carrying around with you but not worried they're already tracking you with it? Oh, the horror ... this app I can freely download, and can freely delete, is showing me if I've come in contact with someone who freely enters that they've tested positive. So scary. Oh no, a government computer might know whether I'm at the variety store or at the gas station, and .... what? What comes after that?
Between you spewing contradictory gibberish and other nonsense, and now paranoid conspiracy theories, and arguing freedumb over hundreds of thousands of lives, I'm done reading your crap.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@FuddlyDud I'll quite myself.
"France, Italy, Spain, and the UK, all didn't take the virus seriously enough, at first, much like the US, and let it get well out of control. Germany took it a little bit more seriously."
Those were the first two sentences of the point I was making, and you started blathering on about Italy's lockdown happening sooner, which doesn't show they were in any way whatsoever taking it more seriously than Germany. This was the point I continued trying to make, and you again kept diverting to the timeline. You have dishonestly tried to make out like Italy took the virus more seriously, when they clearly didn't.
Now you're just lying about about being dishonest. Stopped reading.
2
-
@FuddlyDud Obviously meant "quote", dumb dumb. Never had a phone change a word?
Wtf are you talking about? By that same Mar 22, the Netherlands (pop 17.3m) had 179 deaths, and Germany (pop 83m) had 55. The Netherlands did shit, at the very start, and had an early shit result because of it. Then, they did take tougher measures, closing schools, banning large gatherings, mandating distancing, non essential workers work from home, first mask mandate was for public transportation and later a broader mask mandate, plus enacted serious fines for any violations.
You're still spewing bullshit. Stopped reading.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Irishhound Are you still saying that? Buddy ... Mein Kampf is a rant against Jews (who he blames for Marxism), social democracy (which he claimed was also Marxism), democracy (which he claimed leads to Marxism), and Marxism.
He ran on National Socialism, which he defined as simply people working together for the good of the nation. If simply working together is "socialism", then almost everything humans do together is "socialism". He outright said Marxism had misused the word. He outright argued against the class struggle. He outright argued that National Socialism is on the side of private property. All his rich backers clearly understood he was running against unionism, socialism, and communism, but somehow you don't. Any pro socialism statements you think you read, wasn't any kind of left wing "socialism". It was right wing [National] "socialism". He kicked people out of the party, and killed people in the party, to prove it.
"Fascism is the complete opposite of Marxian socialism." ~ Mussolini
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Breadbored. Because your hospital's problem likely has less to do with single payer, and more to do with location. I don't know where you are to blame negotiated doctor salaries for your hospital's problems. Hundreds of doctors in Quebec thought they were being paid too much, by the same single payer system. Ours is a mixed federal/provincial system. Maybe your province isn't putting in enough, on their end.
https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebec-doctor-embarrassed-by-pay-hikes-to-colleagues
Even if doctor salaries stayed the same, in the US, single payer has much lower administration costs. It's the multiple payer system that requires more administration. And, if the US could negotiate drug costs to half, that would also lower costs for hospitals. Switching to non-profit hospitals would also lower costs. On top of the savings, you'd have tens of thousands fewer people dying due to lack of coverage, hundreds of thousands fewer people going bankrupt due to healthcare costs, and over a million people not having to travel to places like India for healthcare they can afford. It is inherently better, without even touching doctor salaries.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
@nuoiptertermer4484 I don't give a crap what he fantasized would happen. Him vastly overestimating benefits, and vastly underestimating risks, benefits the far right. He outright does go on right wing talk shows, doesn't challenge them, and agrees with right wing nonsense. Only complete idiots would be shocked, and don't know that ancappers and Libertarians will agree with the non authoritarian left on some non authoritarian issues. That doesn't make them decent allies ... which Dore did promote even before the guy came on, after spending weeks trashing other progressives over a disagreement on a single tactic ... for anything other than some single issues.
Dore has proven that he's a lazy pathetic hypocrite, that expects everything to be done for him. He trashes people who have done more for M4A in a few years than he has in his entire lifetime. He does absolutely nothing with the $15 vote, except continue bitching about those who voted for it, after spending weeks promoting the idea that just getting a vote on an important bill was a big accomplishment, that it would lead to big things, that having a list of no voters would be a big deal, ... all bullshit.
1
-
1
-
David's M4A analysis was way off, a couple days ago. He used a nonsensical extreme example of a 5b population while still having a fixed $100b in revenue to work with, arguing you'd have to give up quality. But, revenue would increase, or decrease, depending on the population size. If you're generating about $4k of revenue per capita for healthcare with a population of 5m, you'd have $20b to work with. A population of 5b would give you $20t to work with.
I'm also not sure what metric he was using for quality, because going by life expectancy, infant mortality, maternal mortality, leaving tens of thousands of people without access also leaves them without quality, and makes those overall metrics worse.
Other developed countries both pay less per capita and get better overall results.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Evirthewarrior There's already a record of people who haven't signed on to M4A. You'll get an updated record, when the bill is reintroduced next session. AOC just helped replace some corporate Dems who wouldn't. You still need to replace almost 100 politicians in the house and a couple dozen in the senate. If Jimmy has 100 new pro-M4A progressives in his back pocket, why didn't he pull them out and run them in the election that just happened? If you can't even replace all the ones already openly opposed to M4A, trying to get a few extra names of fakers isn't going to help you much. A vote guaranteed to fail won't even necessarily expose fakers. They could vote for it without worrying it will pass.
What do you mean it would already have passed the house? You're delusional. It needs almost 100 more people to sign on for it, in the house alone.
No. It's not "literally impossible" for the Republican candidate to win. It's majority of votes cast. For every 2 abstentions, absents, or unfilled seats, the threshold needed to win drops by 1. Jimmy arguing that corporate Dems would rather work with Republicans than progressives is actually an argument against his plan, not for it, since it increases the risk they'd work together against progressives.
And if they just let you keep paralyzing the government, during a pandemic, that could also look bad on progressives. No votes on a minimum wage increase. No votes on lowering the social security age. No votes on more covid relief. Etc. They'd definitely propagandize it all, to make progressives look as bad as possible.
Jimmy thought the moon would fall into Lake Michigan before Trump could fill multiple scotus seats. He's not good at risk assessment. Negatives, that he makes out to be impossible, actually aren't impossible.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Evirthewarrior You know this is all a secondary tactic disagreement, right? Getting M4A is the goal. The primary tactic of converting or replacing enough people in congress to actually pass M4A is the primary tactic, because that's the only possible way to pass a bill in congress. Whether the secondary tactic of forcing the vote would provide ammo for the primary tactic ànd speed up the process, whether it could backfire in some way and hinder the process, whether people would forget it in 2 years and it be neither good or bad, or whatever, that's the actual debate. As long as progressives are working at the primary tactic, they aren't doing nothing. It may not be fast enough for your liking, but Jimmy and posse slandering and trashing progressive politicians, over a secondary tactic disagreement, could damage even those small gains, and starting a third party likely won't even get you a seat in congress for decades, let alone M4A, and could split progressive votes enough to let Republicans and corporate Dems rule for decades. He's both impatient and willing to take the longest path to victory. He doesn't really make much sense.
1
-
1
-
@Evirthewarrior If someone just used her platform and PAC to do the very thing you need to do (add more pro-M4A votes in congress) to ever be able to pass a M4A bill, if she just fought against the very corporate Dems you want out (opposing DCCC backed corporate Dems), if she just got punished by them for doing that (threw punches and took a punch) then some cowardly armchair general calling her a "fake", "shill", and "wimp", is pure slander, and a stab in the back.
He doesn't actually give a fuck if anyone gets healthcare. He has his, and is willing to start from scratch, take a century for a third party to get a single seat, and let Republicans and corporate Dems rule, as he works on splitting the progressive vote. If anyone is a "fake" and a "shill" it's the one trashing progressives and the gains made.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Evirthewarrior Fascists are fascists before they get complete power. 28% of Republicans, and many Republican lawmakers, don't want Trump to concede under any circumstances. Whether it happened, or not, they've embraced overt fasism and the end of the democratic process. Many are leaving their already batshit crazy FOX News for even more extreme absolutely nonsensical propaganda stations. He packed in tons of conservative judges, including multiple scotus seats (When Jimmy did his risk assessment, he even agreed that would be horrible, he just thought it was as likely to happen as the moon falling into Lake Michigan. Is it horrible or not?). You lot are insane, yourself, if you think that's samesies as neolibs. And even more insane, if you think progressives are samesies as neolibs.
We might not be talking about M4A, if it weren't for Bernie. Him recognizing that Republicans are even worse, and opposing them, just means he's sane. And, AOC helping to add extra Pro-M4A votes to congress is exactly what you need to happen to ever pass it.
Many of the anti-mask protesters, etc., have been Trump cultists, encouraged by their cult leader. Why would it have been worse, without their cult leader? Why would it have been worse with a pandemic response team prepared to act? The US has had a pathetically low testing rate, one of the most important things to actually contain the virus. Why would it have been worse? N Korea's president gathered corporate leaders and told them the country would need a ton of masks, and it got done. That's leadership. It didn't take forcing them. It had nothing to do with whether federal, state, or local politicians had what powers. Trump's response has been complete incompetence. He also repeatedly threatened state and local politicians going against his bullshit, with defunding. He encouraged his cult to ignore them. Even if they have more control over some things, he fought against them.
1
-
1
-
@Evirthewarrior Fuck you're stupid. Tests per day is also a number totally disconnected from your covid numbers.
If country A sits back and only tests people with symptoms who come in to get tested, then they won't catch the completely asymptomatic carriers, or those who will develop symptoms but haven't developed them yet. Those people will infect more and more people. They won't get ahead of the virus and it will keep spreading. More and more people will then get covid and more and more symptomatic people will come in for tests. The country will end up doing a ton of tests, but still never get ahead of the virus.
If country B actively tests 100 people that possibly came into contact with someone who had a positive result, they'll catch completely asymptomatic carriers and people who haven't developed symptoms yet, and can have them quarantine themselves, getting ahead of the virus and keeping more infected people away from others. This country will get ahead of the virus, flatten its curve, and might not have to do as many total tests, tests per million, or tests per day, exactly because their better testing rate helped reduce the numbers of infected.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hajkie No. He called out the bombing of a refugee camp. He seemed fine with everything else. His starting point was that Hamas was the aggressor. He didn't want to hear any context. He threw people providing context under the bus, and in the same box with people openly cheering the Hamas attack. Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Total tests, or tests per million, are totally irrelevant numbers that are completely disconnected from the number of confirmed cases. For trace testing rates, you want tests per confirmed case. Countries like S Korea, New Zealand, and Australia, that flattened their curves quickly, tested 50+ people per confirmed case. Countries like Germany, or Canada, that took a few months to flatten their curves, have been testing in the 15-20 people per confirmed case range. The US was testing at around 5 people per confirmed case, for months. They've had a pathetic rate of testing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@frankie4827 Hey MAGA moron, "Trump's" big stock market gains occurred during his first year, while Obama's last budget was still in effect. The stock market basically flatlined, at the start of 2018, when Trump's first budget, and his tax breaks for corporations and the rich, kicked in. Even with all the stock buybacks, falsely inflating stock values, that corporations spent their tax breaks on, the stock market barely held its head above water.
There has been no major change in border policy, and no open borders. Your type keeps whining about drugs, when it has been well documented, for decades, that drugs mainly come across at legit border crossings. Drug dealers don't want their drugs washed down the river, or stuck in holding, dumb dumb. Plus, Trump had more border crossings, averaged out per year, than Obama. He wasn't better at it than the guy before him.
Gas prices started jumping under Bush. People don't seem to know that US oil companies have long complained that OPEC kept oil prices too low. Oil costs more to produce, in North America, so there's less of a profit margin. As soon as the US got a foot in OPEC, by invading Iraq, prices started jumping, handing US oil companies the larger profit margins they wanted, from NA oil. Prices spiked to $4.40 (adjusted to 2023 dollars). By the end of Obama's presidency, prices had dropped to $2.59 (2023 dollars). The price went back up to around $3 (2023), under Trump, and only dropped in 2020 (globally) due to COVID, not due to anything Dumpty did.
There is global inflation, due to rebounding from COVID, not due to anything Biden did. The US is actually doing better than many other countries.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JohnJ469 You are a complete and utter moron.
There are 2 axes, economic and authoritarian, so the terms I used were just fine. To make out like a 100% privately owned and operated absolute monarchy (100% totalitarian capitalism) is samesies to a society with all worker owned industries and a direct democracy (100% anarcho-socialism), simply because the latter is a kind of "socialism" is absolutely nonsensical. You'd have to be dumber than a stump, to believe that. One person owning everything is the complete opposite of everything being publicly owned. One person being the ultimate authority is the complete opposite of authority being in the hands of everyone.
Both Italy's and Germany's pre-war (all nations' war economies are more controlled) economies favoured privatization. They were leaders in it, at the time. Again, people just doing stuff together, as a group, isn't f*cking socialism. People could be trying to defeat socialism, as a group, and that's exactly what fascists tried to do. Nazis were literally arresting people for "illegal socialist activity", not "illegal international activity". Hitler literally killed off the left leaning members of his party on the Night of the Long Knives. He made a secret pamphlet, for his industrialist backers, telling them there would be no serious attempt to redistribute wealth. He handed his crony backers slave labour. He handed his crony backers Jewish businesses and property. He handed his crony backers seized businesses and property, after conquests. They got rich off of him. That's why they also stood trial, after the war, because they weren't doing it at gunpoint. To think that the monarch of Spain (who had enough military available to squash the fascists, but instead decided to back them, exactly because they had been fighting socialism), and other nobility, representing the epitome of private ownership, were socialists, is truly f*cking bizarre.
Plenty of governments got bossy during wartime, dictating what needed to be produced, dictating what couldn't be hoarded, dictating lights out, etc., etc., etc. ... that doesn't equate to socialism either. Every country in WWII didn't suddenly become magically "socialist", just more authoritarian.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@purplemonkeydishwasher9818 Rofl. You are, seriously, dumb. You're looking at how he legislates and responds to problems?
How did calling in the national guard work in the 60s? It didn't. Things kept escalating, until there was actual policy changes. What policy changes are Trump and other Republicans putting forth to deal with heavy handed policing? You know, other than him fondly recollecting the good ol' days, when you could beat up protesters?
He's the most inept leader, in his covid response, in the developed world. How are you good with him being responsible for tens of thousands of Americans dying? He's responsible for the need for continued lockdowns, unemployment, etc., by not flattening the curve quickly.
Even using his dumbass stock market meassure of the economy, almost the entire first year of his presidency, when the stock market made its biggest gains, was through Obama's last budget. Since Trump's first budget, his tax breaks kicking in, and the start of his trade wars, the stock market has almost flatlined.
1
-
1
-
@purplemonkeydishwasher9818 Anyone who thinks Trump is competent has zero ability to accurately gauge whether someone is a clown, or not. You simply deflected on any police policy, and covid. Cuomo ... blah blah blah ... is also incompetent. Doesn't change the fact that Trump is incompetent, and you're a moron who thinks the opposite. All you're doing is arguing that Trump is completely full of shit, when he makes all his claims about all the supposed great things he's been doing, at a national level.
You're clearly the uninformed idiot. People connected to BLM have been putting out well thought out, and researched, demands, for years ...
https://www.joincampaignzero.org/#vision
... and after years of being ignored, and decades of ever increasing police funding obviously not going into better and better training, gets you people being fed up and just wanting them defunded, dumb dumb.
1
-
1
-
@purplemonkeydishwasher9818 You lot can't have it both ways. Either Trump has been completely bullshitting everyone, with his claims of getting and distributing supplies, bullshitting that he has the power to simply executive order that businesses be required to cover pre-existing conditions (which would mean he has the power to executive order businesses to do all kinds of things, like mass producing masks), etc., or he does have the power, and hasn't used it effectively, making him incompetent. Why vote for bullshit or incompetence, on top of the recent racism? Plus, you morons seem to think everything needs to be done by force. S Korea gathered business leaders, used coherent words to describe the coming threat, and what they thought needed to be done, and the business leaders jumped on board. Mr deal maker can't seem to make any actual deals, if his life depended on it. You're the one in the bubble of lies, dumbass.
1
-
1
-
Right wing conservative religious types have been cancelling things, or trying to cancel things, for centuries ... women's rights, women's ankles, women's knees, women's thighs, women's nipples, women's degrees, minority rights, minorities immigration, minorities in white only spaces, mixed marriages, black human status, natives, PDA, naughty words, sex, LGBT rights, tons of books, rock and roll, Elvis's pelvis, other religions, other denominations of the same religion, socialists, unions, civil rights protesters, anti war protesters ...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ArchAingeal Rofl. You're bad at editing, then, dumbass, because there's no longer a reply of yours here that starts "god what a nonsense reply", no longer a reply between my two definitions, no longer a reply to jump to from the partial notification. That's all that is left, a partial notification.
Oxford: The presence of, or support for the presence of, several distinct cultural or ethnic groups within a society.
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/multiculturalism
Stanford: "Yet multicultural claims include a wide range of claims involving religion, language, ethnicity, nationality, and race. Culture is a contested, open-ended concept, and all of these categories have been subsumed by or equated with the concept of culture."
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/multiculturalism/
Canadian Multiculturalism Act: recognize and promote the understanding that multiculturalism reflects the cultural and racial diversity of Canadian society and acknowledges the freedom of all members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage;
BC Multiculturalism Act: to recognize that the diversity of British Columbians as regards race, cultural heritage, religion, ethnicity, ancestry and place of origin is a fundamental characteristic of the society of British Columbia that enriches the lives of all British Columbians;
http://www.immigrantwelcome.ca/resources/42-canadian-multiculturalism-act.
I think you're just not recognizing that a "culture" is attached to some group of people, and those people could be grouped a variety of different ways, including by ethnicity. Can't all the words, you're moronicaly nitpicking about, also be used in a cultural sense? Scottish culture? English culture? Pakistani culture? Native American culture?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@neutrino78x I do not believe, for a second, that you have a high IQ, because all the evidence you're providing points towards you being a complete and utter moron. People were spread all over the world, well before a civilization developed in Mesopotamia. Pretty much every human civilization did not descend from it. Many pre civilization migrations not only didn't require pausing in Mesopotamia, they didn't even require stepping foot in Mesopotamia.
Migration to Southern Asia, via the Southern route out of Africa, not only didn't require stopping in the Mediterranean, to count as "descending" from it, it didn't even require passing through it. There goes half of the global population, and the civilizations they created.
Egypt clearly doesn't require leaving Africa. Neither does North Africa.
People leaving Africa do not have to travel to Mesopotamia, to go back to Canaan. It's the first habitable place, leaving Africa along the coast. You just leave and stop.
You do not need to wander over to Mesopotamia, to get to Turkey, where the Hittite civilization emerged. Just stick to the Mediterranean coast. Likewise, with getting to Europe, from Africa.
Do you also believe we all talked the same language, almost built a tower to Heaven (which would place Heaven a few hundred feet above Iraq), and were then magically teleported around the world with different languages, less than 6000 years ago?
1
-
1
-
Nah, it's more a problem with folks like Pakman, and people scared to call certain things "socialism". "Social democracy" is a decent mix of both capitalism and socialism. If you want to socialize a sector of society, say have health insurance publicly owned and operated, or education publicly owned and operated, then those sectors of society are socialistic. If you did that with all sectors, you'd have 100% socialism. If you privatized everything, have all sectors privately owned and operated, then you'd have 100% capitalism. Nobody disagrees that privatizing something isn't capitalistic. A true centrism (not US centrism which is actually right of centre) would be about 50/50 capitalism/socialism. Denmark pays like 60% taxes, has 70+% unionization, and has 30% of its workforce in the public sector. It's a pretty even mix, and ranked one of the best places in the world to live.
So, "social democracy" is more properly democratic centrism, which is both "capitalism" and "socialism". David, and others, are just being dodgy, implying it's not at all "socialism". Basically every country in the world, except for the few remaining absolute monarchies, is now running on some percentage of both capitalism and socialism. Bernie is committed to democracy, and is currently only pushing for that kind of centrism. If his actual ideal is well left of that centre, then he's a democratic socialist. If not, then maybe he should call himself a democratic centrist. Either way, he is committed to the democratic part, and will only go as far as democracy will allow.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@smartass0124 Yep, he was found out to be a Trump supporter.
Cardinal fan 'Rally Runner' wrapped up in Jan. 6 conspiracy:
The Rally Runner, whose real name we don't know, posted in December of 2020 that he was using his stimulus check to travel to Washington D.C. to support Trump and his claims that the election was stolen from him.
"It was flat out stolen and we know it," he posted in a video. "We don't have to be able to prove it."
Hard to mistake in the crowd, the Rally Runner said he was able to force his way to the front of the crowd when Trump supporters attacked the Capitol.
"I'm right of the front of it and got through those doors into the Capitol," he said in a Facebook video posted on Jan. 6. "And that's when reinforcement came, shooting rubber bullets, tear gas, and mace. My face felt like it was on fire.”
Now, nearly a year later, the cable news conspiracy is that the Rally Runner was really a sophisticated secret agent sent to set up Trump supporters by provoking violence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GD-rd6ig What a load of bullshit, "turned over Gaza". It's an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Israel controls the borders, airspace, ports, electricity, water, almost everything that goes in and out, plus Bibi even controls the flow of money from Qatar. Pulling out an illegal colony, doesn't mean it's still not occupied, dumb dumb ... which all Palestine territories are still considered to be, by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC.
1
-
@GD-rd6ig Man, you are so dishonest. Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@James-gq4tb Nope. He very clearly crapped on people who were giving context, as to what Israel was doing, prior to Oct 7, to provoke an attack, not just those vocalizing support for Hamas. Then he proceeded to go on a bit of an anti-Muslim rant, while dishonestly claiming that a colonizing ethnic cleansing nation is "progressive", ignoring that those things aren't progressive, and ignoring that Netanyahu himself propped up, and funded, Hamas, to weaken the Palestinian Authority, and avoid possible peace. A Netanyahu Israel is a supporter of Hamas, on top of everything else it does.
Then, after rejecting any explanation as to what Israel was up to, prior to the Hamas attack, he hypocritically immediately pivoted into explaining what Israel would do, in "response", and why it would be expected. He didn't want to hear about what Israel had done to make an attack by Palestinians expected, but then turned around and made like it was perfectly reasonable and expected for Israel to hit back ... but not letting anyone say they hit first.
1
-
@James-gq4tb Ze'ev Jabotinsky, The Iron Wall, 1923 ...
"There can be no voluntary agreement between ourselves and the Palestine Arabs. Not now, nor in the prospective future. I say this with such conviction, not because I want to hurt the moderate Zionists. I do not believe that they will be hurt. Except for those who were born blind, they realised long ago that it is utterly impossible to obtain the voluntary consent of the Palestine Arabs for converting "Palestine" from an Arab country into a country with a Jewish majority.
My readers have a general idea of the history of colonisation in other countries. I suggest that they consider all the precedents with which they are acquainted, and see whether there is one solitary instance of any colonisation being carried on with the consent of the native population. There is no such precedent.
The native populations, civilised or uncivilised, have always stubbornly resisted the colonists, irrespective of whether they were civilised or savage."
It is apparently very expected, and always has been expected, that the natives would "respond" badly to colonialism, and yet Israel continues to do it. Colonialists are never not the aggressors, when it comes to the native population.
If you don't want to hear about anything the colonialists did, prior to the Powhatan Confederacy's massacre of Jamestown civilians, and act like that is the first thing that happened, and then argue as if it's reasonable and expected that the colonialists would "respond ", then you're not getting an objective picture, at all. Native Americans got to the point where they wanted nothing more than to push the white man back into the sea, and it wasn't simply that he was white.
Jews lived in Muslim nations for 1300 years. Muslims took them in, gave them refuge, when Christian nations offered conversion, death, or exile. The Ottomans even okayed very early Zionism, which was closer to simply immigration. Everything changed when Zionism turned colonialist, and they started talking about carving out a colonialist nation. Muslim nations didn't just magically turn anti-Semitic, for no reason one day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@spacedoohicky How does "cancelling" have anything to do with your "main point", that I supposedly ignored, if you never mentioned it?
Sam trashes individuals, without much "critique". He broad brushes and uses strawmans to publicly shame groups of people. He publicly announced a boycotting of Salon. He has advocated discrimination against Muslims in refugee choices, profiling, has said we're at war with Islam (practiced by every Muslim on the planet), and promoted others who say we're at war with Islam and that there's no such thing as moderate Islam. More than just de-platforming "witch hunts", he has helped stoke fears, leading to actual "witch hunts", with armed people harassing Muslims going to mosques, even people shooting up mosques, or people shooting up Sikh temples because they're morons, on top of being bigots, who can't tell the difference between Muslims and Sikhs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Because nobody is challenging him on his bullshit. He promotes a VAT as a way to make corporations like Amazon "pay their fair share". A VAT is absolutely not a tax on corporations. It is a tax on consumers. The corporations would simply collect the tax and pass it along to government.
Add to that a UBI. Those who actually benefit from the UBI will spend some of that extra money on Amazon, making them even more money. That will, in turn, make Bezos more money. The more money he has, the more he'll hoard, and hoarded money isn't affected by a VAT.
As long as Yang sticks to throwing his hands in the air to fixing tax loopholes, and not presenting alternative ways to truly tax giant corporations and the super rich, they'll actually benefit from his plan.
Those who won't benefit, and will pay into the VAT the most, are the upper middle class and lower end rich who already spend a lot but don't hoard as much. The higher the percentage of their wealth someone hoards, the lower the percentage of their wealth they'll pay back into the economy and VAT.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bravesirkevin No warping. You straight up seem to be restricting my human rights. So I can't ever threaten to stop using a company's services, if I don't like the service they're providing, or the environment they're allowing for? That sounds like you're the one demanding I either stay in an abusive relationship, or just leave quietly, with no middle ground of coming to a compromise for the relationship. Either that other guy is doing something inappropriate, or he's not, right? If he is, she might agree with my argument and ditch him. If he is, but she won't ditch him, you would rather me endure the inappropriate behavior, and just whine about it, without taking an actual stance? If he isn't, she might think my argument is nuts and ditch me. Or, maybe she'd tell me to stop being paranoid, or she'll leave me. Or, would you likewise have her either endure a paranoid boyfriend, or leave quietly, with no option of compromise?
Banning the Dixie Chicks largely started at the top and went down. Right wing media corporations made a big deal about it, and the ones that also owned music stations stopped playing their music. It wasn't like they were coerced by the masses. That's back to private companies deciding for themselves. Can they, or can't they? Can they share their displeasure with the Dixie Chicks with the public?
Not being able to make demands from a service you're paying for, or a service that's making money off you, sounds nonsensical. If an apocalypse preacher is shouting at people in a restaurant, does everyone simply have to endure it? You can't tell staff to make the preacher stop, or you'll take your business elsewhere?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bravesirkevin Holy fuck, you're all over the place. Your original "analogy" didn't include any possible valid reason. I give an example, adding a possible valid reason. You didn't like me adding a possibly valid reason, and again made a zero valid reason "analogy". Then, I address that, and you say I'm going to extremes. Now, you say there could be many reasons. Right, and can any of those reasons be valid? Bad influence? If her friend is a junky or alcoholic, and is leading her down the same path, is having an intervention, and giving an ultimatum, "abuse"? If my kid falls in with the wrong croud, and they talk the kid into stealing something, is it "abuse" to say they can't hang around with that crowd anymore? That sounds like absolute nonsense. Your "analogy" only seems to work if the reasoning is based on absolutely nothing. But, again, when I point out that's not analogous to anything, you think I'm the one who's extreme.
Plenty of people think Israel is doing no wrong. So it's okay to boycott, if you think they're doing wrong, or not?
As someone else mentioned, you seem to be the one arguing against freedom of association, by not allowing people to say they don't want to associate with certain people.
Why would the preacher be "not allowed" to preach in a restaurant? Are you saying businesses can set rules for behavior on their private property, and fully have the right to kick people out who violate those rules? And it doesn't count as abuse? What if they don't have a rule, yet, for a certain behavior? Is it "abuse" to ask management for a new rule, that gets someone kicked out?
Who is doing anything analogous to going into a church and demanding a preacher stop preaching?
1
-
@bravesirkevin I figured it out? So, you agree you could be violating the boyfriend's rights, by making a blanket "abuse" claim. And, there you go again. One second saying there could be valid reasons (if you agree with the reasons) and the next second making a blanket statement about "cancel culture".
I'm pretty sure you're way wrong about the "always". You've already agreed that cancelling people for incitement is valid, and things like racism, bigotry, sexism, that themselves try to diminish others rights, etc. Are you saying none of that kind of cancelling is happening, or are you saying it doesn't count as "cancel culture", like right wingers claim it does?
Plus, conservative types have been cancelling things they find offensive, for centuries. Sometimes opinions, but definitely not "always" opinions. For example, swearing and nudity aren't opinions. They're simply things they don't want to hear or see, on certain media, or at specific times of day. Burning, or trying to ban, Harry Potter books wasn't because religious nuts disagreed with the opinions in Harry Potter. It's because they think magic = evil. Does centuries of that kind of cancelling not count as "cancel culture"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Halon's Razor Pipelines don't generally own all the land they're built on. So, yeah, you kind of need the property owner's permission, which is the public's property, if it's on government land.
Sure, just register your business as a private Christian cake club, or a religious organization. "Public accomodations" were designated so people couldn't go without food, shelter, water, etc. If you can't survive without FB, or Twitter, then you have an addiction problem. They are private clubs, albeit very large ones, with rules for membership.
1
-
@bravesirkevin I actually gave the two options of either the boyfriend is justified, or he's not. Now you're just boldface lying. You were the one portraying it as only one possible option, that he wasn't. Then you agreed he could possibly have valid reasons. My counter examples made you contradict your bullshit blanket statements. It's called reducto absurdum, and is a method for showing fallacies, which your statements have been riddled with. Even now, you're making the ridiculous statement that the "abuser" could be justified, but still use "mistreat". That's like saying killing someone in self defense is justified but still call it "murder". It's nonsensical, contradictory, gibberish.
I gave an example of a white nationalist posting something, and you agreed it would be okay to cancel them. I take it you've also never heard of the intolerance paradox, where you can't tolerate intolerance, if you want a tolerant society. Yes, I'm totally "bigoted" against bigotry, racism, and sexism. Who is cancelling Republicans, just for being Republican, or Christians, just for being Christian?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Halon's Razor It's a long pipeline, going over various lands, ffs. Some is disputed native land, or very near native land and the natives don't think their well being or cultural landmarks were considered. Much was private property, taken through eminent domain. All of the land, the federal government has treated as their own. You don't like eminent domain. Okay, and do you like Trump reversing Obama's Keystone decision, just 2 years later? You can renegotiate in favor of the pipeline, in just 2 years, but not against in 4?
A cake shop is a kind of bakery, ffs. Laws don't tend to list all the possible sub categories. If you want to restrict your customers, have memberships. Even private clubs that open part of the club to the general public on some days, can get themselves considered "public accomodations". Don't do that.
1
-
@Halon's Razor So, eminent domain land grabs were bad, okaying the deal was bad, but reverting back is also bad. So, if something is bad, or goes wrong, you don't allow for fixing it, because ... deal. Like, keep spending billions on faulty jets, because ... deal? Keep selling Saudi weapons, because ... deal? Don't renegotiate drug prices, because ... deal? Don't renegotiate international trade agreements, because ... deal?
The supreme court, after Republicans blocked one appointment for almost a year, and then put in 2 new conservative judges, for one. For another, they didn't outright rule that the shop had the right to discriminate. They ruled that the state commission hadn't been neutral enough.
1
-
@Halon's Razor I only think there's, broadly, maybe 100 half decent Democrats in congress, atm. More narrowly, only a dozen, or so, decent ones. And, that's up, from previous years, and decades. So, you can shove the strawman bullshit.
Isn't it wrong to keep spending taxpayer dollars on garbage, keep giving weapons to a humanitarian crisis, keep infringing on native lands and keep battling eminent domain lawsuits (still happening), etc.?
1
-
@Halon's Razor You know, odds are, if I already don't like what the corporate Dem lawmakers are doing, I'm not going to like what any Republican lawmakers are doing, right? It's not like they're going to be left of corporate Dems on much of anything.
I'll find as much common cause with Republicans as a Libertarian would find with the CCP. They want to move things in the completely opposite direction than I'd like to see happen, for the most part. Corporate Dems, don't move any direction, much, which is somewhat better than the wrong way. Progressives want to move things in a direction I'd like to see.
Or, with all the litigation going on (multiple federal suits, and dozens of eminent domain suits), you don't consider the deal cemented in stone, like you did.
1
-
1
-
@bravesirkevin What are you even talking about? Fascists weren't censored, and rational thought didn't win out. Intolerance was tolerated and rational thought wasn't gloriously victorious. Trump just got done convincing tens of millions of people not to believe any media, any courts, any election officials, any doctors, any nurses, any scientists, any other politicians, anybody, even to not believe their own lying eyes, if any of those contradicted Supreme Leader. He pulled off the most Big Brother like propaganda campaign in US history. He even convinced 28% of Republicans (still millions of people) to embrace overt fascism, saying they didn't want him to concede under any circumstances. They were okay with openly ending the democratic process and keeping an unelected ruler in power. Do you think all horrible ideas that have taken over countries just magically popped into the minds of the masses one day, or something? I don't think you know much about history, at all.
Did women win the right to vote, simply by convincing everyone with rational argument? No. They had to protest, as well as make ultimatums, on top of rational debate. And then, after pushing the majority to their position, they forced it on the remaining irrational sexists. Did slavery end simply with rational argument? Did segregation end simply with rational argument?
Just how long do you think we "need" to debate racism, exactly? Do you not consider the subject settled? Numerous countries have hate speech laws (which are simply similar to defamation and threat laws extended to groups of people, rather than just an individual) and those countries top the US, which doesn't have hate speech laws, on multiple freedom indexes. You slipped all the way down the slope to severely intolerant regimes, regimes that actually rose up by freely spreading their intolerant ideas.
1
-
1
-
@bravesirkevin Ironic, coming from someone who apparently didn't read, or didn't grasp, what I actually said about fascism. Hell, you didn't even seem read, or grasp, a quote you posted yourself, in its entirety. You seem to think fascists magically appeared in positions of power, one day, that their intolerant ideas just magically popped into the minds of the masses. Apparently, you would have been defending their "right" to promote the idea of having a single dictator make all the wrong decisions, promote the idea of ending democracy. You'd be someone claiming that them being able to spread their anti-democratic ideas, that would end people's most important form of speech, as a good thing, right up until they did attain positions of power. And then you'd be screwed. Debating exactly what form of democracy to have is different than debating whether zero democracy is bad, right? Aren't we done with that debate? Dictatorships are bad, aren't they?
Debating solutions to rape or murder, is different than debating whether we want them happening in society, or not. What is the benefit of a Richard Spencer promoting the idea that a racist society, a single race society, would be good? To me, that's like someone promoting the idea that allowing people to rape and murder whoever they want, would be good. That person is insane, and is promoting things that would harm, and clearly violate the human rights of others. It appears, to me, to be an attempt at incitement, because if enough people bought the ideas being promoted, terrible things would happen to others. You said you were against incitement, but it seems like you would defend incitement, as it's happening.
You also don't seem to grasp a little word, like "simply". Did I say there was zero rational argument behind any of those things? No. I asked if there was "simply" rational argument, which already implies there was some. You know, "simply", as in only, or just. And, I didn't even state exactly how complex I imagined anything to be.
Saudi isn't even 100 years old. 19th century European women, travelling in the previous Ottoman Empire, thought women in the Empire had more freedoms than them. That same Empire had decriminalized homosexuality, while countries in Europe, and states in the US, were still considering it illegal, or a mental health issue, and locking people up. The freedom loving Brits were the ones who instead handed land to a theocratic monarchy, and the freedom loving US is the country who has rewarded that theocratic monarchy's behaviour the most. Both of those freedom loving countries have also overthrown democratically elected non religious fanatics, in the ME, just because their economics leaned a bit to the left. And, they've outright backed religious fanatics, as well. American colonies still had Puritans, 100 years in, who didn't allow women to do much. And, are you now promoting Britain using ultimatums, in business dealings, to cancel other countries' ideas of how to do things, as a good thing? That wasn't abusive boyfriend behaviour?
You, basically, just argued that it's perfectly fine for the Dr Seuss folks to decide that racist images aren't really family friendly, or social media platforms to decide their TOS to appeal to whatever audience they want to attract. It's perfectly fine if a business guesses what its consumers want. Totally abuse if consumers tell a business what they want.
I don't watch CNN, or FOX. So, my solution is to watch neither, rather than both. Seriously? You think it's possible that local Republican election officials, state level Republican officials, conservative judges (some even appointed by Trump himself), federal Republican election security officials, and even some right wing media, joined up to cover up widespread election fraud? You think it's possible that politicians worldwide, media worldwide, doctors worldwide, nurses worldwide, scientists worldwide, are perpetrating a covid hoax? Do you also think it's possible that the Democrat party are a bunch of devil worshippers that eat babies, or whatever?
1
-
@bravesirkevin Fascism: Extreme anti-socialism, it's the number one thing Mussolini stated fascism was opposed to. Anti union, they destroyed unions and outlawed striking. Ultra nationalism, everyone work together to make the nation great, with an idea of what makes for an ideal nationalist, and those further from the ideal being considered un-. Authoritarian, building up policing, surveillance, and the military. They were backed by leading industrialists, large land owners, religious leaders, and even monarchists and nobility ... the rich and powerful. Propagandists, that created cults with cult leaders. And, anti democratic. The US already had a problematic democracy, with gerrymandering, voter suppression, the bullshit electoral college, the senate being able to block bills from the far more representative house. Overtly overthrowing the democratic process is really only the last nail in the coffin that Republicans need to hammer in, to go all out fascist. Even a bunch of corporate Dems only need to hammer in a few more nails, and are borderline.
You know fascists were, and are, fascists before attaining complete control, right? Trump, and many Republican lawmakers proved themselves to be overt fascists, ready to hammer in that last nail. Over 70% of Republicans were going along with all that bullshit. And 28% of Republicans surveyed didn't want Trump to concede, under any circumstances. The Jan 6 storming of the capitol was closer to being a coup than Hitler's Beer Hall Putsch, and had more people participating. I'm pretty sure it's you that doesn't know what fascism actually is. "Fascism is the complete opposite of Marxian socialism", Mussolini. The Marxist ideal is a stateless non-authoritarian democratic socialism. The complete opposite is an ultra-nationalistic authoritarian crony capitalist dictatorship.
By implying I want one party, because I don't think racism, sexism, and bigotry, need a platform, like you do, means you're arguing that the Republican party is all about racism, sexism, and bigotry, or that they somehow couldn't be a party without those "ideas". Well done. You're making that party sound great. In reality, I'd actually like to see no parties. Vote for individuals and their stated policy positions. Politics as a team sport is stupid and lazy.
Mail in voting was up all over the country. I'm quite sure that, if you looked at the other states (that Trump didn't challenge), you'd find a similar breakdown, that more voters voting for the candidate who encouraged voting by mail, voted by mail, and more voters voting for the candidate who encouraged voting in person, voted in person. The only difference between the states that were challenged, and the rest of the country, was that their Republican state legislators didn't update their election system, to start counting mail in ballots early. So, unlike the rest of the states, you got to witness the day of voting count, and then the mail in voting count being added after. Trump used the imagery of that process as propaganda. With zero evidence, from his election night podium, he started spewing his voter fraud crap. He was perfectly fine with just beforehand saying he won states the AP had called for him, the night of. His daughter even congratulated him when the AP called Alaska for him, days after he had started spewing his voter fraud and anti AP bullshit.
You know even after winning in 2016, he was also baselessly declaring widespread voter fraud, claiming that's why he didn't win the popular vote, right? He even set up an election integrity commission. It was finding nothing of the sort, so he quietly ended it. Trump just throws shit and hopes it sticks. This time it has gotten his friends, that threw shit with him, hit with billion dollar defamation lawsuits. I guess they'll get their day in court, like they wanted, lol.
Do you think it's just a coincidence, that countries that rolled out testing quicker and tested at higher rates, rolled out masks quicker and had higher mask use, created apps for covid tracking, etc., faired better than countries that didn't do those things, only did some, and did what they did slower? The US and UK were testing at a rate of 5 people per confirmed case, for example, while Vietnam (shares a long border with China) and S Korea were testing 50+ people per confirmed case. Do you think it's just a coincidence that Sweden, for example, is in the top 25 for covid deaths per million, with a covid death rate 5-10x higher than its neighbouring Nordic countries? Quarantines have been a pretty standard response to epidemics, for centuries now. Doctors and nurses wearing even cloth masks, way before the newer disposable masks, was pretty standard stuff. You're worried governments want to keep powers, that they've actually always had, to make people stay indoors, generate less revenue, and have to pay out more in assistance? Why would they want that? To what ends? It makes zero sense. Do they all have shares in UberEats, or something? Remember when the British government wanted to keep on telling people to turn off their lights, to ration food, to enter shelters whenever they said, etc., after years of war? Me either. And, I'm quite sure, now, that you're the one that doesn't know what fascism is.
Btw, I didn't say I was American. I'm Canadian. I also don't have a horse in the race. You, and the other guy, created a horse for me from pure imagination. US Corporate Dems, and maybe a very few less extreme Republicans, are almost like Canadian Conservatives (right). I wouldn't ever vote for, or show support for, them because I like their policies. It would only ever be to oppose something worse. I don't even tend to vote Liberal (centre-right, kind of like the broader US progressive caucus maybe), and only did once, to get rid of Harper. I tend to vote NDP (more centrist, like the Justice Dem style progressives and Bernie). To me, most US Republicans (far right) are batshit crazy. We had our Conservative party split, before, and some created an even further right party. It failed. Only 14% of Canadians surveyed said they'd vote Trump. That almost half of Americans voted for him is insane. We also have hate speech laws, haven't hit your slippery slope, and are still ranked higher than the US on freedom indexes. We had a not horrible, but still only mediocre, covid response. If the US had a similar, just mediocre response, they could have had 300k fewer covid deaths. The US response was horrible. Massive incompetence, at multiple levels. I was telling Cuomo lovers that he was as incompetent as Trump, from the start. We also put our asylum seekers up in hotels, not prisons. Plenty of Canadians stay in the US longer than they're supposed to, and don't get rounded up and tossed in those ICE prisons.
You, literally, chastised me for adding options to justify ultimatums. Then, still used the words "abuse" and "mistreat", to describe justified ultimatums. Now you're justifying ultimatums, and more. You also, still seem to have zero clue what I asked, about women's suffrage, slavery, and forced segregation. You can blather on about rational arguments and "negotiations" all you want. Again, I never said that didn't happen, and outright implied it did. It still won't change the fact that that's not all it took. Slavery not standing up to old English law, the authority, in mainland England, is that authority forcing its will on those who wanted slaves. Declaring people pirates and chasing them down was force. Making trade ultimatums was force. The US having to go to war was force. Not having the option to not sell your slaves to be freed, and keep them, was force. The authority, backed by the will of the majority, forced that will on the irrational holdouts, that couldn't simply be reasoned with. Almost everything you've described was force.
There are Scottish clubs, Irish clubs, Italian clubs, Greek clubs, Catholic schools, Muslim schools, Jewish schools, schools for people of various European descent, boys' clubs, girls' clubs, women's clubs, men's clubs, women's gyms, men's gyms, women's sports, men's sports, etc., etc., etc. What kind of segregation are you worried about, exactly, that's even remotely equivalent to Jim Crow style segregation?
A busiiness guessing that doing X will lose them consumers, or doing Y will gain them consumers, or doing A would be good for public relations, or doing B wouldn't be good for public relations ... decisions businesses have been making for centuries ... are now "abuse", if they feel any kind of pressure (they always have, and always will, feel the pressure of possibly doing something that tanks business), or if their customer base or the public just comes out and tells them so they don't have to guess. But multiple ways of forcing the idea that black people aren't animals, the idea that they shouldn't be property, on people in your country, people in your colonies, and even people outside your country or empire ... all good. So, the finding that FB was giving right wing media, like Shapiro, more algorithm weight was them supporting Democrats? Odd support.
1
-
@bravesirkevin @bravesirkevin Holy crap, you are completely clueless. What I said was that fascism is the opposite of the Marxist ideal, which can also be called anarchism, or libertarian socialism. An authoritarian form of crony capitalism vs a non authoritarian democratic socialism. Socialism is abroad category, like capitalism, not a narrow position, like fascism. 100% privately owned and operated on one end and 100% publicly owned and operated on the other end, with various degrees of mixed economies in between ... not counting the military, justice system, and basic government, which even Ayn Rand fans, US Libertarians, and the like, argue are needed for a functioning full blown capitalist society. Don't even have those and you get ancap on one side and anarchism, ansoc, on the other. Have those, and go super authoritarian, and you've got fascism on one side and capital C Communist countries on the other. You're a complete joke. There were a number of socialist enclaves in Italy. They weren't created by the federal government. Mussolini and his fascists went after them even before gaining power. It's one of the reasons the King handed Mussolini power, to quash rising socialism ... from the bottom. Anarchists in Spain set up communities, as well, from the bottom. They didn't always get along with the more authoritarian Soviet style communists, but they sided with them against Franco and his fascists. Much like Libertarians and ancappers side with Republicans, when it comes to certain things. Saying socialism is opposed to liberty, when it comes in a libertarian flavour, is completely idiotic.
Rofl! What a load of crap. If something lasts (for how long exactly?), then there was no force involved? There was zero force involved in the American Revolution? Zero force involved in taking the land from natives? Zero force involved in CCP takeover of China? Zero force involved in defeating fascists? Zero force in colonizing Australia with criminals? Zero force in adding Scotland and Wales to England, to become the UK? Northern Ireland? Zero force in adding Quebec to Canada? Seriously, history is jammed packed with successful uses of force, and people then accepting the results. That's pretty much the basis for how peace treaties work, after force is used. To pretend like the law isn't force is just as nonsensical. Laws are "enforced" by police "forces". If the law says you can't have a slave, but you really like the idea of having a slave, then you'll most likely get your ass tossed in jail, if you try for it. Did the South leave the union over slavery, enshrining slavery in their new constitution? After winning, did the North let them keep their slaves, if they wanted, or were they forced to give them up? You've gone from contradicting yourself to babbling complete and utter nonsense.
Yeah, all the Chinatowns, in various North American cities, have been nothing but trouble. Sounds like a warzone every Chinese New Year. And the Scottish pipe bands are a bunch of hooligans. Please don't tell me you want everyone to be of one culture. You just don't want them gathering together, in the same spot, or what? You didn't use the right winger words, but you implied their "reverse racism" is going on. Where at?
You've already argued that it wasn't "abuse", for say abolitionists to pressure and convince enough lawmakers to abolish slavery, and then enforce it on the rest of society. Yet, you're still going on as if someone pressuring a company is "abuse". Hell, you've just justified a whole ton of crap, with your acceptance = no force argument.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@garyelder4610 You MAGA morons wanted someone to run the country like he does his businesses. He did. He has been committing fraud since he was in diapers.
"March 06, 2015
WASHINGTON, DC – The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) today imposed a $10 million civil money penalty against Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort (Trump Taj Mahal), for willful and repeated violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). In addition to the civil money penalty, the casino is required to conduct periodic external audits to examine its anti-money laundering (AML) BSA compliance program and provide those audit reports to FinCEN and the casino’s Board of Directors.
Trump Taj Mahal, a casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey, admitted to several willful BSA violations, including violations of AML program requirements, reporting obligations, and recordkeeping requirements. Trump Taj Mahal has a long history of prior, repeated BSA violations cited by examiners dating back to 2003. Additionally, in 1998, FinCEN assessed a $477,700 civil money penalty against Trump Taj Mahal for currency transaction reporting violations."
"1991
The Trump Castle Casino Resort, admitting that a $3.5-million loan from Donald J. Trump’s father violated state gaming laws, has agreed to a $30,000 penalty, officials said Tuesday."
"But The Times’s investigation, based on a vast trove of confidential tax returns and financial records, reveals that Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire, starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day.
Much of this money came to Mr. Trump because he helped his parents dodge taxes. He and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise millions of dollars in gifts from their parents, records and interviews show. Records indicate that Mr. Trump helped his father take improper tax deductions worth millions more. He also helped formulate a strategy to undervalue his parents’ real estate holdings by hundreds of millions of dollars on tax returns, sharply reducing the tax bill when those properties were transferred to him and his siblings."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@imlikewhat860 Adding hurdles, that affect minorities more, is racist. Whether the hurdles are surmountable, or not, is irrelevant. If you want to add classist hurdles, without them being racist, then balance the poverty rates. They'll still be classist, though. Poorer urban people are less likely to own vehicles and more reliant on public transportation, so less likely to have a driver's license. They are also less able to afford taking a day off work. You're now adding hurdles to them voting, that weren't there before, in terms of ID. Making certain communities wait in line, and not other communities, is likewise racist, and classist. That it's possible to endure and get through is completely irrelevant to the point.
There are numerous ethnicity/nationality based clubs. There are numerous ethnicity/nationality based competitions and awards. There are numerous ethnicity/nationality based neighborhoods, or "towns". I don't think you quite have a grasp on exactly what racism is. A Scottish pipe band celebrating its Scottishness isn't racist.
1
-
@imlikewhat860 It's not the you need a license. It's that they don't already have a useable ID on hand. They're made to go out and get an extra ID, to vote. If you don't think taking a day off work is an issue, then you have zero clue what it's like to be poor.
The poverty rate for black Americans went from near 60% down to 30% after the Civil Rights Act and the migration North. It was a North South divide, back then, not a Dem Rep divide. You're living in some delusion, where the parties are exactly the same as 150 years ago.
I don't think you know how racists work. A racist has an ideal in mind, with characteristics. They can add religion to it, nationality to it, ethnicity to it ... whatever they want. Nazis managed to be racist towards Jews, Poles, Romani, etc., all of which were white. The KKK managed to also hate Jews and Catholics, because they added the Protestant characteristic to being the ideal white person.
I also don't think you grasp that the vast majority of black Americans are descended from slaves. They were ripped away from their nations, ethnic groups, cultures, heritage, ancestry, and all thrown together into a singular slave culture. Africa is a massive continent, with dozens of countries and hundreds of different ethnic/cultural groupings. Black Americans don't tend to know which one they came from, and have developed their own cultural grouping. Black American is not simply a race. Much like descendants of black slaves in Jamaica, Haiti, etc., developed new cultures, in those countries. The only difference being they are the majority there.
1
-
@imlikewhat860 No, you're arguing for the "magical" opposite. The geography is still similar. You're arguing that states where the majority fought and died to keep slavery going, where the KKK thrived, where the majority supported Jim Crow laws, which now tend to vote red, have magically become majority non racist, magically become the least racist. And, that the states which fought and voted against those things, where black Americans of the great migration migrated to, which now tend to vote blue, the party black Americans migrated to, have magically became majority racist, magically become the most racist.
The parties weren't unified and partisan, 60 years ago. Again, geography was a bigger factor than party. Why are you pretending like a Democratic president didn't push for the Civil Rights Act? Why are you pretending like the majority of Democratic representatives didn't vote for the Civil Rights Act?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Likud was created by Zionist terrorist, Menachem Begin, who bombed Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism), and bombed the King David Hotel. The other founder was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, who massacred Palestinian villages. Their initial platform stated that their goal was for Israel to rule from the sea to the Jordan (reverse of, from the river to the sea). Netanyahu has proven that that still seems to be the goal, with the endless colonization of the West Bank. Netanyahu also promoted, and helped fund, Hamas, to weaken the Palestinian Authority and avoid possible peace, so he could continue his colonization projects. The end of violence would mean that Israel might have to pull back, plus allow the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Peace is against Likud's interests.
So, why not the exact same demand that Likud be removed?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JohnSmith-xq6cv Fuck, moron. "Han Chinese" isn't a fucking colour. The proper comparison would be with Americans who are mostly of English descent, not "white". The Chinese are different from the Japanese, and the English are different from the Dutch.
British Americans did not have the same experience as Irish Americans, who did not have the same experience as Italian Americans, who did not have the same experience as German Americans, who did not have the same experience as Spanish Americans, etc. Hell, you racist morons don't even consider people of Spanish decent "white" anymore. There has never been a unified "white American" culture. You're spouting bullshit.
The only unifying aspects are agreeing to a democratic system, and gradually coming around to freedom from and freedom for religion, and everyone being equal under the law. White nationalists don't believe in any of that shit.
Detail this supposed singular "white American" culture. Who best represents it, Californians or Texans?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Cristian-g9v6x Not sure if he has actually said that, more recently, but back in 2016, he promoted letting Trump win. He argued it would lead to a massive progressive wave, that would take over the house (nope), senate (nope), and presidency (nope). He also argued there was no real downside, that the moon would fall into Lake Michigan, before Trump even filled one SCOTUS seat, let alone multiple (nope). He was wrong about everything. That, and everything he has promoted since then, would benefit Republicans, more than anyone else.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lonewolf115 Every country in the world, except the remaining absolute monarchies, are socialist to some degree. If sectors of your society are publicly owned and operated, then you've got some socialism in your capitalism. Everyone needs to get over the fear of a damn word, admit all our economies are mixed, and then just figure out what things we'd like to be publicly owned and operated, and what things we'd like to be privately owned and operated, without the nonsense fearmongering.
David, and others, need to stop making out like using the word "socialist" is a big deal. It's just subtle fearmongering about a word, in itself.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sondorp Nothing you're saying addresses what I said. The failure of right wing "trickle down" is that it actually trickles up, which is exactly what would end up happening, if giant corporations don't pay into the UBI. Even Yang's words say giant corporations should be paying for it. Everytime he compared his dividend to the Alaskan dividend, which is entirely paid for by corporations, he was saying giant corporations should be paying for it. You're arguing against Yang's own words.
His problem was that a VAT doesn't do that. He even linked to a pass through rate on his VAT page, that he either didn't grasp or lied about, which actually showed that consumers were paying the entire VAT.
Especially in his heavily automated future, you can't have ever increasing numbers of unemployed consumers paying for the UBI. It's the corporations with the robots that need to give money to the public, to buy crap back from them. If you just keep feeding money into automated corporations, that doesn't make it back to the public, that's unsustainable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@CoolhandLukeSkywalkr Jews are Iraqis, according to their book. They're Canaanites, themselves, according to archaeology, and never wiped out other Canaanites (Palestinians, Lebanese), as well as no evidence the vast majority of the population ever left (the majority stayed and converted to Islam). You should bone up on DNA tests done in the area.
If tens of millions of Americans, with British ancestry, decided they wanted to move back, after 2000 years, should they be considered native, and given half of England?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Broly 456 If you don't have corporations paying into the dividend then they will only get the benefit of the dividend being spent. Amazon's share of US consumer spending is 2.3%, and rising. If even 2% of $3t is spent on Amazon, they'll make an extra $60b a year. Extra billions they can hoard or invest into automation, putting people out of work even faster. Bezos, being a 12% owner of Amazon, would make an extra $6+b a year, increasing and speeding up inequality.
If you won't have corporations paying into your dividend, you shouldn't compare it to one that is paid for by corporations, Alaska's. You shouldn't be claiming people will get paid for their data, get paid to be shown ads, or get paid for every automated truck mile. You, most definitely, shouldn't be promoting a tax designed to not tax businesses as a way to tax businesses. That's borderline gibberish.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnb1567 It would all depend on their income and spending, dumbass. I already pointed out that all it would take for someone already getting $1000+ in assistance that doesn't stack with UBI is 10¢, and they're operating in the negative, dumb dumb.
People spend about 30% of their incomes on VATable goods and services, so it's actually more like anyone currently getting $970+ in unstackable assistance, which is full SSI disability benefits and SNAP, will be worse off.
But hey, as long as you're better off, and as long as people making hundreds of thousands a year are better off, and billionaires are better off, it's all good, right?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ashwynnair6812 Google doesn't pay for the ads. Some secondary company would pay 10% more for the ads, Google would collect and pass it along. Zero extra taxes on Google. Those secondary companies would then either a) write it off ... VAT can be recouped on operating costs, both here in Canada, and in the UK; or b) they'd simply adjust their own prices to cover the rise in advertising costs, and their customers would pay for it.
That's going to be the top 20 or 10 percenters. But, within that group, the top 1% will make so much more money, they'll have even more untaxable money to hoard away. The VAT will affect the high upper middle class, and the low end of the rich, the most, not the 1%.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bernie lost because of MSM, and the DNC machine. Most older voters aren't on Twitter or YouTube, running into the supposedly mean Bernie supporters. They're watching CNN, MSNBC, etc. When people are polled on individual Bernie proposals, most of the country is in favour of them, so they are as "left" as Bernie. They've just been sold bullshit, about electability, M4A, Venezuela, etc., have nostalgia about the Obama years, haven't seen Biden challenged very much ...
1
-
1
-
Likud was created by Zionist terrorist, Menachem Begin, who bombed Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism), and bombed the King David Hotel. The other founder was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, who massacred Palestinian villages. Their initial platform stated that their goal was for Israel to rule from the sea to the Jordan (reverse of, from the river to the sea). Netanyahu has proven that that still seems to be the goal, with the endless colonization of the West Bank. Netanyahu also promoted, and helped fund, Hamas, to weaken the Palestinian Authority and avoid possible peace, so he could continue his colonization projects. The end of violence would mean that Israel might have to pull back, plus allow the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Peace is against Likud's interests.
So, why not the exact same forceful demand that Likud be removed? Hamas has ceasefired before and Likud broke the agreement. Why dishonestly make out like Hamas is the only barrier to peace?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yes. Fascist: ultra-nationalistic, anti-union, anti-socialist, anti-communist, anti-feminist, anti-democratic, backed by big business (crony capitalism), backed by religious extremists, pro military expansion, pro police expansion ...
Republicans have been dipping their toes into all out fascism with gerrymandering, disenfranchising, and voter suppression. This latest nonsense is overtly anti-democratic and fills in the last box.
1
-
1
-
Maybe. It would still be hard to try and get Republicans to go along with making all private insurers offer a basic, universal, non-profit, package, and have all states cover anyone and everyone who can't afford a private package. But, states might be able to make those kinds of rules for insurers within their own states, and not have to wait for the feds.
The foundation for a Canadian model is there. Their's is more like a Medicaid for all, with the federal government pitching in, but each province running their own. You could keep raising the max income level Medicaid covers. Individual states could also start this on their own, and not have to wait for the feds.
The foundation is also there to keep lowering the age of Medicare, but very hard to get enough federal lawmakers on board.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jlassonful What a load of crap. Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@myt1soo320 You idiots keep tossing around the word "luxury". A VAT is zero rated by the type of product not the cost of a product. If you buy a shitbox used car from a dealer you pay a VAT, just like someone buying a new Porsche. If your shitbox car breaks down you pay the mechanic a VAT, just like when the Porsche breaks down. If you buy a Big Mac you pay a VAT, just like someone eating at a fancy restaurant. If you buy a plastic watch you pay a VAT, just like someone buying a Rolex. If you buy a shit flip phone you pay a VAT, just like someone buying a top of the line iPhone. If you have a dinky little house you pay a VAT on utilities, just like someone living in a mansion. If you have plumbing issues you pay a VAT, just like someone living in a mansion. If you buy crappy fake Lego for your kid you pay a VAT, just like someone buying a giant real Lego set. If you go to cheap movie night you pay a VAT, just like someone going to a theatre production. Etc.
Poor people would have to sit in the dark, without heat, without communication, counting stars for fun, to totally avoid a VAT.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@edwardz.rosenthal9946 Stop pretending like Dore's "plan" actually gets you M4A now, or that he actually gives a crap if anyone gets healthcare. A failed vote won't get it now. It'll leave you still having to do exactly what AOC just did ... help get more pro-M4A progressives elected to congress going against DCCC backed corporate Dems. You need to replace almost 100 people in the house alone.
Dore acts all impatient, but just as progressives are making gains, he doesn't mind trashing and slandering them, undermine their credibility as much as he can, and start from scratch with yet another third party, and maybe not even get a single house seat in 50 years (the Libertarian party will turn 50 in a couple years), let alone get M4A. He wouldn't mind possibly splitting progressive votes, reducing progressive gains in the Dem party, and letting Republicans and corporate Dems rule for decades. He just got done promoting Tulsi's "Medicare choice" (a public option) over Bernie's M4A. But then he spent the general basically campaigning against the guy offering a public option and a reduction in the Medicare age. Pretending like he desperately wants anyone to get healthcare anytime soon, is blatantly obvious nonsense. He's all over the place, and seems content with trashing everything, even small gains, or small improvements, and completely changing course every other year, effectively going nowhere.
1
-
@edwardz.rosenthal9946 Yes, the ACA provided millions more with healthcare, and covered people with preexisting conditions. Not awesome, but a step forward. Republicans went nuts trying to repeal it. It even took an Obama veto of their repeal attempts in the end. So, a person who actually cared about those millions having healthcare wouldn't promote a Republican president, who'd sign a repeal, as a better option for progressives than Clinton in 2016. Dore did what he could to help Trump get elected, even promoting Stein as having a shot. He didn't give a crap if that meant millions could lose their healthcare.
During the 2020 primaries, he promoted Tulsi and her "Medicare choice" (public option) over Bernie and his M4A. He didn't give a crap if her plan wasn't as good as his. He didn't give a crap if he peeled off any progressive votes from the more viable candidate, and help Biden win. He didn't give a crap.
During the general election, he basically ran an attack ad campaign against Trump's only viable opponent, Biden. Again he didn't care that Trump and Republicans were trying to gut the ACA, he didn't care about getting another small step forward with lowering the Medicare age and a public option (which he had just fucking supported with Tulsi). He didn't give a fuck.
The only way to possibly ever pass M4A is to get more yes votes in congress, which AOC just helped do. She used her platform and PAC to fight DCCC backed corporate Dems. She threw punches. They just punched her back, by not giving her the committee seat she wanted. Dore, the armchair general slandering her over a fucking tactics disagreement, is a coward stabbing her in the back. Jimmy doesn't have the balls to get out of his garage and run himself. Go ahead, try to get the forcethevote movement going, but if it doesn't happen, all the slander will have done is convince some idiots that they should abandon congressional progressives. Again, that's not giving two shits about the small gains of getting more yes votes in congress, not giving a shit about moving forward. Plus, he's stupid, and doesn't even make a proper risk assessment, which could backfire and hurt progressives and M4A.
On top of all that, he's ready to go with yet another third party, that likely won't even win a single seat in 50 years (the Libertarian party is turning 50 in a couple years), let alone get you M4A. He doesn't give a crap if that splits progressive voting, loses the gains made within the Democrat party, fully hands the party back to corporate Dems, and lets Republicans rule for decades, possibly destroying even the public healthcare insurance there is. He doesn't give a flying fuck.
He's a fucking child, whose gets so impatient with small steps forward that he abandons them and changes directions, if that leads to small steps forward he again abandons them and changes directions, and so on ... in the end, Jimmy Dore will lead you nowhere. Maybe you could try to argue that he cares so much that he can't act rationally, but his actions indicate he doesn't give a fuck if anyone ever reaches destination healthcare.
Colossus? If spreading ideas across social media counts as fighting, then AOC completely destroys Jimmy in the only arena he fights in. Total annihilation. Her platform is worth about 40 of his. A single M4A tweet of hers is worth about 70 of his. It's nonsensical the number of Dore knobs who consider Jimmy to be "fighting" but consider her using her much larger platform to spread progressive ideas, including M4A, to be doing nothing.
We probably wouldn't be having this discussion without Bernie making M4A a mainstream talking point. Again, if spreading an idea counts as fighting, then Bernie is a champ. Disagree with his pragmatic lesser of two evils approach, but to also call him a "fake", "shill", "wimp", is just more bullshit slander. Dore doesn't actually give a fuck about getting anywhere.
Remember when the Tea Party ate their own Tea Party friendly politicians, and fractionalize the Tea Party itself? Me either.
1
-
@edwardz.rosenthal9946 I'm plenty chillaxed. If you don't want to know what indicates he doesn't give a crap, don't ask.
Threatening to paralyze the house doesn't necessarily get rid of Pelosi anyway. Jimmy's whole idea is she folds and gives you the vote, for your vote... and you still have Pelosi. So why pretend like that's even the goal?
Even if she didn't give you the vote and you paralyze the house, corporate Dems in caucus can keep picking her over and over and over. How long do you keep paralyzing the house for, as they blame you for no new covid relief, no new unemployment extension, no new vaccine funding, etc.?
Jimmy has also argued she'd rather work with Republicans rather than progressives, and Kyle has said she's the queen of backroom deals. She could just make a backroom deal with Republicans, and give them something in exchange for enough of them to be absent, or abstain, from the vote, lowering the threshold needed for her to win (Dore doesn't even know how the vote actually works, even when he reads it aloud).
Also stop pretending like just adding more pro-M4A votes to congress is doing nothing. That would make Jimmy's plan ... have a vote and then do nothing. Dore knobs are incoherent.
1
-
@edwardz.rosenthal9946 The US healthcare system is disgusting. The lack of support for those in need is disgusting. But, unless you can somehow change the way government works, or overthrow the government, getting enough yes votes in congress is the only possible way to ever pass a bill. Getting more pro-M4A candidates elected, or converting enough candidates already elected, is the primary tactic, no matter what else is going on. Anyone working on that primary tactic isn't doing nothing, isn't a "shill", isn't a "sellout", isn't a "fake", and definitely isn't a "wimp", if they're in the swamp getting their hands dirty and trading punches in the actual political trenches.
This is all a debate about a secondary tactic, and whether it would provide more ammo, to accomplish the primary tactic. It's not going to get you M4A now. It's almost 100 votes short in the house alone, let alone the senate. So, what would it get you?
A list? You already get a new list of people in congress who won't sign onto the bill when it's reintroduced every new session, that need to be converted or replaced. You can already use that list to pressure them, protest them, or primary them. Why weren't the 100 extra Pro-M4A candidates Jimmy has lined up in the election that just happened? Why wasn't BJG organizing mass protests against anti-M4A candidates during the election that just happened? Why wasn't during the elections the time to act? Why isn't now the time to act, instead of after a failed vote?
Catch a few fakers? Who cares about trying to ferret out a few fakes, when you have 100+ people to convert or replace in the house and senate, already? There's already a lot of names to work with, without worrying about whether there's a few fakers, who wouldn't even have to expose themselves knowing it won't even pass the house.
Get a record of them outright opposing M4A to use against them? It took a single reporter's question to get Biden on public record saying he'd veto M4A. It didn't take threatening to paralyze the house. Plenty of these people have just campaigned and made public statements against M4A. So why isn't this being used against them already? What are Jimmy and his supporters waiting for? They could be doing whatever is supposed to spontaneously happen after a failed vote, right now.
A debate on the floor? That's the best reason I've heard. It could be used to inform the public and garner more support (only 36% of Americans want outright M4A, 26% want some private/public mix like a public option, and the others want the status quo or are complete Libertarian morons). But, the corporate Dem and Republican majority would also be using their debate time to misinform. Likely the corporate media, as well. It might be more productive to run some kind of pro-M4A information campaign directly to the public, where they don't also hear 3 anti voices, and a bunch of bad MSM press, per 1 pro voice. So, I'm more unsure on this point, and don't see the big benefit of the others.
So, for questionable gains, there are risks. If people desperately want M4A now, then they should already be doing most of those things already.
The DSA has been having M4A rallies. Get out to them, promote them, start your own.
The CBO (the government itself) just released a major study showing various types of single payer systems actually reduce overall costs. Spread the info.
If your rep's name isn't signed onto the M4A bill, demand to know why. If they won't budge, make sure to support a pro-M4A candidate against them. If there isn't one, find one fast.
What are all the impatient Dore fans waiting for? Do it right fucking now! Or are they just lazy armchair generals hoping a failed vote will spark others into rising up and doing it for them?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@michaelburkey1968 The "nuance" is bullshit, because there's no such thing as Islam, without Muslims. Religions don't exist on their own. A "Muslim" is someone who practices some form of Islam. "Islam" is a religion practiced by Muslims. So, when he makes out like Islam is a singular horrible thing, he's making out like that's what all Muslims practice. If you say Islam is dangerous, and all Muslims practice Islam, how haven't you said something about all Muslims? You have. You've portrayed them all as possible ticking time bombs.
Yes , he promotes former Muslims, like Hirsi Ali, who says we're at war with Islam, that Islam needs to be defeated, even militarily, that there's no moderate Islam, etc. If every Muslim on the planet practices a form of Islam, what is that saying about all Muslims?
He was for Ted Cruz's picking Christian refugees over Muslim ones. He thinks Ben Carson ... who also was against the Muslim ban, but has said a bunch of other shit things about Muslims, and is an utter moron ... knows more about what's going on with Muslims in the world than Chomsky.
If you've got a reformed liberal Muslim, who still practices their form of Islam, and an ultra-conservative Wahhabi Muslim, who practices their form of Islam, and you say "Islam is the motherload of bad ideas", as if it's a singular unified thing, how does that not apply to both Muslims?
1
-
@michaelburkey1968 Scripture =\= religion. We seem to grasp that with other religions. Religious people interpret things differently, give weight to things differently, cherrypick differently, include extra writings differently ... and it is the final product that is their religion. To say there's only one true way to follow a religious book to the letter, a) goes against over two centuries of non-theists arguing religious books are contradictory; and b) sides with the extremists making out like other Muslims aren't true Muslims. It's, literally, helping the extremists make their Not a True Scotsman argument. If you're going to help promote a single interpretation, why not pick the one you like best, rather than the one you like least?
It hasn't seemed to spook him about US foreign policy. Why, when Hezbollah or Bin Laden, list the US committing or complicity in ME atrocities, as reasons for their actions, doesn't Sam give a crap? He went on with Chomsky, defending US intent, and not seeming to grasp that the other side considers their intentions to be good, as well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theobsidiansimp8626 Well, from my perspective, I didn't know you replied to the wrong person, so the reply seemed to be a clear case of reading comprehension problems.
Half of the price of cigarettes is tax, in Canada. The goal is to keep increasing the tax until smoking is down to 5%. The government is outright making smokers pay more into healthcare, and trying to deter smoking down to almost nothing, with those taxes, plus bans in public indoor places, etc. Why shouldn't the unvaccinated both pay more, somehow, and be banned from public indoor places? Not having a variety of vaccines is enough to boot kids out of school. These covid anti-vaxxers are just spoiled brats.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Halon's Razor If you don't like lowering taxes 100%, for some strange reason, how about this ...
Person A is below the poverty line, making $10k a year and paying 10% taxes ($1000).
Person B is making $1m a year and paying 10% taxes ($100k).
If you lower both of their taxes by 10%, person A gets to keep an extra $100, and person B gets to keep an extra $10k. But, that's $10100 no longer going towards things like education, Medicaid, affordable housing, SNAP, disability, etc.
How does that only hurt the government, and benefit the one in poverty?
Why do capitalists detest the poor, so much?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Likud was created by Zionist terrorist, Menachem Begin, who bombed Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism), and bombed the King David Hotel. The other founder was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, who massacred Palestinian villages. Their initial platform stated that their goal was for Israel to rule from the sea to the Jordan (reverse of, from the river to the sea). Netanyahu has proven that that still seems to be the goal, with the endless colonization of the West Bank. Netanyahu also promoted, and helped fund, Hamas, to weaken the Palestinian Authority and avoid possible peace, so he could continue his colonization projects. The end of violence would mean that Israel might have to pull back, plus allow the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Peace is against Likud's interests.
So, why not the exact same demand that Likud be removed?
1
-
1
-
Much of the developed world failed at containing the virus. Not as bad as the US, but they also didn't take it seriously enough, early on. It's the tests per confirmed cases rate, which tells you how much trace testing is going on. When I first looked at those numbers, countries, like S Korea, New Zealand, and Australia, that flattened their curves quickly, were testing 50+ people per confirmed case. The US was testing 5 people per confirmed case ... a 10x slower rate of testing. NY and NJ were testing 4 and 3 people per confirmed case, below the already pathetic US national average, so I don't get why some people praise Quomo. He's as incompetent as Trump. That 5 per confirmed case rate was on par with Sweden, who wasn't even trying. The UK and France were also testing at 4 and 3 rates. Italy and Spain were both testing under 10. Germany and Canada were testing about 15. Other Scandinavian countries were testing about 20. The US has always been testing too few people per confirmed case, to be able to get ahead of the virus. Trump brags about total tests, or tests per million, but those numbers are completely disconnected from case numbers. I'm pissed at our Canadian leaders. Americans should be irate, and storming the capital.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shylanambiar4316 Right. Right. So horrible that they had what was considered a "Golden Age", under Muslim rule. The dreaded tax ... that sent none of them fleeing in trrr, for over 1200 years, and led to the First Znst congress wanting to create a home for Jws ... in a Muslim Empire.
Yes, the RU pgrms and the Nz Hlcaust, both done by Christians, was horrible. My grandfather was in the Danish resistance, that helped get almost all the Jws out of Denmark. They, like other resistance groups across Europe, were considered trrrists, by the Nzs.
History has no record of the majority of the population in Pal ever leaving. And yet, it became majority Christian, and then majority Muslim. How did that happen, I wonder? Pals have Canaanite DNA. They are Arab and Muslim the same way indigenous peoples of Central America are now Hispanic and Catholic. They are the Hebrews that never left. And the few that neither left, nor converted, were targeted right alongside their Pal brothers and sisters by the Irgun and Lehi trrrists. Those would be the same trrrist founders of Likud, that Einstein considered to be on par with Fscsts and Nzs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NessaBear90 History: In 1918, Ben-Gurion fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism. In 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and also predicted, based on the entirety of history, that the native response to said colonialism would be to fight it until the bitter end.
On top of the colonialist foundation, another building block was Zionist terrorism, by groups like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets, amongst other things, killing many Palestinians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into their new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, who bombed the King David Hotel, as PM. To this day, Israelis celebrate those terrorists as heroes. They literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood.
In the West Bank, colonialism continues, using the blueprint for the colonization of North America. Move settlements out into native territory, piss off the natives, the natives react violently, cry about being poor "innocent" colonizers attacked by "savages", call in the cavalry to squash the native uprising, and eventually expand the borders to include those settlements. Rinse and repeat.
In Gaza, Israel operates an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, and then cries when there's a Warsaw style ghetto uprising.
It really is a sickening country.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yang doesn't know how his key tax, a VAT, actually works. A VAT is specifically designed to NOT tax businesses in order to avoid double taxation. It's a sales tax, collected in stages, with the business stages all getting paid back their input VAT.
Because a VAT won't have corporations like Amazon paying into the dividend, they will only get the benefit of the dividend being spent. Amazon would make an extra $60b a year from $3t in added consumer spending. Ironically, that's billions more they could invest into speeding up their automation timeline, putting people out of work even faster.
That would also make the likes of Bezos extra billions a year more than he'd ever personally pay into a VAT, speeding up inequality.
"a consumption tax because it is borne ultimately by the final consumer. It is not a charge on businesses."
"taxable persons (i.e., VAT-registered businesses) deduct from the VAT they have collected the amount of tax they have paid to other taxable persons on purchases for their business activities"
"the taxable person is entitled to deduct all the tax already paid at the preceding stage. Therefore, double taxation is avoided"
https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/vat/what-is-vat_en
"The GST takes into account the cost of inputs – the factors used in manufacturing or production – at each stage of the process to avoid double taxation. Input tax credits enable partnerships, businesses and self-employed workers to recover all GST paid on goods and services purchased for business purposes by deducting them from their GST payments. Final consumers are not entitled to such credits, which means that they pay all the GST on every item purchased. The GST is thus a multi-stage tax on final consumption."
http://publications.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/BP/prb0003-e.htm#A.%20Taxing%20Mechanism(txt)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Taking an "enlightened centrist", both sides-ing, position, doesn't equate to informative or level headed. Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
Trump convinced tens of millions of people not to believe any media, any judges, any lawyers, any politicians, any election officials, any doctors, any nurses, any scientists, any police, any military, any intelligence agency, any women ... anybody ... even not to believe their own lying eyes, if any of them contradicted Supreme Leader Trumpty Dumpty. I don't know if any other president has ever pulled off that fanatic level of "loyalty", and it's not a level of "loyalty" anyone should want a politician to have.
1
-
1
-
@josephmassaro Isn't that the way things were supposed to be set up, in the US, so that if the government turns corrupt, the people could remove it, and start over, just like the founding fathers had? Americans kind of screwed the pooch on that one, though, by having a massive standing army, a military armed police force, and no militias, except for racist psychos.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mycosys David doesn't seem to cover events, unless something has happened to Israel, or unless there's some news about Hamas doing something bad. Prior to the Hamas attack, there had been almost one Palestinian a day, killed by the IDF or settlers (who are rarely punished). I don't know if I'd say he's an outright Zionist, but I do think he has a bias. "Zionist" also has a definition. It's not simply name calling.
Leaving out details, like that, and the entirety of the history, has David, like most, framing things in a way that makes Israel out to be the one responding to Hamas' violence. After hundreds of Palestinians were killed, this year alone, why isn't Hamas instead framed as the one responding to Israel's violence? People are more understanding as to why say Geronimo left the reserve his tribe had been forced onto, multiple times, to go on a warpath. Not framing Israel as the colonialist power that it is, allows for propaganda like "The savages have attacked poor innocent settlers!", rather than "Natives have left the dirt patch they were forced onto, and have attacked people that have been colonizing and ethnically cleansing them, for a century." Maybe unintentional bias, but considering how he criticized AOC for an "uninformed" comment about Israel/Palestine, I would expect him to be more precise.
As I said, above, Ze'ev fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism. After that point, the colonialists can never really be the "victim". Natives would never be attacking them, if they hadn't done the colonialism, in the first place. On top of the colonialism, Israel was founded on terrorism, by groups like the Irgun and Lehi. They killed a bunch of Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support Zionism). Israelis elected a terrorist, Menachem Begin, who led the Irgun and bombed the King David Hotel. Israel merged those terrorist groups into their new national military/intelligence. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Israel literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are heroes. Making out like Hamas is "pure evil", without ever mentioning that Israel was founded on similarly "pure evil", and had a "pure evil" PM, is a bias.
Even now, Netanyahu has a terrorist in charge of the West Bank. He was previously arrested on his way to bomb a highway out of Gaza, to block the withdrawal of settlers there. He's a racist, who has said that "Palestinian" people don't exist. He's an ultra Orthodox nutjob, who equates homosexuality with bestiality. Plus, he's a genocidal maniac, who made public a plan to segregate and subjugate (no federal representation), exile, or kill, any non Jews, in all Israel/Palestine.
Casually mentioning , now and then, that Israel is an "apartheid state", doesn't get to the true depths of how horrible it is. These are Jewish people that are running an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. It is insanely ghastly, that they've become the thing they fled from.
Again, not sure if I'd go as far as saying David is himself a Zionist, but he does show an abnormal bias, when it comes to Israel. Not very objective.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Jordblitz You know that Israel was founded on terrorism, by groups like the Irgun and Lehi, right? They elected terrorists, like Menachem Begin, who was leader of the Irgun and bombed the King David Hotel. They still celebrate those terrorists.
Even now, Netanyahu has a terrorist in charge of the West Bank. An Orthodox extremist bigot, who compares homosexuality to bestiality. A racist, who says "Palestinian" people don't exist. And a genocidal maniac, who made public a plan to segregate and subjugate (no federal representation), exile, or kill, all non Jews in all Israel/Palestine.
There isn't just a single side with extremists. And, most people wouldn't consider the Warsaw ghetto uprising to be an act of extremists. They'd consider it normal. Not sure why Gaza's open air WWII style fascist style ghetto is supposed to be considered different.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
FACT: Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RuckFussia Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ironically, slavery didn't survive British common law, in England proper. British colonies were worse than their parent country, including the American colonies, and, later, the independent US.
It's stupid to only start counting at independence. Canada could say it had zero years of slavery and no war about it, after independence. Turkey could say it abolished slavery in under 80 years, with no civil war over it, after independence. Both of those sound better, and there are plenty more young countries.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Emjaemidd Palestinians have Canaanite DNA, ffs, and have a close genetic relationship to Jews. There was most definitely a land of Philistia, comprising 5 city states, around the same time as the Kingdoms of Israel and Judea. Israel was wiped out by the Assyrians, and Judea and Philistia were conquered by the Babylonians.
Even the more modern version of the word has been around for centuries.
"c. 450 BCE: Herodotus, The Histories[57], First historical reference clearly denoting a wider region than biblical Philistia, referring to a "district of Syria, called Palaistinê"[58][11][59]"
Doesn't matter if there's a country. Someone from Michigan is a Michigander. Someone from Detroit is a Detroiter. Was there a Palestine political district? Yes. People from that would be Palestinians.
"c. 1000: Suda encyclopedic lexicon: "Παλαιστίνη: ὄνομα χώρας. καὶ Παλαιστι̂νος, ὁ ἀπὸ Παλαιστίνης." / "Palestine: Name of a territory. Also [sc. attested is] Palestinian, a man from Palestine.[205]"
"1177: John Phocas, A Brief Description of the Castles and Cities, from the City of Antioch even unto Jerusalem; also of Syria and Phoenicia, and of the Holy Places in Palestine[213][214]"
"c. 1350: Guidebook to Palestine (a manuscript primarily based on the 1285–1291 account of Christian pilgrim Philippus Brusserius Savonensis): "It [Jerusalem] is built on a high mountain, with hills on every side, in that part of Syria which is called Judaea and Palestine, flowing with milk and honey, abounding in corn, wine, and oil, and all temporal goods"[221]"
"1560: Geneva Bible, the first mass-produced English-language Bible, translates the Hebrew פלשת Pleshet as "Palestina" (e.g. Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31) and "Palestina"[233]"
"1563: Josse van Lom, physician of Philip II of Spain: A treatise of continual fevers: "Therefore the Scots, English, Livonians, Danes, Poles, Dutch and Germans, ought to take less blood away in winter than in summer; on the contrary, the Portuguese, Moors, Egyptians, Palestinians, Arabians, and Persians, more in the winter than in summer"[236]"
"1779: George Sale, Ancient Part of Universal History: "How Judæa came to be called also Phœnice, or Phœnicia, we have already shewn in the history of that nation. At present, the name of Palestine is that which has most prevailed among the Christian doctors, Mahommedan and other writers. (See Reland Palestin. illustrat.)"[305]"
"1841: John Kitto, Palestine: the Physical Geography and Natural History of the Holy Land, Illustrated with Woodcuts.[351][352]"
"1897: First Zionist Congress: the Basel program sets out the goals of the Zionist movement: "Zionism aims at establishing for the Jewish people a publicly and legally assured home in Palestine""
"1902: Salim Qub‘ayn and Najib Nassar, "A Palestinian describes Palestinian towns."[390][398]"
"1915: VIII Corps (Ottoman Empire), Filastin Risalesi ("Palestine Document"), an Ottoman army country survey which formally identified Palestine as including the sanjaqs of Akka (the Galilee), the Sanjaq of Nablus, and the Sanjaq of Jerusalem (Kudus Sherif).[407][408]"
"1918: House of Commons of the United Kingdom: Minutes: "Major Earl Winterton asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what facilities have been given to the Palestinian and Syrian political leaders now in Egypt to visit Palestine?"[410] An early use of the word Palestinian in British politics, which was used often in following years in the British government[411]"
You'd have to be a complete and utter moron, to actually believe that Palestine or Palestinians didn't exist.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There's actually widespread agreement that a single individual's reasoning shouldn't be taken as objective knowledge, or truth. That's why we now use empirical justification, and consensus. Reasoning "your own truth" isn't necessarily scientific, nor reality, at all.
While I agree that "self" preservation is the basis for morality, those with a very narrow sense of "self", that literally only covers themselves, and don't care about anyone else, aren't all that moral. Being more moral comes from extending that sense of "self" to others, caring about others as you care about yourself. Rand's is a narcissistic philosophy, that even many animals get beyond.
Human reality is that we aren't all the same, and we can adapt, learn, change. There is no "natural", across the board, human greed. Many of us want to work together, and look out for each other, and it is possible to teach that to others. That's how our societies evolved to even being a place where a woman's philosophy was taken seriously, where she could make her own money, where she could vote, etc. Or, a poor immigrant. If enough people had considered immigrants a threat to themselves, she could have been sent packing. She totally benefited from a society that had evolved beyond everyone only looking out for themselves.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@j___9594 Empirical evidence is objective, and we go through day to day life trusting our senses, but senses can be flawed, tricked from the wrong perspective, or some sich. That's why we rely on consensus. Not because number of believers equates to truth, but because numbers making the same objective empirical observations decreases the chance of error. If I observe an item on a table to be a flower, and dozens of other people observe it to be a stone, then odds are I'm hallucinating, the light is reflecting in a weird way from my perspective, or something of the sort, and the truth is that there's a rock on the table. Allowing every individual to have their own truth, their own knowledge, would mean it's true the item is both a rock and a flower, which makes no sense. You'd have to accept every individual claim of a religious experience, seeing a ghost, or being abducted by aliens, as "knowing" gods, ghosts, or aliens, exist, it being "true" they exist, if justification is not required for actual "knowledge" or "truth".
Not only would you allow for an individual's flawed observations to be "truth" or "knowledge", but you'd also have to allow for unjustified subjective beliefs to be, as well. Someone could declare they "know" anything, claim anything to be "true", and you're not requiring them to show any justification. Numerous people are simply taught to accept unjustified subjective beliefs as being "true". They don't even necessarily have a claimed personal experience, but still declare they "know", still declare what they believe is "true". Now all the religious people's conflicting claims can't all be true, if there's a single truth, but if you allow that each individual can have their own truth, then they can all be true. That's not logical.
Reasoning should tell us that there isn't "my truth" and "your truth", that there's only "the truth".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@eeegrow2744 He's an idiot. If a country is letting asymptomatic people wander around, spreading the virus, waiting for people with symptoms to come in and get a test, then they're going to find more and more positive results as more and more people get infected and come in to get tested, because the virus is spreading, and they'll never get ahead of the virus. Countries with very high trace testing rates, that get as many people as possible who may have come into contact with an infected person to get tested, then they can find and isolate any asymptomatic carriers, and get ahead of the virus. The fact that a country can test hundreds of people per confirmed case, is absolute proof that simply testing more people doesn't equate to finding more cases. All countries would have similar tests per confirmed case rates, if your bullshit was true.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Lisa-pl6gv Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@spacetoast7783 I meant your last post was ironic, dumb dumb.
I don't know what your superior reading skills read in the op, but I read the "if true" as a response to the title question, "Is Biden abandoning the Public Option?"
I also don't know what your superior reading skills read in the press release, but I read that the clear answer to the title question is "not true", because of the very fact that they're still promoting that Biden has a public option plan. David simply speculating that he hasn't abandon it, saying there's no evidence he has, instead of pointing to evidence he hasn't, doesn't really clearly answer his own title question, allowing for "if true" to be an option. What I quoted seems to provide the op the answer "not true".
Do carry on with your irrelevant gibberish, though.
1
-
@JaysSavvy But I have been treated in the US, while there (didn't go there to be treated), have seen others treated, and heard first hand accounts of how others were treated. I was with an organization for people with disabilities, for over 20 years. You're mental telepathy appears to not work. You haven't guessed one thing right about me.
You mean like Insulin? HAART? Medium 199 and "Toronto method"? T-cell receptor gene? Cystic fibrosis gene? ... Canada has had plenty of medical breakthroughs. Canada, and many other developed countries, put out more scientific publications per capita than the US does. Specifically biomed, the US comes in 11 and Canada 13, per capita. Canada has slightly more hospital beds and doctors per capita, for half the cost. Canada has a higher life expectancy, and lower infant and maternal mortality.
You're spewing bullshit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SethAndrews111 Israel was founded on terrorism, and elected terrorists, dumb dumb. Look up the Irgun, Lehi, and Menachem Begin. They still celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". They taught their neighbours everything.
Rivlin hosts 90th anniversary of founding Irgun Zvai Leumi (Etzel)
By GREER FAY CASHMAN Published: MARCH 1, 2021
"Etzel is most famously known for the bombing of the King David Hotel on July 22, 1946"
They also bombed many Palestinian markets, killing civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support Zionism).
Prior to Oct 7, Israel had 1200+ Palestinian hostages, held without charges, the IDF and settlers had killed 200+ Palestinians, Israel continued its unending colonization of the West Bank, and its continued operation of an open air WWII style fascist ghetto.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@somas7293 No, dumb dumb.
An authoritarian brand of communism, like Stalinism, is the reason, the philosophy, behind reworking the agriculture system. That reworking of the agriculture system caused the deaths of millions.
Capitalism, making profits, was the reason, the philosophy, behind the British Empire exporting food out of India. That exporting of food caused the deaths of millions.
Both of those could be considered "tyranny", dumbass. Just like both, the lower class rebelling against and overthrowing the upper class, or invading another country to profit from their resources, can each be considered "war".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
@hwajuhwarang I'd suggest this because it's exactly not who the candidate is claiming will pay the tax, meaning they're either clueless or lying, neither of which is a good attribute for running a country. If lying, it's the same "humanity first" candidate who originally didn't have UBI stack with anything. On his own, he thought it was a good idea to toss the elderly off social security, veterans off VA benefits, and disabled people off SSDI, until he got negative feedback. Even now, he still thinks it's a good idea to make disabled people on SSI have to choose.
I'd suggest this, because massive inequality and automation are huge problems, so why would speeding up either, and likely both, be a good thing? The top 3000 US corporations are already hoarding $2.7t. If you're going to have a UBI, that should be what pays for it. You shouldn't be increasing the hoard at an even faster rate.
While the plan makes Bezos extra billions a year, there are millions of disabled people collecting SSI and SNAP who will get zero economic benefit from the UBI. Even if they do opt out of the UBI, they can't opt out of the VAT, and will be worse off. That's fucked up.
Where are you getting free counseling from? While his end healthcare goal might be universal coverage, his transition to that is a public option, which isn't taxpayer funded, at all. A public option creates a public insurance that then competes with private insurance, paid for with a premium, and you have the option of not signing up, and not paying, for it. LA tried that, in hopes it would lead to universal coverage, and 6 years in they're nowhere close. Everyone with marriage problems will be long divorced before universal coverage happens, if it ever does, using that method.
Odd headline? His VAT page, what he says about his key tax, is mostly bullshit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stevemarchando4132 If my business has purchased $100 in Facebook data, $100 in Google ads, and $100 in automated truck delivery miles from Amazon, those costs will be included in the price of my own good and service. Add a 10% VAT, and I've paid $30 input VAT on that $300. I charge my customer that $300 + $200 profit. They pay me $50 in ouput VAT. I reclaim my $30, paying myself back. I send $20 to the government, who got $50 total. And, the consumer paid $50. The consumers end up paying a tax on their own data, a tax to be shown ads, and a tax on the automation taking their jobs.
If you argue to ditch the VAT reclaim, then it can get even worse, with businesses passing their tax along as a cost, and the final consumer could end up paying their tax, multiple businesses' taxes, and taxes upon taxes.
Not only are actual exempt services the less common "specialized" cases, the vast majority are final consumer services, and would be found in the middle of a chain extremely rarely. A business doesn't go to a doctor. An individual goes to a doctor. So, if a doctor has $50 in VATable costs, paying $5, it actually saves the final consumer money if the doctor simply slips in the $5 cost to their $100 price ($105 vs $110). Since it's usually at the end of the chain, it would very rarely lead to stacking.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Nah. While they had started their Red Scare nonsense earlier, there was a Southern Strategy, 55 years ago, collecting the Southern racist nuts (no, the most racist states in the country didn't magically become the least racist ... they simply started voting for a different party, whose Southern candidates were just as racist, and also voted against Civil Rights). Then they started collecting the religious nuts, about 45 years ago, like Falwell's Moral Majority. Then started integrating in some really far right economics, from Libertarian/Objectivist types, wanting full deregulation (economically, the party had become almost the complete opposite of the Teddy Roosevelt party, and his Square Deal, by the time of Reagan). But, even Reagan handed out amnesty for 3 million undocumented immigrants. MAGA morons are clearly even more racist and extreme, on that point.
While Republicans are still using the Red Scare tactics, they have become further and further removed from reality, as to what communism even is. Biden is no progressive, and even progressives aren't proposing anything that would move the US left of Denmark. The US is nowhere near the 50% unionization rate, and over 70% top tax rate, just before the mid 20th century. Republicans took things way right, and Democrats followed, "meeting them in the middle", as the middle moved further and further right. Biden is just a tiny step back to the left, nowhere near even FDR, let alone communism.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@docvaliant721 Rofl. I know about polio, just fine, thanks. You didn't answer my questions. Refigeration and plumbing had been around for over a century, by 1950. What were the specitic major advances, between 1950 and 1960, that coincidentally happened at the exact same time as the vaccine rollout, which caused polio rates to plummet? How did the same thing coincidentally happen, at the exact same time as polio vaccine rollouts, across the world? This has to be one of the most amazing chain of coincidences ever recorded.
The main Salk vaccine worked just fine. There was an incident where a manufacturer made an error, but that wasn't something inherently wrong with the vaccine. The Salk vaccine doesn't use live virus samples, it uses dead ones, so can't give you polio. It is absolutely impossible for it to give you polio. How did you become so "well informed" and totally miss that major fact?
Yeah, nah, mRNA vaccines don't change your dna.
1
-
Countries with higher tests per confirmed case rates then tend to have lower cases and deaths. The US had a pretty pathetic rate during much of the pandemic, as well as did the European countries that have had similar results to the US. And countries like S Korea, New Zealand, Australia, had incredibly high rates, testing hundreds of people per confirmed case. It's a pretty simple concept that, the broader your net, the better, and faster, you can find and isolate those who need to be isolated, and vastly reduce the spread.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Freakarmy Where does this copy paste bullshit come from?
Non-staples: electric bill, phone bill, internet bill, cable bill, toys, games, any entertainment with a cost, snacks and pop, and all kinds of things that would still affect poor people.
Some of those poor people are already collecting $1000+ in government assistance of a kind Yang doesn't have stack with UBI. Those people will get zero economic benefit from the UBI but will still have to pay the VAT. He should have UBI stack with SSI and have a half UBI for children.
That price sensitivity nonsense is bullshit under normal circumstances. Basically every business would have a VAT added. They would all be sitting in the exact same competitive position they were in pre-VAT. There would be no reason to lower their prices and start eating their profit margins. Add in that consumers are being handed $3t to go shopping, and price increases won't even reduce consumption.
Yang is bullshitting, when he claims a VAT will make corporations like Amazon "pay their fair share". They'll still pay nothing with a VAT. Businesses get credited back for their input VAT in a VAT system. So, if even 20% of that $3t is spent on retail, and Amazon owns 5% of retail, Yang's VAT/UBI scheme will only make them an extra $30b a year. That'd make Bezos an extra $3.6b a year. He'd have to blow over $36b a year on goods and services with a VAT to pay in more than he'll get out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
By every measure, Israel is objectively the aggressor ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "your" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
Actual Hamas supporter: Netanyahu promoted, and helped fund, Hamas, to weaken the Palestinian Authority, to avoid a potential peace, so he could continue his colonization project. This is very much like the US promoting and funding religious extremists in Afghanistan, and that ending up biting them in the ass. Plus, he was warned by Egypt and, instead of strengthening the Gaza border, he moved Gazan troops to the West Bank, to support his colonization. Almost like he wanted his pet terrorists to actually break through.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@andersenparker2297 I did. Biden's approval rate is currently about the same as Dumpty's. That seems to represent the core supporters, for both.
How is hating someone who was asking everyone and anyone to support a coup, to overthrow the democratic process to keep him on as an unelected dictator, a "mental complex"? Pretty sure the "mental complex" is supporting that insanity.
Yeah, Biden has proved to be a standard right wing corporate Dem, and not a moderate, or at least not one who actually puts up a fight for moderate policies, instead bending the knee to the most conservative of Dems. But, still, why would that make a voter want to vote for someone even further right, who has already proven to be the most divisive president, who criticizes any Republicans voting bipartisan, and who has already proved to be totally incompetent?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Adam-wi5bh Like I said ... Israel is objectively the aggressor by every relevant measure...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
garyallen8824 Rofl, says the complete and utter moron, who makes a completely irrational argument. Palestinians have Canaanite DNA. They're native to Palestine. "Arab" is like "Hispanic". A tiny desert country didn't literally wipe out and replace entire populations, dimwit. They conquered and Arabized the populations that were there. A Palestinian isn't from any of those other places, and shouldn't have to move, just to carve out some colonialist nation for people from Europe and Russia.
I laid out the objective facts, about modern history, law, and current events, this year. Refute any of them, if you can.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@christopherdonahue1066 Vietnam showed it was good at stopping the virus, S Korea showed it was good at stopping the virus, Japan showed it was good at stopping the virus, Australia showed it was good at stopping the virus, New Zealand showed it was good at stopping the virus ... and how many countries followed them, and did exactly what they were doing? Are you under the delusion that the US, and others, would have responded better, if only they had known of a better way? All evidence suggests otherwise. Hell, with all the evidence of different countries' response effectiveness, morons were still wanting to be like Sweden (top 25 for covid deaths per capita, 5-10x more deaths per capita than its neighbours), because they wanted to do as little as possible, not as much as possible.
By the time the first case was confirmed in the US, and other countries, it had already been confirmed to be a SARS strain, which WHO officials said meant it could be transmitted from human to human.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7378494/
1
-
1
-
@jKLa Are you one of those morons who thinks any insult is an ad hominem? If so, then you being a moron would appear to be an objective fact.
https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html
Every "white American" isn't an "Anglo", dumbass. I know you don't like descendants of Spaniards, but now you're ditching the Irish, Scottish, Franks, Italians, Scandinavians, Germans, etc., too? Why the fuck use the term "white"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Likud was created by Zionist terrorist, Menachem Begin, who bombed Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism), and bombed the King David Hotel. The other founder was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, who massacred Palestinian villages. Their initial platform stated that their goal was for Israel to rule from the sea to the Jordan (reverse of, from the river to the sea). Netanyahu has proven that that still seems to be the goal, with the endless colonization of the West Bank. Netanyahu also promoted, and helped fund, Hamas, to weaken the Palestinian Authority and avoid possible peace, so he could continue his colonization projects. The end of violence would mean that Israel might have to pull back, plus allow the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Peace is against Likud's interests.
So, why not the exact same demand that Likud be removed?
1
-
People need to stop being afraid of the word "socialism", including you, David. A "social democracy" is a very mixed (capitalism/socialism) economy. If 100% of the economic sectors were publicly owned and operated, that would be 100% socialism. If 100% of the economic sectors were privately owned and operated, that would be 100% capitalism. Centrist countries are a fairly even mix of the two. If you're going to pretend they aren't, at all, socialist, simply because it's not 100% socialism, then you shouldn't be pretending they're capitalist, either.
The public owning a 60% share in Norway's oil company means it's 60% socialized, a more socialist than capitalist company. Many countries have a mostly socialized health insurance industry, making that industry almost completely socialist. The UK has an even more socialized healthcare sector, much like the VA, which is even more socialist than capitalist. Yes, the public owning, operating, and maintaining roads, is socialistic. The public owning and operating schools is socialistic. The public owning and operating emergency services is socialistic.
Some sectors, however, are tied to whether a country is more, or less, authoritarian, more so than they are tied to whether it's capitalist or socialist. While the VA's medical care can be considered socialist, the authority side of the military isn't. Even extreme right Ayn Rand types, would keep the military, law enforcement, and the courts. They just want those things to protect their self interests, though. Authoritarian capitalists (fascists) use those things to make themselves even more money, and expand their interests. And they are no longer truly publicly owned and operated if they're serving an oligarchy, rather than the actual public at large ... sometimes even working against the public at large.
The only purely capitalist countries left in the world are the ones still owned and operated by absolute monarchs, like Saudi.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sandydl2 Businesses get to reclaim any input VAT they've paid. It's a pretty simple formula for businesses.
output VAT - input VAT = x
if x is positive, reclaim the input VAT and send the government x (business gets paid back)
if x is negative, keep all the output VAT and the government refunds x (business gets paid back)
A VAT is a sales tax, collected in stages, with all the business stages getting paid back. Hope this helps.
As for the 30%, poor people still eat out, pay for entertainment, pay utilities, etc. They just eat at cheaper places, do cheaper things, have smaller places to heat, etc.
https://images.app.goo.gl/gHnLBowbuMTqf6696
Also, I was mainly referring to the fact that wealthier people won't start paying in, until fairly high incomes, so you'll have people making hundreds of thousands a year getting a few thousand extra dollars to blow, while some poor people currently on assistance will get little to no benefit from the UBI.
1
-
Well, firstly I'd take it with a grain of salt, what people working for CNN and Bloomberg say about how progressives feel. I'm pretty sure Ilhan and AOC are still amongst progressive favorites. They've been on the frontline of opposition to Israel.
As for Fetterman ... supporting Likud (who even Einstein called fascists and Nazis in its previous form), that was founded by Irgun and Lehi terrorists (who are still celebrated as "heroes"), and has their own, older, "between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty" platform, promising to completely colonize and ethnically cleanse all Palestine territories ... that's not pragmatism, that's sociopathic and dishonest. Anyone outright blindly supporting Likud is either ignorant as hell, or a lunatic. It's equivalent to supporting Nazis.
Bernie has been critical, but isn't pushing hard enough.
I'd also take what David says about the progressive left, with a grain of salt. He has been crusty about people calling him out for his Israel bias.
1
-
@Dawt_Calm Hrrrm, the difference is that she advocates for and promotes M4A. The difference is that she's a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, which has been holding M4A rallies, that Jimmy hasn't promoted. The difference is that she uses her campaigning and fundraising power to primary progressives around the country. Trying to convince more people to get on board, getting more politicians on board, is how you end up getting it passed, not by having a pointless vote to get a list of names of people you already know need to be primaried out. Helping to destroy confidence in the few progressives in congress, just as they're making small gains in numbers, is moronic. The DNC will sure as hell be primarying corporate Dems against them. You're more likely to get another corporate Dem, instead of a more aggressive progressive, if you convince people not to vote for her, or those like her, again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Likud was created by Zionist terrorist, Menachem Begin, who bombed Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism), and bombed the King David Hotel. The other founder was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, who massacred Palestinian villages. Their initial platform stated that their goal was for Israel to rule from the sea to the Jordan (reverse of, from the river to the sea). Netanyahu has proven that that still seems to be the goal, with the endless colonization of the West Bank. Netanyahu also promoted, and helped fund, Hamas, to weaken the Palestinian Authority and avoid possible peace, so he could continue his colonization projects. The end of violence would mean that Israel might have to pull back, plus allow the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Peace is against Likud's interests.
So, why not the exact same demand that Likud be removed?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@m0ckingB1rd42 Lol, yes, I do believe they were true colonizers, dimwit. Hell, everyone traces back to Africa, so Africa can't possibly be colonized, by anyone? If I rounded up 6 million people from the Americas whose ancestors left England hundreds of years ago, "went back", claimed half of England, and cleansed "our" half of its current inhabitants (at least enough so that us "returnees" would be in a solid majority, so we can fake being democratic), we'd be colonizers.
How has Liberia turned out? It is now a majority native (never left) African. Would Israel be cool with that? Peace, and full right of return, for all Palestinians?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If human beings wanted to be in a free universe, rather than a perfect universe, then why are so many trying to get into a perfect heaven, where they'll be stuck for the rest of eternity?
There is no such thing as unlimited free speech, anywhere. Defamation is a speech crime. Threats are a speech crime. Conspiring to commit a crime, is a speech crime. Verbal harassment is a speech crime. Incitement is a speech crime. The weird thing about the US is that you can face legal consequences for harassing, threatening, defaming, an individual, but you can effectively harass, threaten, or defame, an entire group of people, all you want. Plus, spew an incredible amount of hate, publicly, guaranteed to incite someone. Hate speech tends to have to rise to a level of harrassment, threat, or incitement, for the law to get involved.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@emoonie No vaccine is 100%, dimwit. The flu vaccine has a 50% efficacy, and needs to be taken yearly. How effective a vaccine is, and how long it lasts, depends mainly on the type of virus, not the vaccine. Different viruses trigger different types of antibodies. The same reason that you're not immune to the flu, after getting it once.
The protection, with even the 50% efficacy flu vaccine, is exponential though. The first vaccinated person in contact with a virus carrier is 50% protected, which means a second vaccinated person coming in contact with the first vaccinated person is 75% protected, the third contacting the second is 87.5% protected, the fourth contacting the third is 93.75% protected, etc. You, not being vaccinated, having 0% protection, and possibly being an asymptotic carrier, are far more likely to reset the vaccination chain percentage back down to 50%.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hamas has ceasefired before, and it was Israel that broke the agreement. So, the issue is that Bernie, and David, should be saying the same thing about Likud, who has shown zero desire for peace, for decades.
Likud was created by Zionist terrorist, Menachem Begin, who bombed Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism), and bombed the King David Hotel. The other founder was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, who massacred Palestinian villages. Their initial platform stated that their goal was for Israel to rule from the sea to the Jordan (reverse of, from the river to the sea).
Netanyahu has proven that that still seems to be the goal, with the endless colonization of the West Bank. Netanyahu also promoted, and helped fund, Hamas, to weaken the Palestinian Authority and avoid possible peace, so he could continue his colonization projects. The end of violence would mean that Israel might have to pull back, plus allow the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Peace is against Likud's interests.
So, why not the exact same forceful demand that Likud be removed?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Lord_technofascist_nepobaby Maybe they don't bend over, and call you. Then you have to either cave, looking stupid, or paralyze the house. If you paralyze the house, during a pandemic, they can blame you for no new covid relief, blame you for no minimum wage hike, and whatever other harm a paralyzed house would cause to people.
Or, if Jimmy is right, and they'd rather work with Republicans than with progressives, then they could coordinate something with Republicans to counter progressive protest votes.
1
-
@jamez2918 Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
By every relevant measure, Israel is objectively the aggressor ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, that the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "your" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
waynebanks6515 The difference, here, is that Jews had been living with Muslims for 1200+ years. Muslims weren't force converting, like Christians. When Christians reconquered Spain, the vast majority of the population was still Christian. The Christian conquerors then gave Jews and Muslims an ultimatum ... conversion, death, or exile. The Sephardic Jews left with the Muslims, and most settled in the Ottoman Empire, which welcomed them. Early Zionism also started under the Ottoman Empire.
Basically all major tensions stem from the British screwing Palestinians out of self rule over their lands, with the Balfour declaration, which led to the creation of Israel. That, not religion, was the initial core of the problem, on the Arab world side of things. On the Zionist side of things, there was definitely a religious aspect to thinking they had any right to their supposed "god given land".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Doc Wonder You're a moron, too. Only complete idiots point at big city totals. Red states tend to have higher firearm mortality rates, higher homicide rates, lower education ratings, lower healthcare ratings, leech off of blue states, etc. Anchorage, Alaska, has a higher violent crime rate than Chicago. St Louis, Missouri, has a higher violent crime rate than Baltimore. Tons of red state cities have a higher violent crime rate than San Francisco, don't even know why you included it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's not that Zionists are extraordinarily ruthless, wicked, evil, or whatnot ... it's that colonialism is an old shit philosophy, that shouldn't be around anymore. You said in another recent video that you'd have more respect for Trump supporters, if they'd just be honest. I have more respect for early Zionists who were quite honest. The Iron Wall is very honest in describing Zionism's colonial intentions ...
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/quot-the-iron-wall-quot
Just like American colonialism ... move some settlers into Native territories, the Natives get angry and attack, pretend the Natives are the bad guys, the military moves in and eradicates or pushes off the Natives, the border expands ... rinse and repeat.
The two state solution is a failure because it's based on colonialism. Native Americans didn't give up for hundreds of years, and not until there was almost nothing left of them.
You're a bright guy. There needs to be a single state solution, a right of return, government sharing like in Lebanon, and an end to what will be endless bullshit, the way things are going. There's not a huge difference between Manifest Destiny and Zionism.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
William Webber How did he "assure himself of their validity"? When will he release how he managed to authenticate them?
So, Hunter Biden, who has been living in California since 2018, travelled to Delaware with 3 old laptops that needed repairs in 2019, just happened to pick a Trump supporter's repair shop, and then just happened to forget about them. That shop owner then called him (and can provide us with a verifiable Hunter Biden phone number?) but got no response, then at some point rifled through 4 years of emails, found the "smoking gun", called the police or FBI (he couldn't seem to decide), the FBI sent a subpoena, he made a copy of what was then federal evidence, that evidence made its way to Rudy in early 2020, Rudy then took months to verify it himself, rather than handing it to an investigation he was personally promoting so they could do it, it took him months and months to verify the hard drives were authentic, totally missing the congressional hearing he was also promoting, and then once authenticated handed the information to a tabloid instead of his buddies at FOX, but didn't hand over how they were authenticated.
Have I got all that right?
1
-
William Webber As soon as you get the subpoena, it's basically theirs, under penalty of law. You can't just not give it to them, trying to claim it doesn't belong to them unless they get their hands on it.
And you're just lying about the "Biden camp". Days ago, they put out a statement saying Biden's official schedule of the time, shows no such meeting with any such person. As well as Biden's Ukraine advisor of the time denying any such meeting took place.
You also seem to be dumber than a stump. The Mueller investigation led to charges against 34 people. Plenty of evidence was found. And, they only didn't charge Jr and Kushner, because they couldn't prove they "knowingly" broke the law. In other words, the two could have used the defense that they were too stupid to know they were breaking the law, and Mueller wouldn't be able to prove otherwise. There's plenty of evidence that they are very very stupid, so I get how it would be difficult to prove they aren't. There was also evidence of obstruction laid out against Trump, but he didn't think a sitting president could be charged. Doesn't mean there was no evidence, or that he can't be once he's not a sitting president.
You just seem to be projecting. I mean, even with a majority of the Senate, the Republican investigation didn't find anything criminal. Kind of like their billion Benghazi investigations.
1
-
William Webber Who the hell is playing lawyer? It's just a fact that you can't withhold stuff that's been subpoenaed. "Subpoena", literally, means "under penalty". Don't hand it over and you're going to get charged.
Is that the same Ratcliffe who thinks a process that's laid out in the constitution is unconstitutional, if it's used against his buddy Trump? I'll wait for the FBI take on it, thanks. Even though Wray is a Republican, he doesn't seem to be french kissing Trump's asshole every chance he gets.
Oh hey, the exact guy Trump's own administration sanctioned as being a Russian stooge, but Trump and Giulliani kept sharing things from anyway, has supposedly found another laptop in the Ukraine. Hunter was leaving laptops everywhere. If someone isn't ruling out the possibility of Giulliani being played, then that seems pretty weird.
Unlike Trump, Biden released 22 years of tax returns. You can be sure that Bannon (another Trump criminal sidekick, charged with fraud over border wall fundraiser) had people go through them, because he had wanted to see them for over a year. Nobody has found any income from China. The Ukrainian Biden helped get fired, the EU also wanted fired, as did Republicans like Ron Johnson and Rob Portman. It wasn't all that controversial. I don't even know what you think there really is on Joe, even if the laptops pan out. Who gives a crap about Hunter? Is Joe planning on having his idiot of a kid working in the White House, like Trump?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeffbguarino Rofl, I read your "everyone I know", just fine, dimwit. And, since you consider any survey, that doesn't ask every single person in the country the question, to be invalid, your opinion is limited to your little circle of friends. Ironic, considering your opening criticism. You're, clearly, a nutjob.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@michaelarmijo4112 She helped add a few more progressive yes votes to congress, which is what actually moves you closer to being able to pass a progressive bill. She was just trying again, with Nina Turner. That, alone, is doing something.
Wait ... do you think going the third party route, which hasn't won the most popular third party a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence ... that puts you on the sidelines, with zero seats, zero votes, zero bills, zero amendments, zero committee time, zero floor time, etc. ... counts as doing something? Rofl!
1
-
@michaelarmijo4112 You didn't, in fact, ask anything, dimwit. Questions have question marks at the end of them.
You're the one who needs to research how the party speaker candidate is picked. Even the entire progressive caucus isn't enough votes to pick a different party speaker candidate, which is picked by simple majority of the Dem caucus.
No, I'm talking to a complete and utter moron.
The Hill's Rising had to do a retraction, when they claimed AOC voted for it. Their correction said she voted no. When AOC criticized some other members of congress for voting for it, they could have simply said "same to you", if she had voted for it, but they didn't ... indicating she hadn't. AOC's corporate Dem primary opponent, ran attack ads against her for voting against it. There's zero evidence she voted for it.
Bernie has never hid the fact that he has always caucused with the Democrats. Bernie has never hid that he's a harm reductionist. He always said he'd support whoever won the Democratic party primary. If you expected him to do otherwise, then you were never listening to what he was saying, and are a complete and utter moron.
Especially when the opponent was the incompetent fascist, Trump, why would you be upset that he encouraged voting against Trump ... unless you're a Trump supporter, of course?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jack Schitt Harris doesn't even grasp that mutual deterrence is based on mutually assured destruction. Because he doesn't, he's the psycho in his "thought" experiment. He makes out like he can take out the first country, with no return fire, and only have to deal with other countries getting mad about it after the fact. The reality of mutual deterrence is that, as soon as you send your missiles towards them, they send their missiles towards you. Harris is the suicidal one.
He also conflates "Muslim" into "Islamist" into "Jihadist", opening by saying we have to worry about all Muslims. Pakistan has nukes. They seem to grasp mutual deterrence just fine, and aren't anywhere close to being as psychotic as Harris, himself. He doesn't even seem to grasp Jihadists. Although they may influence some individuals to make suicide attacks, they're not suicidal, en mass. They have goals that require the majority to remain alive. The same goes for non-Muslim extremists, like the Tamil Tigers, who invented suicide vests. The end goal requires most of them be alive.
1
-
1
-
@infinitemonkey917 So, let's say Person A wants the freedom to spout hateful, racist, bigoted speech, but is opposed to "unpatriotic", anti-capitalist, anti-religious speech. And, Person B wants the freedom to criticize their nation, capitalism, and religions, but is opposed to hateful, racist, bigoted speech.
Basically totally opposite goals. But, just because they both oppose some kind of speech, you want to say "Samesies!"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thomasjr8318 They've been going on about those grants, for a year, including Dumpty. Nobody has argued there weren't grants. Some 10% went to Wuhan to gather and analyze samples. The bulk of the research (part of the larger USAID Predict research program, which includes researchers from the Smithsonian and other US institutions and companies, which has received some $6b in research grants, who all work with on the ground scientific groups in countries all over the world, that are fully approved by the State Department first) is done inside the US. Big woop, there's a money trail, fully approved by congress (if they actually read what funding is being spent on), with full participation from other government departments, fully renewed under Trump, yada, yada, yada ...
So? Is there any actual evidence of a lab leak? Who gives a crap about a money trail leading to nothing?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I love Chomsky, but Germany had numerous parties, at the time. You could blame the Centre Party for not forming a coalition, or the German National People's Party, or the Bavarian People's Party, etc. Numerous combinations of parties could have formed a coalition with more seats than the Nazis. You could also blame the Social Democrat Party, itself, for breaking with its roots, leading to members breaking off and forming the Communist Party, in the first place. "Social democrat" and "democratic socialist" meant the same thing, originally. But, even though the Social Democrat Party didn't drop Marxism from their platform until the 50s, they started moving towards the right during WWI. During WWI, they tossed out any anti-war members of the party, which led to a split and two Social Democrat parties, MSPD and USPD. Then came the German Revolution and the overthrow of the monarchists. The SPD leadership sided with centrists, conservatives, and former Imperial Officers in the military, against workers wanting production nationalized and overseen by direct democracy ... exactly what "social democrat" was supposed to be, at the time ... and a democratic military, with officers elected by their men. SPD betrayed their base, just like Democrats did, long ago. You can't do that, and keep expecting those you're betraying to blindly follow.
The clearest blame, is that it was the fault of all the morons or assholes, who actually voted for the Nazis. Seriously, you're still going to have a country with a large population of fascist morons and assholes. Why? And how do you get rid of them, rather than continuously just choosing a lesser of two evils to try and win a few more seats than them for a few years?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, when you have people making laws, that BDS, which has nothing to do with all Jewish businesses everywhere, only Israeli ones, is anti-semitic ... Or, you have people saying anti-Israeli government or anti-zionism, which are political and have nothing to do with all Jews everywhere, are anti-semitic ... Coming from people like Ben Shapiro, sorry, I don't buy his definition.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nappel6496 Nope. You're showing zero respect for the average young people they actually were, before feeling the need to sign up, or legally having to sign up, something almost all of them never would have done if there wasn't a world war going on. If you were a careerist, back then, you probably would have been criticizing any of them who supported FDR's new subsidized housing program, telling them to be a man, join the military, and earn your housing, or criticizing them for something else, right up until the US became involved in the war.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Total testing is irrelevant. Even testing per capita is irrelevant. Neither tell you how you're testing against the virus spread. Number of tests per positive result tells you how you're testing vs the virus. The US is testing about 6 people per positive result. New York and New Jersey are testing at pathetic rates of 2-3 people per positive result. Most of our world leading countries are failing. France is also testing at a pathetic rate of 2-3 people per positive result. The UK is testing 4-5 people per positive result. Spain is testing 5 people per positive result. Italy is testing 7-8 people per positive result. Germany is testing 13 people per positive result. Canada is testing about 15 people per positive result, which still isn't enough. Countries, like S Korea, New Zealand, and Australia, that quickly contained the virus and flattened their curves, are testing 50+ people per positive result. Sweden isn't even trying to contain the virus, and they're testing at a rate of 5-6 people per positive result. How countries can claim to be trying to contain the virus, while testing at a similar rate, or worse, than a country that isn't even trying, is beyond me. They really don't seem to be trying all that hard.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Zenith118 "There can be no voluntary agreement between ourselves and the Palestine Arabs. Not now, nor in the prospective future. I say this with such conviction, not because I want to hurt the moderate Zionists. I do not believe that they will be hurt. Except for those who were born blind, they realised long ago that it is utterly impossible to obtain the voluntary consent of the Palestine Arabs for converting "Palestine" from an Arab country into a country with a Jewish majority.
My readers have a general idea of the history of colonisation in other countries. I suggest that they consider all the precedents with which they are acquainted, and see whether there is one solitary instance of any colonisation being carried on with the consent of the native population. There is no such precedent.
The native populations, civilised or uncivilised, have always stubbornly resisted the colonists, irrespective of whether they were civilised or savage."
"Our Peace-mongers are trying to persuade us that the Arabs are either fools, whom we can deceive by masking our real aims, or that they are corrupt and can be bribed to abandon to us their claim to priority in Palestine , in return for cultural and economic advantages. I repudiate this conception of the Palestinian Arabs. Culturally they are five hundred years behind us, they have neither our endurance nor our determination; but they are just as good psychologists as we are, and their minds have been sharpened like ours by centuries of fine-spun logomachy. We may tell them whatever we like about the innocence of our aims, watering them down and sweetening them with honeyed words to make them palatable, but they know what we want, as well as we know what they do not want. They feel at least the same instinctive jealous love of Palestine, as the old Aztecs felt for ancient Mexico, and the Sioux for their rolling Prairies.
To imagine, as our Arabophiles do, that they will voluntarily consent to the realisation of Zionism, in return for the moral and material conveniences which the Jewish colonist brings with him, is a childish notion, which has at bottom a kind of contempt for the Arab people; it means that they despise the Arab race, which they regard as a corrupt mob that can be bought and sold, and are willing to give up their fatherland for a good railway system.
There is no justification for such a belief. It may be that some individual Arabs take bribes. But that does not mean that the Arab people of Palestine as a whole will sell that fervent patriotism that they guard so jealously, and which even the Papuans will never sell. Every native population in the world resists colonists as long as it has the slightest hope of being able to rid itself of the danger of being colonised.
That is what the Arabs in Palestine are doing, and what they will persist in doing as long as there remains a solitary spark of hope that they will be able to prevent the transformation of "Palestine" into the "Land of Israel.""
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wvu05 Most states have a mandatory retirement for judges. Kind of odd to retire those who interpret the law, but not those who create the laws. There are a number of other government jobs with mandatory retirement. Also odd to force retire generals, but not the ones telling generals what to do. Odd to force retire older intelligence agents, but not the ones telling them what to do. Out in the private sector, the majority of people over 50 feel like they were forced out of jobs they wouldn't have retired from, and are now in jobs they didn't particularly want, for less money. There are plenty of contracts that conveniently run out at a certain age. Businesses all over find ways to get people to retire, if they really want them to. And most people do get the hell out by the time they're 65.
The original "democracy", in Ancient Greece, much like the US' original "democracy", only included only landowning males, not women, not non landowners, not slaves ... various restrictions might make a democratic system more, or less, democratic, but it doesn't completely abandon it. The US already isn't a direct democracy. That doesn't make it completely "anti-democratic". Most democracies aren't. The US is less democratic than a number of countries, due to gerrymandering, the senate, the electoral college, disenfranchisement, and voter suppression. Doesn't make them completely "anti-democratic". Completely "anti-democratic" is trying to overthrow the democratic process, to keep an unelected ruler in power, like what Republicans tried to do. An age limit is more democratic than a term limit. You could have as many terms as you want, up until a certain age.
There's a minimum age for both running and voting. Automobile accidents increasing again at higher age categories, and it's not because they're careless, like many teenage drivers. It's because cognitive decline starts setting in. At 65, 15-20% of people are experiencing some kind of mild cognitive decline. By 70, average cognitive scores are dropping below those of 25 year olds, who aren't allowed to run for many positions.
Do you think Bernie's hospital visit, and heart stents, put a bit of a damper on his campaign and gave the opposition some ammo? Would have been nice if he started running for president, become a household name, and have his policies part of mainstream conversations, decades ago. Maybe he would have, if he had known he wouldn't be able to later. And, for every Bernie, who still seems to have his wits about him, how many Trumps or Bidens, who seem to have, at least, some mild cognitive impairments ... how many Dianne Feinsteins or Reagans, who had more ... how many congress members taking Alzheimers medication? Or, how many that simply want to return to the 1950s, that they thought it was awesome? Bernie just happened to be on the right side of most things, all along. Many have been on the wrong side of things all along, and are entrenched.
An age limit might not get you something much better out of McConnell's district, but it might get you something more progressive out of Pelosi's, or Feinstein's, once the seat is freed up.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's not simply testing per capita that's important, David. How fast that testing is rolled out is more important. If you quickly jump to 20k tests a day, get ahead of the virus quickly by testing beyond those showing symptoms, and largely contain the virus, like S Korea did, then you don't really have to increase the testing rate. You could even lower testing significantly, and not end up with a high tests per million. If you allow the virus to spread to hundreds of thousands of people, you need to multiply the tests needed significantly, and just doing more tests per million, than S Korea, might not be enough. Italy, Spain, and Germany have almost double the test per million that S Korea does, and it's still not enough, because they rolled out mass testing too slowly. The US should probably be at 100k tests per million, rather than 10k.
1
-
@Breadbored. I'm nitpicking because I want to be clear about what's what, for anyone reading. You referred to the "Canada" system, not your provincial system. You said that Canada system had "fundamental" problems. Then you gave government negotiated doctor salaries as an example, while leaving out that that's a provincial government negotiation, not a federal (Canada) government negotiation, and that it's not a problem across the whole system. Anti M4A folks love to pick up on any negative anecdotes about the Canadian system, so I just want to be clear.
To be clear, the US already has hospital shutdown problems in less populated areas. Those hospital shutdown problems are even worse in areas that didn't accept federal assistance to expand Medicaid. You don't know if your hospital might have already shutdown if it wasn't for public funding. Keeping hospitals afloat in less populated areas is a fundamental problem for any system, and possibly a worse problem without public funding.
So, your example was neither a "Canada" problem, nor a "fundamental" problem with our system specifically, nor even solely a single payer problem. Our system evolved over decades, so it's also not a problem with any hasty implementation. And, yes, universal coverage is inherently better than not having it, even if there are still issues. If we agree on all that, then we agree your initial post was kinda bullshit, just like I said, as well as some of the other language you used, all of which I didn't misread, at all. If you're reading that I'm arguing against anything other than specific statements you made, then you're the illiterate one.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Snihawk What a load of horse shit. The IDF has its largest base in a shopping mall, cowardly hiding behind civilian human shields. The IDF has over 400k militants (reservists), amongst its populace, cowardly hiding behind civilian human shields. Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "their" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto, in Gaza. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thorby8583 Germany has tested about 11 people per confirmed case. That's better than Italy, about 7 per confirmed. That's better than Spain, UK, US, Sweden, which are about 5 per confirmed, or lower. Canada, is at 15 per confirmed. Norway, which has just about flattened is at 20 per confirmed. Australia, S Korea, New Zealand, Iceland, all of which have flattened, are testing at 50+ per confirmed case. Germany isn't the best place to start.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@luchi.el.zorrito If demand didn't drop, and people spent just as much money, buying just as much stuff, then what caused the economy to tank? If there was simply a shift, but the exact same amount was bought and sold, that shouldn't affect the entire economy. And, as with most recessions, the inflation rate dropped to near zero (not a good thing in a capitalist system), because businesses were trying to get people to buy stuff, so didn't increase prices.
If supply didn't drop, and kept nice and steady, then why isn't supply meeting demand?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1