Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that the party that invaded Libya? I get confused, on account of the two "big" ones seem identical to me.
- If you're trolling, I have nothing to say. - If you're playing that game where overstating things for political effect because you [...], have fun, but I don't want to play. - If you actually believe that, either your priorities are so very far removed from mine that we have nothing to say to each other, or you have blinded yourself to a huge array of very real differences with very real effects on very real people…
Florida cut $100M from its mental hospitals – chaos followed
111–114 of 114 posts
Re: Florida cut $100M from its mental hospitals – chaos followed
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
- If you're trolling, I have nothing to say. - If you're playing that game where overstating things for political effect because you [...], have fun, but I don't want to play. - If you actually believe that, either your priorities are so very far removed from mine that we have nothing to say to each other, or you have blinded yourself to a huge array of very real differences with very real effects on very real people…
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/libya/obamas-libya-d...
So you're in the third category.
Re: Florida cut $100M from its mental hospitals – chaos followed
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
> about half as much of the economy would be spent on them (per capita), compared to the general population Your math only works if mentally ill people receive no other services from the state whatsoever. Assuming the mental hospitals receive supplies by road, this is not true.
Ok, sure, you can add in roads and it will change the numbers in a small way that will be irrelevant to the thread. You can spend an infinite amount of time making rough estimates more accurate, if that's what you're into.
No I think it's very relevant to the thread. You have not accounted for any other services that people receiving mental health care receive from the state at all. You're ignoring most of the state's spending. Your estimate is not just rough; it can't possibly be anywhere near the mark.
Re: Florida cut $100M from its mental hospitals – chaos followed
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have never, ever, seen Mother Jones do "an investigation into things that people on the left or the Democrats wish we wouldn't." Maybe there was a time that they were more extremist than the Democrats, and that's what they are referring to. They are basically Fox News, but on the left. Both Fox and MJ make you less informed than before because they leave out facts and stories that don't fit their preconceived viewp…
I am confused by your positioning Mother Jones as no more extremist than the Democrats while also saying "They are basically Fox News, but on the left". I can't tell from that if you mean that the Democratic party is an extremist party, or if you mean that that Fox News is as moderate towards the right as the Democrats are towards the left, or both. I thought 'Democracy Now' was more like the left-extreme version of…
I believe that Mother Jones is to the left of the traditional Democrat party platform. I also believe that Fox News is to the right of the traditional Republican party platform. In that way, I think the two publications are similar.
Basically, I don't consider either publication a useful source of news. In general, both of them leave out the context that would be needed to understand what is going on in the world. For example, that Mother Jones article about "Why is [the world bank] Bankrolling Oligarchs" leaves out the context of what has been going on in Myanmar in the last few years. Myanmar has gone from being a completely military-run state, to allowing a limited democratic opposition to exist. The World Bank is making investments there partly as a kind of reward for that. If the World Bank left, other countries like China would step in and try to buy influence there with their own equivalent of the IMF (China Development Bank). It invests in bigger companies because it has to, because the managerial overhead of investing in tiny ones would be way too high.
All the same issues exist in our government's aid programs to poor countries. The money does indeed often get siphoned off to the rich and well-connected. But of course Mother Jones doesn't comment on this, becuase the narrative is government = good, World Bank = bad. If facts or context have to be left out to fit the narrative, they always will.
I could go on, but you get the idea. By leaving out facts and, most especially, context, biased news sources like these leave you less informed after you read them than before.