What the F:)k is Going on in America?

Page 3 of 4 [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 42,178
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

11 Mar 2017, 10:56 pm

BettaPonic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
I think people wanted an outsider and some viewed Trump as an outsider.


Yes, an outsider with little or no idea of how government works, or who wants the same kind of people filling his cabinet, and God help us, that's exactly what we've got.

I some view trumps lack of government experience as a plus. I don't think trumps cabinet is ignorant I would say some are and others are working in corporations favor. I do agree so far trumps cabinet is a disaster.


But how is lack of experience in government a plus?

I have seen dome people saying that politicians are staying office too long. Some say politicians in office do not help the people and that we need a "common man". To me it is just like Mr. Smith goes to Washington. He is viewed as the "average man" who is working for the people and not Super Pacs or corporate doners. Another point is not experience means less history of political corruption and scandals.


Sure, it's not a bad idea to get fresh blood in government. But the newbies learn the craft of governing in order to become part of a working system.
But how is Donald Trump, in this or any universe, a common man?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


BettaPonic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2017
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Posts: 918
Location: NOVA

11 Mar 2017, 11:25 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
I think people wanted an outsider and some viewed Trump as an outsider.


Yes, an outsider with little or no idea of how government works, or who wants the same kind of people filling his cabinet, and God help us, that's exactly what we've got.

I some view trumps lack of government experience as a plus. I don't think trumps cabinet is ignorant I would say some are and others are working in corporations favor. I do agree so far trumps cabinet is a disaster.


But how is lack of experience in government a plus?

I have seen dome people saying that politicians are staying office too long. Some say politicians in office do not help the people and that we need a "common man". To me it is just like Mr. Smith goes to Washington. He is viewed as the "average man" who is working for the people and not Super Pacs or corporate doners. Another point is not experience means less history of political corruption and scandals.


Sure, it's not a bad idea to get fresh blood in government. But the newbies learn the craft of governing in order to become part of a working system.
But how is Donald Trump, in this or any universe, a common man?

I used air quotes because I don't view him as such, but him not bring some seasoned politician makes people think he is an honest person who stands up for him. I don't think he is honest though. I peronally preferred Hillary and voted for her, even though I hate her.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,242

11 Mar 2017, 11:37 pm

Attitudes like this are what's wrong:

Quote:
There’s one final problem with these kinds of arguments, and that is the implication that we should be worried by the possibility of poor people buying the occasional steak, lottery ticket or, yes, even an iPhone. Set aside the fact that a better cut of meat may be more nutritious than a meal Chaffetz would approve of, or the fact that a smartphone may be your only access to email, job notices, benefit applications, school work and so on. Why do we begrudge people struggling to get by the occasional indulgence? Why do we so little value pleasure and joy? Why do we insist that if you are poor, you should also be miserable? Why do we require penitence?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... a#comments


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


BettaPonic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2017
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Posts: 918
Location: NOVA

11 Mar 2017, 11:41 pm

beneficii wrote:
Attitudes like this are what's wrong:

Quote:
There’s one final problem with these kinds of arguments, and that is the implication that we should be worried by the possibility of poor people buying the occasional steak, lottery ticket or, yes, even an iPhone. Set aside the fact that a better cut of meat may be more nutritious than a meal Chaffetz would approve of, or the fact that a smartphone may be your only access to email, job notices, benefit applications, school work and so on. Why do we begrudge people struggling to get by the occasional indulgence? Why do we so little value pleasure and joy? Why do we insist that if you are poor, you should also be miserable? Why do we require penitence?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... a#comments

I think people are arguing that before indulging on yourself, you should have your finances straightened out. I think we should increase access to education personally.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 42,178
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

12 Mar 2017, 2:12 am

BettaPonic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
I think people wanted an outsider and some viewed Trump as an outsider.


Yes, an outsider with little or no idea of how government works, or who wants the same kind of people filling his cabinet, and God help us, that's exactly what we've got.

I some view trumps lack of government experience as a plus. I don't think trumps cabinet is ignorant I would say some are and others are working in corporations favor. I do agree so far trumps cabinet is a disaster.


But how is lack of experience in government a plus?

I have seen dome people saying that politicians are staying office too long. Some say politicians in office do not help the people and that we need a "common man". To me it is just like Mr. Smith goes to Washington. He is viewed as the "average man" who is working for the people and not Super Pacs or corporate doners. Another point is not experience means less history of political corruption and scandals.


Sure, it's not a bad idea to get fresh blood in government. But the newbies learn the craft of governing in order to become part of a working system.
But how is Donald Trump, in this or any universe, a common man?

I used air quotes because I don't view him as such, but him not bring some seasoned politician makes people think he is an honest person who stands up for him. I don't think he is honest though. I peronally preferred Hillary and voted for her, even though I hate her.


Me too.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,242

12 Mar 2017, 4:03 am

BettaPonic wrote:
beneficii wrote:
Attitudes like this are what's wrong:

Quote:
There’s one final problem with these kinds of arguments, and that is the implication that we should be worried by the possibility of poor people buying the occasional steak, lottery ticket or, yes, even an iPhone. Set aside the fact that a better cut of meat may be more nutritious than a meal Chaffetz would approve of, or the fact that a smartphone may be your only access to email, job notices, benefit applications, school work and so on. Why do we begrudge people struggling to get by the occasional indulgence? Why do we so little value pleasure and joy? Why do we insist that if you are poor, you should also be miserable? Why do we require penitence?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... a#comments

I think people are arguing that before indulging on yourself, you should have your finances straightened out. I think we should increase access to education personally.


The question is, Why do they think that?


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


BettaPonic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2017
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Posts: 918
Location: NOVA

12 Mar 2017, 7:26 am

beneficii wrote:
BettaPonic wrote:
beneficii wrote:
Attitudes like this are what's wrong:

Quote:
There’s one final problem with these kinds of arguments, and that is the implication that we should be worried by the possibility of poor people buying the occasional steak, lottery ticket or, yes, even an iPhone. Set aside the fact that a better cut of meat may be more nutritious than a meal Chaffetz would approve of, or the fact that a smartphone may be your only access to email, job notices, benefit applications, school work and so on. Why do we begrudge people struggling to get by the occasional indulgence? Why do we so little value pleasure and joy? Why do we insist that if you are poor, you should also be miserable? Why do we require penitence?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... a#comments

I think people are arguing that before indulging on yourself, you should have your finances straightened out. I think we should increase access to education personally.


The question is, Why do they think that?

I don't know for sure. I am in a personal finance class and they do teach stuff like that though.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

14 Mar 2017, 12:38 pm

Jacoby wrote:
Restricting the supply of labor would allow wages to rise where they have been stagnate for 40+ years, it would way lessen the burden on our social services and schools, I don't see how it wouldn't help poor people in this country. People always say well these immigrants are a net positive and my response to that would be not for everyone and even the ones that do contribute are displacing American citizens who will need assistance in their place. Think about what this does to the rental market, illegal immigration hurts poor people!

As I mentioned, Canada has a merit based immigration system and they aren't letting in the same people that we are by a long shot. The US has an open border with a third world country with a 122M people(a decent chunk of that are living in America illegally) that is one of the most violent and corrupt places in the world, it's not really comparable to the country that is our hat with no external threats whatsoever. Why hasn't Trudeau with his big heart offered to take in any of these illegal Mexican immigrants? I'm sure Trump could expedite that if he wanted to, a pipeline if you will. Everyone is supposed to share the burden with Syrian refugees but the US has to accommodate 11-30 million people who have no business being here? If Mexico is so bad that they can't be sent back then perhaps other countries need to share in the burden, that's not going to happen tho obviously since most people are virtue signaling hypocrites.

That's not the way refugees work. One word: Lebanon.

The US has a history of importing foreign labor when times are good, and rejecting it when times are bad. This is just another cycle of history; in that context, stipulating inevitability for the sake of argument, it only matters how we treat the people involved. We can also find lots of examples of other countries around the world who do the same thing, and look at how they treat imported labor.

Don't act like an idealist until you work out all the details.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 104,178
Location: Canada in person, Germany in spirit

14 Mar 2017, 12:51 pm

I'm glad that Trump went after Planned Parenthood and I'm glad he's Pro-Life.


_________________
Peabody

Om Nom 2024

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=26&start=645


androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

14 Mar 2017, 1:30 pm

Washington Post: Defunding Planned Parenthood would lead to thousands more births, CBO says

Quote:
Planned Parenthood provides reproductive and other services, including abortion, to 2.5 million men and women nationally. Its health centers provided more than 300,000 abortions and nearly 3 million contraception services in 2015, according to its latest annual report, and the group says that more than half of its centers are in rural or medically underserved areas.


Great ... more unwanted people with nothing to do.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

14 Mar 2017, 7:26 pm

CockneyRebel wrote:
I'm glad that Trump went after Planned Parenthood and I'm glad he's Pro-Life.

He's adopting unwanted dark-skinned children? To be clear, I don't worry so much about the unwanted white children. I guess that, even in their desperate situation, they have a little privilege left and won't typically have to wait as long.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


BettaPonic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2017
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Posts: 918
Location: NOVA

14 Mar 2017, 7:41 pm

jrjones9933 wrote:
CockneyRebel wrote:
I'm glad that Trump went after Planned Parenthood and I'm glad he's Pro-Life.

He's adopting unwanted dark-skinned children? To be clear, I don't worry so much about the unwanted white children. I guess that, even in their desperate situation, they have a little privilege left and won't typically have to wait as long.

There are going to be more unwanted white children. I worry more about older children.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

14 Mar 2017, 7:47 pm

There won't actually be any more children, or not many more. There will simply be more dead women who didn't want to be mothers yet.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


BettaPonic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2017
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Posts: 918
Location: NOVA

14 Mar 2017, 8:06 pm

jrjones9933 wrote:
There won't actually be any more children, or not many more. There will simply be more dead women who didn't want to be mothers yet.

I can also see an increase in women who try to get abortions, but end up having babies with deformities. I am wondering your opinion on a new state law? Some state is passing a law that if you get an abortion of a fetus with Down syndrome, there have to be other reasons beside the Down syndrome?



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

14 Mar 2017, 8:08 pm

Tough one. We leave the choice up to the woman in whatever case. That's my ethical position, even if she makes a choice with which I disagree for reasons I find repugnant. It's the only ethically consistent position I can find.

To be clear, I don't care how you regulate what the hospital has to do once it is removed from her. I don't care, conditionally on what the fetus people eventually decide to do with the fetuses. By that I mean, I might come to care, but I want to assume they will take the responsibility seriously until I see otherwise.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


BettaPonic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2017
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Posts: 918
Location: NOVA

14 Mar 2017, 8:14 pm

I think a baby with Down syndrome born to parents who are not ready would endure more suffering than if it was never born.