Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2021
- Messages
- 188
The Politics Megathread
- Thread starter Zephyrus
- Start date
- Status
@Hornyturtle What ideas? All I see is you raging about our economic system without voicing a single sensible solution.
But in case you decide to make one, make sure it doesn't go against the Constitution or our Founding Principles. 🙂
But in case you decide to make one, make sure it doesn't go against the Constitution or our Founding Principles. 🙂
Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2021
- Messages
- 188
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2019
- Messages
- 10,562
@immortalartisan
No, Trump IS a narcissist. That's pretty evident from the way he acts
Unless I know what you specifically mean by "American culture," there's no point in debating it really. However, to govern without some philosophical principles or underpinnings in any sense won't lead to a good society or culture. Hence why I like the American emphasis on liberty and anti-authoritarianism above all.
There's several misunderstandings about the labor market here.
Firstly, it is a false dichotomy to say that it has to be Artificial Intelligence or Immigration that affect the job market. Firstly, advances in technology have always affected the labor market, so it's always going to be a factor in creating unemployment (which is called structural unemployment). but that does not mean immigration does not affect the demand for labor
Here is the labor market graph
https://----[! URL is only accessible to you. !]----/proxy/7quUkdyFsD3sTWd5dimnHabwe7Xmzyig5A9HfXUXrQBRShxvZx5vZOnmQdgtPBj7KLuC58SsL4cwdEpLR945meDoJFJ93DMo9Cw
The more people you have within a country, the more supply of labor there is without there being a change in demand for labor, meaning that the wages of the workers goes down because their skills are more accessible and abundant, which means they are easily replaceable. You can't have mass immigration and expect to solve your second issue because it means there are more people to fill jobs and their wages will go down. It's tied inevitably to supply and demand.
Additionally, increasing the minimum wage will only make it so companies are incentivized to have less people employed to stay afloat, creating more of a demand for jobs and making employees more content with poorer working conditions due to more people demanding jobs.
My experience in college so far is that High School was a far superior institution in terms of actually informing you about the underlying philosophies and principles, and it seems that we should move society into auto-didactic means of education with the internet instead of overpriced think tanks, really.
I think people lack perspective. Everywhere in the world is unfair and shitty. Life is unfair and shitty. And so you have to hold America to a standard in relation to other countries instead of this impossibly high standard no nation can hold, and through that, America is a lot more fair than most of the world in comparison.
"Great" is not a moral claim, but one of power and prestige. The Romans formed a Great Empire, as did the Mongols and the Huns, but that does not mean it was ethical. That is why it is important the world hegemon is one that is founded on moral principles that care about human rights, like America.
Europe and the EU is governed by an unaccountable bureaucracy making laws for everyone and trying to untie Europe under the Global homogeneous state of unaccountable bureaucrats who make sweeping laws and legislation. They are not in a good state right now with draconian free speech laws and crackdowns on dissident. Europe is only successful because it can support itself off the ability for Americans to consume their exports, and if we go under, they will soon follow.
The culture war in America is representative a large struggle throughout the West. We are not special nor unique in this regard
@Halo
Trump didn't pack the courts, he filled vacancies which were within his duties as president. Packing the court means to add more justice to the supreme court to control the Judiciary, not to fill vacancies.
Also, I don't think Trump really did anything unconstitutional or that was extending powers anymore than any of the recent presidents have done. This is where citing examples helps your argument
Finally I have stated multiple times that I do not "love" Trump and am not really a Trump supporter, it's just that the election stuff and seeing what Biden has done has changed my perspective a bit on Trump in comparison due to all the lies and bad faith interpretations about who he is from the media.
All of these seem like disingenuous "got'chas" more than actually trying to refute what I am saying.
No, Trump IS a narcissist. That's pretty evident from the way he acts
Unless I know what you specifically mean by "American culture," there's no point in debating it really. However, to govern without some philosophical principles or underpinnings in any sense won't lead to a good society or culture. Hence why I like the American emphasis on liberty and anti-authoritarianism above all.
There's several misunderstandings about the labor market here.
Firstly, it is a false dichotomy to say that it has to be Artificial Intelligence or Immigration that affect the job market. Firstly, advances in technology have always affected the labor market, so it's always going to be a factor in creating unemployment (which is called structural unemployment). but that does not mean immigration does not affect the demand for labor
Here is the labor market graph
https://----[! URL is only accessible to you. !]----/proxy/7quUkdyFsD3sTWd5dimnHabwe7Xmzyig5A9HfXUXrQBRShxvZx5vZOnmQdgtPBj7KLuC58SsL4cwdEpLR945meDoJFJ93DMo9Cw
The more people you have within a country, the more supply of labor there is without there being a change in demand for labor, meaning that the wages of the workers goes down because their skills are more accessible and abundant, which means they are easily replaceable. You can't have mass immigration and expect to solve your second issue because it means there are more people to fill jobs and their wages will go down. It's tied inevitably to supply and demand.
Additionally, increasing the minimum wage will only make it so companies are incentivized to have less people employed to stay afloat, creating more of a demand for jobs and making employees more content with poorer working conditions due to more people demanding jobs.
Probably also true, but the fact that they are ideologically homogeneous does not help because it makes them not as good at making people who are able to function within society as on the job training.
My experience in college so far is that High School was a far superior institution in terms of actually informing you about the underlying philosophies and principles, and it seems that we should move society into auto-didactic means of education with the internet instead of overpriced think tanks, really.
I think people lack perspective. Everywhere in the world is unfair and shitty. Life is unfair and shitty. And so you have to hold America to a standard in relation to other countries instead of this impossibly high standard no nation can hold, and through that, America is a lot more fair than most of the world in comparison.
"Great" is not a moral claim, but one of power and prestige. The Romans formed a Great Empire, as did the Mongols and the Huns, but that does not mean it was ethical. That is why it is important the world hegemon is one that is founded on moral principles that care about human rights, like America.
Europe and the EU is governed by an unaccountable bureaucracy making laws for everyone and trying to untie Europe under the Global homogeneous state of unaccountable bureaucrats who make sweeping laws and legislation. They are not in a good state right now with draconian free speech laws and crackdowns on dissident. Europe is only successful because it can support itself off the ability for Americans to consume their exports, and if we go under, they will soon follow.
The culture war in America is representative a large struggle throughout the West. We are not special nor unique in this regard
@Halo
Trump didn't pack the courts, he filled vacancies which were within his duties as president. Packing the court means to add more justice to the supreme court to control the Judiciary, not to fill vacancies.
Also, I don't think Trump really did anything unconstitutional or that was extending powers anymore than any of the recent presidents have done. This is where citing examples helps your argument
Finally I have stated multiple times that I do not "love" Trump and am not really a Trump supporter, it's just that the election stuff and seeing what Biden has done has changed my perspective a bit on Trump in comparison due to all the lies and bad faith interpretations about who he is from the media.
All of these seem like disingenuous "got'chas" more than actually trying to refute what I am saying.
@Tamerlane
Aren't you ignoring how these vacancies got to him in the first place?
And dems were saying same shit about Barack, so as republicans about George before him. Seems to me this is an issue of perspective and personal bias, rather than facts or examples.
Ah, here it comes. "You don't debate how I want you to, you must be disingenuous." If you don't like this so much, just ignore it.
Supporter
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2018
- Messages
- 320
@Tamerlane
Your comments are always very insightful, I enjoy reading them. Thank you.
Anyway, who here is going to take the vaccine/who isn't? Figured out I might get good answers from here. I accept all points of view, whether I might or not agree with them, so please feel free to answer regardless of your stance.
Your comments are always very insightful, I enjoy reading them. Thank you.
Anyway, who here is going to take the vaccine/who isn't? Figured out I might get good answers from here. I accept all points of view, whether I might or not agree with them, so please feel free to answer regardless of your stance.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2019
- Messages
- 10,562
@Halo
Anthony Kennedy (R) retired
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (D) died of Pancreatic Cancer
If you're implying something nefariousness, you'll have to explain it in more depth because this seems to just be coincidence. Obama appointed two judges in his run and Trump got to appoint three. That's it.
This is why you need to cite what Trump did that was unconstitutional. Bush actually did unconstitutional shit like the patriot act and Obama saw the extrajudicial killing of Anwar al-Awlaki and his family, which violates their rights to due process, just as an example off the top of my head.
But what did Trump do specifically? We can both play this game, but until we have examples that Trump did which definitely violated the rights of American Citizens that his predecessors did not do. Give me an example.
It's not that I personally don't like how you debate, but it just doesn't address my position at best, and at worst is contrary to what evidence I have on hand, and so I engage with it to dispell the seeming misinformation or strawmen positions that don't address what I am saying, really.
You're not disingenuous because of your debate tactics, you seem disingenuous because of how you frame your arguments in response to mine.
@Alraisen
I'm waiting a bit until I know the long-term effects, and I want the people who are in the vulnerable demographics to get their dose first. I don't trust the Trump administration to have rushed out a functioning vaccine in a few months, if I'm being honest. Just give it time and we'll see how it goes
Antonin Scalia (R) died of natural causes
Anthony Kennedy (R) retired
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (D) died of Pancreatic Cancer
If you're implying something nefariousness, you'll have to explain it in more depth because this seems to just be coincidence. Obama appointed two judges in his run and Trump got to appoint three. That's it.
This is why you need to cite what Trump did that was unconstitutional. Bush actually did unconstitutional shit like the patriot act and Obama saw the extrajudicial killing of Anwar al-Awlaki and his family, which violates their rights to due process, just as an example off the top of my head.
But what did Trump do specifically? We can both play this game, but until we have examples that Trump did which definitely violated the rights of American Citizens that his predecessors did not do. Give me an example.
From what I can gather, your main rhetorical tactic is to look for seeming contradictions or false predictions and present them. My issue with this line of argumentation is it never address the crux of the argument and is more dancing around the issue.
It's not that I personally don't like how you debate, but it just doesn't address my position at best, and at worst is contrary to what evidence I have on hand, and so I engage with it to dispell the seeming misinformation or strawmen positions that don't address what I am saying, really.
You're not disingenuous because of your debate tactics, you seem disingenuous because of how you frame your arguments in response to mine.
@Alraisen
I'm waiting a bit until I know the long-term effects, and I want the people who are in the vulnerable demographics to get their dose first. I don't trust the Trump administration to have rushed out a functioning vaccine in a few months, if I'm being honest. Just give it time and we'll see how it goes
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2019
- Messages
- 3,052
@Tamerlane
I'm talking about the 105 inherited vacancies, which he got thanks to the great efforts of the Turtle and Friends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_judicial_appointment_controversies
What's the point? You already in denial about the most unconstitutional thing he did (insurrection attempt), which he got away with thanks to a technicality. Literally nothing I can say is going to change your mind.
Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2021
- Messages
- 188
It's probably safer to catch covid and build your immunity that way than it is to take the vaccine. Alot of people you should probably never trust are making big money from it
Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2021
- Messages
- 188
@Hornyturtle Yeah, this is my favorite part: https://youtu.be/5qDePLRK1xU
Turtle: yep, he's responsible, but nah not guilty cause I delayed the process lol 😋
Btw, I'm surprised you trust big tech corporations enough to keep using the Internet. Curious.
Turtle: yep, he's responsible, but nah not guilty cause I delayed the process lol 😋
Btw, I'm surprised you trust big tech corporations enough to keep using the Internet. Curious.
Group Leader
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2019
- Messages
- 2,357
Watched two videos of Asian Boss interviewing American expats and Japanese people about their thoughts on the capitol riot.
Japan and Korea ought to watch out for western media propaganda more.
@Tamerlane Don't waste your time.
Japan and Korea ought to watch out for western media propaganda more.
@Tamerlane Don't waste your time.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2019
- Messages
- 10,562
@EOTFOFYL
If you make a bad argument, or if your argument is based on a point that is fallacious or contrary to the evidence, I will point it out. If it seems to me that you're making a point in bad faith, I will point it out.
I am the type who likes to have standards for what arguments they present, really. You should challenge one another because it makes your thinking and argumentation stronger.
@Halo
Fair, but "packing the court" specifically refers to the Supreme Court, so you've branched away from the main point. Don't stray away from the main point.
That is because he can not be blamed for inciting insurrection because he did not incite violence and everything he did was within his rights. There is no evidence to suggest Trump wanted them to riot, let alone wanted them to spearhead an insurrection.
Unless you have some massive bombshell that we're unaware of, the only points I have seen are either taking the least charitable interpretation of his words, pointing to tenuous connections and post hoc reasoning, or outright fabricating evidence in the case of the Impeachment Trial. It would never hold up in criminal court.
Also "denier" implies that it's a fact that he caused an insurrection. It is demonstrably not. He told them to "peacefully march," not to storm the building, and the evidence suggests that they began to enter the Capitol around 1:00, which is when Trump was still speaking to the audience. You are definitively wrong.
Even then, I asked you for what Trump did that was unconstitutional and you pointed to something that all the evidence says he did not incite, and said that because I won't concede that point to you, therefore I will not accept any point you make, or any evidence I point to. That's just deflection, and it does not address my claim or argument at all.
When I say it seems you're being disingenuous, it's because you're not engaging with my argument in any meaningful way and dismissing any attempt to do so as futile. That only reflects poorly on your ability to make a counterargument.
@Mr_Detective
I may not be able to change their minds, but if someone's reading along with the thread or if there's others, I may be able to strengthen my own position in their eyes.
If you make a bad argument, or if your argument is based on a point that is fallacious or contrary to the evidence, I will point it out. If it seems to me that you're making a point in bad faith, I will point it out.
I am the type who likes to have standards for what arguments they present, really. You should challenge one another because it makes your thinking and argumentation stronger.
@Halo
Fair, but "packing the court" specifically refers to the Supreme Court, so you've branched away from the main point. Don't stray away from the main point.
That is because he can not be blamed for inciting insurrection because he did not incite violence and everything he did was within his rights. There is no evidence to suggest Trump wanted them to riot, let alone wanted them to spearhead an insurrection.
Unless you have some massive bombshell that we're unaware of, the only points I have seen are either taking the least charitable interpretation of his words, pointing to tenuous connections and post hoc reasoning, or outright fabricating evidence in the case of the Impeachment Trial. It would never hold up in criminal court.
Also "denier" implies that it's a fact that he caused an insurrection. It is demonstrably not. He told them to "peacefully march," not to storm the building, and the evidence suggests that they began to enter the Capitol around 1:00, which is when Trump was still speaking to the audience. You are definitively wrong.
Even then, I asked you for what Trump did that was unconstitutional and you pointed to something that all the evidence says he did not incite, and said that because I won't concede that point to you, therefore I will not accept any point you make, or any evidence I point to. That's just deflection, and it does not address my claim or argument at all.
When I say it seems you're being disingenuous, it's because you're not engaging with my argument in any meaningful way and dismissing any attempt to do so as futile. That only reflects poorly on your ability to make a counterargument.
@Mr_Detective
I may not be able to change their minds, but if someone's reading along with the thread or if there's others, I may be able to strengthen my own position in their eyes.
@Tamerlane
You said
Plurality made me to understand it as a take on appointments in general.
Of course there isn't. After all, he never said exactly "hey, go and murder Pence and the dems for me" *wink-wink* 😉
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2019
- Messages
- 10,562
@Halo
I'll own up to the fact that I made a typo, but it's pretty clear what I meant by the phrase I used and the context I was referencing.
"Packs the court" is an allusion to this bill, specifically, and has pretty much become the go-to phrase for the concept
I'd say this is why clear communication and explaining the positions in depth would help, instead of trying to be snarky like Twitter encourages people to do, because it doesn't really help the conversation, especially if you go after off-handed comments like that.
Apparently Halo is a mind-reader and can absolutely without a doubt determine the motives of people, even if it contradicts their actions and their statements and actions, including the fact Trump told them not to be violent and to go home multiple times, and is the one who called in the National Guard.
Unless you have some damn good evidence, never assume people's motives, because you know what they say about people who assume.
I'll own up to the fact that I made a typo, but it's pretty clear what I meant by the phrase I used and the context I was referencing.
"Packs the court" is an allusion to this bill, specifically, and has pretty much become the go-to phrase for the concept
I'd say this is why clear communication and explaining the positions in depth would help, instead of trying to be snarky like Twitter encourages people to do, because it doesn't really help the conversation, especially if you go after off-handed comments like that.
Apparently Halo is a mind-reader and can absolutely without a doubt determine the motives of people, even if it contradicts their actions and their statements and actions, including the fact Trump told them not to be violent and to go home multiple times, and is the one who called in the National Guard.
Unless you have some damn good evidence, never assume people's motives, because you know what they say about people who assume.
@Tamerlane The concept only came into being after the balance got so tilted to one side. We could also talk about Merrick Garland, but I don't care enough.
Indeed, Donald's raging for several months was very peaceful, nor did he say anything about walking down with anybody anywhere. His staff definitely did not say anything about trial by combat. The National Guard was deployed very swiftly.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2019
- Messages
- 10,562
@Halo
Being angry does not mean he incited an insurrection, nor does presenting evidence of malpractice or suspicious circumstances.
Saying he will peacefully and patriotically march in front of the capitol is not inciting an insurrection
Trump did not deploy the national guard as fast as he could have, therefore he cited an insurrection
Stop. Moving. The. Goalposts. It's all deliberately trying to make the argument not about whether or not trump started a riot, or any of my arguments.
None of this in any way directly or indirectly makes it definitive that Trump intentionally incited violence. If your barrier of evidence was as high as it was when I was presenting evidence calling the legitimacy of the election into question, you would not be in the position you are in now.
Being angry does not mean he incited an insurrection, nor does presenting evidence of malpractice or suspicious circumstances.
Saying he will peacefully and patriotically march in front of the capitol is not inciting an insurrection
Someone who was not Trump used a metaphor to imply a long and hard-fought campaign. Watch the clip instead of taking him out context.
Trump did not deploy the national guard as fast as he could have, therefore he cited an insurrection
Stop. Moving. The. Goalposts. It's all deliberately trying to make the argument not about whether or not trump started a riot, or any of my arguments.
None of this in any way directly or indirectly makes it definitive that Trump intentionally incited violence. If your barrier of evidence was as high as it was when I was presenting evidence calling the legitimacy of the election into question, you would not be in the position you are in now.
- Status
Similar threads
