371–380 of 839 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Move fast and break the nuclear weapon arsenal.
Move fast and break the nuclear weapons arsenal. edit: OK, so parent edited to match what I wrote and now I'm being downvoted because I look like I copied parent?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
…youre saying that life was good from 1870-1910? Reconstruction and the gilded age?? I mean, there was technological and medical improvements, sure, and continued urbanization. But that’s… those are some of our nations most shameful, inequal, racist years in its entire history. The federal government as it exists now was just getting started after we realized we needed it thanks to the civil war, and many local democ…
>social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and defense spending. I doubt even the biggest libertarian on here could advocate cutting any those with a straight face Who says I don't advocate cutting those too, if you're asking? And I am grey haired, not sure about the ageism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you're telling me that government spending was continually going up, and while this happened our quality of life massively and suddenly improved? I feel like reversing this process is very bad.
Unless nirvana is at 100% it has to stop somewhere. What im saying is it didn't continually go up during periods of like growth, and it's not clear such high federal spending is necessary or helpful in improving the human condition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the insiduous thing we're seeing - when you have to work two jobs just to make rent on a dilapidated shack for a slumlord you don't have time to protest, and when your healthcare insurance depends on having a job (because there aren't charity-run hospitals around any more) you can't afford the risk getting fired for going on a strike, much less actual "direct action". On top of that, mass media controls the na…
[flagged]
Whether or not you agree with that assessment, it seems like you don't understand a few links in the chain there or are otherwise playing dumb. It is very reasonable for people to not care about the death of someone who is widely considered a mass murderer whether or not our legal systems have caught up to this sentiment.
In a perfect world that CEO would have spent his entire life rotting in jail, his ill gotten fortunes completely stripped and his name as infamous as other mass murderers. We live in an imperfect world where people like him get defended by weirdos online though.
It's not good that he got assassinated. Assassinations like this are a symptom of a failing justice system doesn't deal with human waste like Brian Thompson on it's own. If society widely considers someone like him a mass murderer he should be behind bars. But there's a pretty huge inequality between the ruling class and the poors these days, so the justice system has stopped working for the everyman. It's a natural result of cascading inequality, it will keep happening at an increasing rate if our civilization doesn't start holding people accountable for their crimes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is far less dependent on trade than the average country. We could close our borders to the world entirely and be fine after an initial discomfort. And nobody has has seen America as the “good guy” in my lifetime. We’re the country that destabilizes Latin American and Asian countries, bombs the Middle East, etc. I used to think there was at least a logic to all that, but it turns out our elites were just ideolo…
> We could close our borders to the world entirely and be fine after an initial discomfort. I'm no economist but a trade deficit in the hundreds of billions[0] suggests otherwise. [0] Wikipedia says 773B for 2023.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I mean ignoring all the trade that will wither away to/from America and slowly be diverted to other countries instead (lost American money/opportunity), there's also lost tourism money from people not wanting to come spend their vacations there (lost money).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and defense spending. I doubt even the biggest libertarian on here could advocate cutting any those with a straight face Who says I don't advocate cutting those too, if you're asking? And I am grey haired, not sure about the ageism.
Well, all I'll say is this then: you are a tiny minority.
Majority is just a collection of tiny minorities, in this case my minority opinion partially aligns. As it turns out minority isn't aways what you think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe “reactionary” or “accelerationist” is the word you want? Please let’s not popularize the label “progressive right,” our political labels are already a mess in the US but that is just too much.
I don't have a strong opinion here, but I am curious. What don't you like about the term progressive right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Your use of the word "innocent" there is doing a lot of heavy lifting. He did not have a day in court, and what he did was indirect. However, a lot of people consider the supposedly "innocent" guy that got killed a mass murderer. Whether or not you agree with that assessment, it seems like you don't understand a few links in the chain there or are otherwise playing dumb. It is very reasonable for people to not care a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Americans should care because America isn't the world. So much wealth and power derives from people seeing you as the good guy. Blowing that up will make America poorer.
The US is far less dependent on trade than the average country. We could close our borders to the world entirely and be fine after an initial discomfort. And nobody has has seen America as the “good guy” in my lifetime. We’re the country that destabilizes Latin American and Asian countries, bombs the Middle East, etc. I used to think there was at least a logic to all that, but it turns out our elites were just ideolo…
When it comes to isolation I think of this:
The word invasion itself is a good example of this.
A French ironmaster says: "We must protect ourselves from the invasion of English iron!" An English landlord cries: "We must repel the invasion of French wheat!" And they urge the erection of barriers between the two nations. Barriers result in isolation; isolation gives rise to hatred; hatred, to war; war, to invasion. "What difference does it make?" say the two sophists. "Is it not better to risk the possibility of invasion than to accept the certainty of invasion?" And the people believe them, and the barriers remain standing.
And yet, what analogy is there between an exchange and an invasion? What possible similarity can there be between a warship that comes to vomit missiles, fire, and devastation on our cities, and a merchant vessel that comes to offer us a voluntary exchange of goods for goods?