Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Politics. The feel in your country.

1629630632634635

Comments

  • TakisMegasTakisMegas Member Posts: 835

    In regards to policy (and I guess also in regards to the last 10 or so posts about guns) I would support a bill that calls for a mandated threshold of liability insurance to own a gun. Proof of this insurance would be needed BEFORE the purchase could take place. I believe this would would cut down on the kind of angry, impulsive buys that take place in the heat of the moment when someone starts thinking about taking a life with a firearm. It also can't really be argued about if you believe in the concept of personal responsibility, as it requires you to do exactly that.

    What would you suggest be done about the illegal guns that are used? I agree with you on legal sales but how many murders are committed with a legal firearms. Grabbing Dad's gun from his lockbox accounts for some but most are illegal?

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    edited July 2018


    I didn't skip the " A well regulated militia" part. It's convenient of the U.S. government not to assign " A well regulated militia", they would have someone to answer too then, when Presidents in the U.S. give Executive Orders and go against Congress and the will of the people.

    I see that gun control is a huge thing with you, with me it's what causes the gun to be used. Neither of us are wrong, though I don't believe an inanimate object is to blame.

    The countries without the wild proliferation of these inanimate objects don't have mass shootings.

    So are you saying Americans are more violent? There's research that shows that's not true. It's not movies, video games, or whatever either.


    Look at the Florida Man who "stood his ground" a day or so ago. He was pushed to the ground, then he shot the guy and killed him. Police say no charges. I wonder how that would work in a country without easy access to guns. They'd both be alive right. No one deserves to die for a push. Not very well regulated either if you can get away with murder like this against a guy backing away.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/23/us/florida-stand-your-ground-fatal-shooting/index.html

    Post edited by smeagolheart on
  • TakisMegasTakisMegas Member Posts: 835

    I beg to differ about movies and video games.

    I already commented on peoples mental state and extreme ideologies. That video was exactly what I am talking about. It was not the gun that did the shooting. The man already expressed that he would shoot.
    The other man should not have pushed him.

    Canada has strict gun laws but yet shootings happen. Maybe Americans are more violent and the research is bull shit. I do not see any other first world countries citizens act with such reckless abandon and disregard for human life. There is no respect anymore.

    Yet though again, and also in this thread, instead of discussing the issue which is people acting like savages the conversation gets pulled into a gun debate. Why are we all so scared of talking about the obvious. How are we supposed to grow as a race if we cant even discuss what is troubling in our societies? Why the fear to engaged in these topics?

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    edited July 2018
    Other countries consume American media and games. Other countries have the same religions and extremists. Mental illness rates in the US are in line with other developed countries. Maybe the research is bs but I'm inclined to believe research over a feeling that the research is wrong. What's different in the US? Massive amount of and access to guns. Dwarfing other countries in gun ownership.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html

    - No other country has more than 46 million guns or 18 mass shooters. The US had 90 mass shooters and more than 200 million guns.

    - It's not the video games or movies, other countries watch and play the same stuff. Americans are no more likely to play video games than people in any other developed country. American entertainment is exported throughout the world.

    - It's not mental health, our rates of severe mental disorders are all in line with those of other wealthy countries.

    -The United States is not more prone to crime than other developed countries studies. Data that has been repeatedly confirmed shows that American crime is simply more lethal. A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.

    FinneousPJThacoBell
  • TakisMegasTakisMegas Member Posts: 835

    What's different in the US?


    Respect.

    smeagolheart
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    edited July 2018

    What's different in the US?

    Respect.
    But we're got southern hospitality and stuff. Every other country has more respect than the US? Couldn't it be the more than 90 million guns and ridiculously lax regulations due to the gun lobby (exhibit A stand your ground law example). Its more unregulated free-for-all more than well regulated militia.

  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,719

    In regards to policy (and I guess also in regards to the last 10 or so posts about guns) I would support a bill that calls for a mandated threshold of liability insurance to own a gun. Proof of this insurance would be needed BEFORE the purchase could take place. I believe this would would cut down on the kind of angry, impulsive buys that take place in the heat of the moment when someone starts thinking about taking a life with a firearm. It also can't really be argued about if you believe in the concept of personal responsibility, as it requires you to do exactly that.

    What would you suggest be done about the illegal guns that are used? I agree with you on legal sales but how many murders are committed with a legal firearms. Grabbing Dad's gun from his lockbox accounts for some but most are illegal?
    Hard to do anything about illegal guns when each state has their own laws. Chicago's tough gun laws don't work because Indiana is just a hop, skip and jump away, and they basically have no restrictions at all. And when it comes to MASS shootings, more often than not, we learn the weapon was bought legally.

    TakisMegassmeagolheart
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    edited July 2018


    So much for the "middle class miracle". Did anyone fall for that line? Dat chart looks awfully limp.

    Where did all the money go from the massive deficit exploding tax cut that has now has Republicans eyeing Medicare and social security for cuts to pay for it

  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    As far as the religion issue goes, wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where people's beliefs were based on demonstrable reality. Unfortunately we do not live in that world, and people believe all sorts of make believe.

    "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."
    - Voltaire

    smeagolheart
  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 3,009
    The original source provides more context for that graph, especially if you choose the "view all" setting. The graph being cited calculates wages after accounting for inflation; the *actual* wage graph is above it and shows that wages are up 1.1% versus this time last year. Also, note the scaling in the graph cited in the tweet--it is designed to make it look like there is a precipitous drop when, in fact, that is not happening. After accounting for inflation the numbers show that "real wages" are down only -1.4% versus this time last year. Not great news, of course, but also not the disaster the Bloomberg tweet purports it to be.

    Statistics in a vacuum are useless; instead, they are valid only in context. Bloomberg should know better.

    TakisMegasBalrog99
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

    smeagolheartThacoBellGrond0
  • TakisMegasTakisMegas Member Posts: 835
    chimaera said:









    And the earth is round...

    The earth is flat... to some.

  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 7,001

    The original source provides more context for that graph, especially if you choose the "view all" setting. The graph being cited calculates wages after accounting for inflation; the *actual* wage graph is above it and shows that wages are up 1.1% versus this time last year. Also, note the scaling in the graph cited in the tweet--it is designed to make it look like there is a precipitous drop when, in fact, that is not happening. After accounting for inflation the numbers show that "real wages" are down only -1.4% versus this time last year. Not great news, of course, but also not the disaster the Bloomberg tweet purports it to be.

    Statistics in a vacuum are useless; instead, they are valid only in context. Bloomberg should know better.

    Bloomberg DOES know better. They're not reporting news, they're trying to mold a narrative...

    TakisMegas
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    80 % of Finns support keeping the whole country populated when asked. Yet in reality 80 % of municipalities suffer from negative population growth due to people moving to the cities. In conclusion, cognitive dissonance is funny.

  • TakisMegasTakisMegas Member Posts: 835
    edited July 2018
    Wildfires in Greece.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44932366

    I've been in touch with relatives in the area and it is really bad.

    *The government is concerned about the alignment of the fires. They are on the east and west sides of Athens and they are estimated to have started at the same time.

    Balrog99
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,719
    edited July 2018

    So......welfare for farmers is a-ok I guess, just not for anyone else. Everyone else can feel the effects of the tariffs, but a constituency that votes overwhelming for Trump is immune to his policies because he is just going to hand them money. Gotcha. Let's not hear from conservatives about inner-city "welfare queens" ever again, ok?? I'm sure all these farmers will be refusing these checks because of how much they hate socialism and how much they believe in the free market.

    This would bring farm subsidies in this country to almost 35 billion dollars. Or, to put it another way, half as much as is being spent on food stamps for ALL OF THE REST OF THE COUNTRY. No single constituency in this country is likely receiving more government welfare than farmers.

    ThacoBellsmeagolheartGrond0
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,009

    Other countries consume American media and games. Other countries have the same religions and extremists. Mental illness rates in the US are in line with other developed countries. Maybe the research is bs but I'm inclined to believe research over a feeling that the research is wrong. What's different in the US? Massive amount of and access to guns. Dwarfing other countries in gun ownership.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html

    - No other country has more than 46 million guns or 18 mass shooters. The US had 90 mass shooters and more than 200 million guns.

    - It's not the video games or movies, other countries watch and play the same stuff. Americans are no more likely to play video games than people in any other developed country. American entertainment is exported throughout the world.

    - It's not mental health, our rates of severe mental disorders are all in line with those of other wealthy countries.

    -The United States is not more prone to crime than other developed countries studies. Data that has been repeatedly confirmed shows that American crime is simply more lethal. A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.

    In regards to the movies and games argument. I would they aren't the reason, but a symptom of the reason. America is known worldwide for its action movies, and those movies come from a culture of gun worship. Having guns isn't just a possibility for many Americans, its the most American thing one can own. Only the most American of American exercise their right to bear arms, and goes even further than that. Not only are guns the most american good, they are the great equalizer that can fix your problems. So amny people that go on these rampages feel wronged in some way and decide that the only way they can fix it, is to shoot it. Its far too late to try and take guns away from people, the market is saturated. Something needs to be done to teach upcoming generations that guns don't solve problems. Education is the key to reducing our mass shootings. We aren't the only country with easily available firearms, but its our worship of the gun that is causing the problem.

    Balrog99jjstraka34TakisMegasGrond0
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    I applaud @smeagolheart for actually trying to construct an argument based on evidence. Everyone else seems to just assert their opinion and leave it at that.

  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,719
    edited July 2018
    deltago said:


    So......welfare for farmers is a-ok I guess, just not for anyone else. Everyone else can feel the effects of the tariffs, but a constituency that votes overwhelming for Trump is immune to his policies because he is just going to hand them money. Gotcha. Let's not hear from conservatives about inner-city "welfare queens" ever again, ok?? I'm sure all these farmers will be refusing these checks because of how much they hate socialism and how much they believe in the free market.

    This would bring farm subsidies in this country to almost 35 billion dollars. Or, to put it another way, half as much as is being spent on food stamps for ALL OF THE REST OF THE COUNTRY. No single constituency in this country is likely receiving more government welfare than farmers.
    This is usually standard practise when an industry gets hit with a tariff and is usually temporary until the tariff is lifted.

    Canada did something similar when the US hit them with both the soft lumber and steel tarrifs, giving company loans and working with unions to create job-sharing to prevent as many layoffs as possible.

    Farming is also extremely fickle as it mostly relies on the weather. A bad season season can bankrupt a farm without subsidies and increase food prices drastically. Do they need $35 billion worth? Who knows, but those food stamps would be close to worthless if food prices tripled.

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-ottawa-to-unveil-final-list-of-retaliatory-tariffs-on-us-goods-on/

    I'm mostly talking about the hypocrisy of demonizing one group of people who receive government assistance, and then turning around and accepting assistance yourself. There is NO understanding or compassion for people on food stamps, but endless understanding for the "salt of the earth" farmer. It is, in a sense, just like the opioid drug crisis. Once it hits white, rural America, all of a sudden people are interested in talking about treatment rather than mass incarceration. Funny how that works. Point being, the "welfare state" is not limited to people living in housing projects with 4 kids, and the drug problem is not an exclusive province of inner-city street corners. But that is how society portrays it. I'm just saying that in fairness, any debate over government hand-outs should ABSOLUTELY include farmers.

    semiticgoddessGrond0ThacoBell
  • TakisMegasTakisMegas Member Posts: 835

    deltago said:


    So......welfare for farmers is a-ok I guess, just not for anyone else. Everyone else can feel the effects of the tariffs, but a constituency that votes overwhelming for Trump is immune to his policies because he is just going to hand them money. Gotcha. Let's not hear from conservatives about inner-city "welfare queens" ever again, ok?? I'm sure all these farmers will be refusing these checks because of how much they hate socialism and how much they believe in the free market.

    This would bring farm subsidies in this country to almost 35 billion dollars. Or, to put it another way, half as much as is being spent on food stamps for ALL OF THE REST OF THE COUNTRY. No single constituency in this country is likely receiving more government welfare than farmers.
    This is usually standard practise when an industry gets hit with a tariff and is usually temporary until the tariff is lifted.

    Canada did something similar when the US hit them with both the soft lumber and steel tarrifs, giving company loans and working with unions to create job-sharing to prevent as many layoffs as possible.

    Farming is also extremely fickle as it mostly relies on the weather. A bad season season can bankrupt a farm without subsidies and increase food prices drastically. Do they need $35 billion worth? Who knows, but those food stamps would be close to worthless if food prices tripled.

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-ottawa-to-unveil-final-list-of-retaliatory-tariffs-on-us-goods-on/

    I'm mostly talking about the hypocrisy of demonizing one group of people who receive government assistance, and then turning around and accepting assistance yourself. There is NO understanding or compassion for people on food stamps, but endless understanding for the "salt of the earth" farmer. It is, in a sense, just like the opioid drug crisis. Once it hits white, rural America, all of a sudden people are interested in talking about treatment rather than mass incarceration. Funny how that works. Point being, the "welfare state" is not limited to people living in housing projects with 4 kids, and the drug problem is not an exclusive province of inner-city street corners. But that is how society portrays it.
    Wouldn't farmers of any colour in rural America receive the hand out as well?

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    Aren't these farmers like millionaires already? Mom and pop farmers don't exist anymore like they used to. These are millionaire farmers who get paid to not farm.

  • TakisMegasTakisMegas Member Posts: 835

    Aren't these farmers like millionaires already? Mom and pop farmers don't exist anymore like they used to. These are millionaire farmers who get paid to not farm.

    I don't think they are part of the 1% just yet.

    https://work.chron.com/much-money-farmers-make-average-annually-3185.html

  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 6,975

    Aren't these farmers like millionaires already? Mom and pop farmers don't exist anymore like they used to. These are millionaire farmers who get paid to not farm.

    I don't think they are part of the 1% just yet.

    https://work.chron.com/much-money-farmers-make-average-annually-3185.html
    Those statistics refer to people that work on farms. That does include self-employed farmers, but I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of subsidies go to companies that own large farms rather than self-employed farmers.

    I don't object in principle to the use of subsidies as a means of smoothing out what would otherwise be major fluctuations in farming incomes. However, I agree with @jjstraka34 that it's hypocritical for people to support subsidies at the same time as stating their fervent belief in unrestricted free trade.

    semiticgoddessThacoBellTakisMegas
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,719
    edited July 2018

    deltago said:


    So......welfare for farmers is a-ok I guess, just not for anyone else. Everyone else can feel the effects of the tariffs, but a constituency that votes overwhelming for Trump is immune to his policies because he is just going to hand them money. Gotcha. Let's not hear from conservatives about inner-city "welfare queens" ever again, ok?? I'm sure all these farmers will be refusing these checks because of how much they hate socialism and how much they believe in the free market.

    This would bring farm subsidies in this country to almost 35 billion dollars. Or, to put it another way, half as much as is being spent on food stamps for ALL OF THE REST OF THE COUNTRY. No single constituency in this country is likely receiving more government welfare than farmers.
    This is usually standard practise when an industry gets hit with a tariff and is usually temporary until the tariff is lifted.

    Canada did something similar when the US hit them with both the soft lumber and steel tarrifs, giving company loans and working with unions to create job-sharing to prevent as many layoffs as possible.

    Farming is also extremely fickle as it mostly relies on the weather. A bad season season can bankrupt a farm without subsidies and increase food prices drastically. Do they need $35 billion worth? Who knows, but those food stamps would be close to worthless if food prices tripled.

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-ottawa-to-unveil-final-list-of-retaliatory-tariffs-on-us-goods-on/

    I'm mostly talking about the hypocrisy of demonizing one group of people who receive government assistance, and then turning around and accepting assistance yourself. There is NO understanding or compassion for people on food stamps, but endless understanding for the "salt of the earth" farmer. It is, in a sense, just like the opioid drug crisis. Once it hits white, rural America, all of a sudden people are interested in talking about treatment rather than mass incarceration. Funny how that works. Point being, the "welfare state" is not limited to people living in housing projects with 4 kids, and the drug problem is not an exclusive province of inner-city street corners. But that is how society portrays it.
    Wouldn't farmers of any colour in rural America receive the hand out as well?
    Ostensibly yes, but this is a problem that goes back all the way to the end of the Civil War. One of the popular phrases of that time was "40 acres and mule" which referred to the idea that freed slaves would be given that amount of land to work for themselves in a redistribution of land as payment for their slave labor. But it never happened, and in fact, Southern Reconstruction was abandoned altogether, resulting in most freed slaves becoming servants or sharecroppers. Point being, there has never been a historical opportunity for any significant number of African-Americans to own farmland (and the Native Americans just had it stolen from them). As I have mentioned before, even black veterans of WW2 were shut out of the government housing and college loans that white veterans used to create the great middle-class of the 1950s. In fact, there was almost no government assistance whatsoever to African-Americans until the Johnson Administration in the 60s. Which is also the exact time everyone started complaining about the welfare state. That is not coincidental.

    Grond0TakisMegasBallpointManThacoBell
  • BallpointManBallpointMan Member Posts: 1,592



    Ostensibly yes, but this is a problem that goes back all the way to the end of the Civil War. One of the popular phrases of that time was "40 acres and mule" which referred to the idea that freed slaves would be given that amount of land to work for themselves in a redistribution of land as payment for their slave labor. But it never happened, and in fact, Southern Reconstruction was abandoned altogether, resulting in most freed slaves becoming servants or sharecroppers. Point being, there has never been a historical opportunity for any significant number of African-Americans to own farmland (and the Native Americans just had it stolen from them). As I have mentioned before, even black veterans of WW2 were shut out of the government housing and college loans that white veterans used to create the great middle-class of the 1950s. In fact, there was almost no government assistance whatsoever to African-Americans until the Johnson Administration in the 60s. Which is also the exact time everyone started complaining about the welfare state. That is not coincidental.

    Shh! I have it on good authority that making the "White people have received benefits denied to people of color" argument is the "R-word".
    Balrog99 said:


    Bloomberg DOES know better. They're not reporting news, they're trying to mold a narrative...

    I agree. Formatting the graph to look that way is super shady. Interestingly enough - looking at all the information in that report, and it *does* seem to paint a pretty "meh" picture about the change in the economy. It looks pretty close to the latter Obama years.

    They didnt really need to make changes to the graph to get their point across. I guess they did for the sake of having it in a tweet.

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    edited July 2018
    Trump sees the writing on the wall for November so he's preemptively saying "uh Russia is going to meddle for Democrats". As with everything Trump, he has nefarious ulterior motives. He is claiming this preemptively to counter potential overwhelming losses in November were rigged and that maybe the people in office currently should just stay in office until we can figure out what the hell is going on (and by that he means concoct a scheme to ensure the Republican stays in office).

    The problem with this false narrative Trump wants to spin is that Republicans and Trump are doing all they can to ensure the election is ultra hackable by stripping election security funding and refusing to re-add it. Not to mention the rule change by Trump's Treasury Department to allow unlimited unreportable undisclosed dark money to flow to campaigns. Trump is doing all he can to undermine Democracy and at the same time going out and complaining that Democracy is undermined. I think his cultists won't be willing to see the cause and effect there. They'll just blame Hillary's buttery males.

This discussion has been closed.