131–140 of 155 posts
Lindner was out of line, did a solo act and Scholz took it personally, his ego was insulted, so he fired him. Lindner did it on purpose. He either knows what he's doing (ace under the sleeve) or is a total idiot.
This. Basically all public economists agree on Lindner's ideas and behaviour to be nonsensical. So he either is an idiot or a puppet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Donald Trump and especially the people that voted for him are not so sweet on gays (well I guess some might tolerate gay women on a porn site, but not so much living right next to them). It would absolutely not surprise me if after the repeal of abortion rights, gay marriage rights will be next. Now to be fair, some of the states did vote for better abortion rights after the repeal (and during this presidential elect…
Most people aren’t moving into any of the red states, though (maybe Texas)? And with the all states right thing that they are pushing hopefully Trump will be dead by them time they have enough political capital to restrict stuff on a Federal level.
Hoping someone is dead is very much in poor taste imo.
"And with the all states right thing that they are pushing hopefully Trump will be dead by them time they have enough political capital to restrict stuff on a Federal level."
This sentence doesn't make any sense to me, 'states rights' is a federalistic concept, it's inherently against adding new restrictions at the federal level.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You need to let crazy people do crazy things (within the law of course). Yeah, like stripping away LGBT rights or abortion? The far-right, no matter if we are talking about the US, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Argentinia, Israel or the UK, has clearly stated what they want to do, and they have shown in more than enough cases (Argentinia, USA, UK) that they are willing to throw the entire nation under the bus for…
> like stripping away LGBT rights or abortion? These are ideological battles which are specular to those of the left. All these laws to extend and protect LGBT rights? Marginally useful only to a small minority (which should be already protected in its fundamental rights by the normal laws) but great to avoid talking about difficult issues: how to go against established interests to improve the economy, how to modern…
Are we cosplaying Hellen Keller? The only ones who are upset about the current state of those minorities are conservatives. Not those on the left, the left doesn't care and has moved on. The right is the only one propping up the "culture war" (your dreaded "ideology"). I don't understand how you guys can't see it, it's so obvious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it is this attitude, which was even reflected in the speeches the party leaders gave after the breakup, accusing each other of "ideology", that is the problem. Every single party in germany claims to stand for "reasoning", "pragmatism" and accuses others of "ideology". People brandmark anything they disagree with as ideology, as in "heizungsideologie" for example. (The idea that gas heating should be replaced wit…
I think you have a very special definition of reasoning only you can understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it is this attitude, which was even reflected in the speeches the party leaders gave after the breakup, accusing each other of "ideology", that is the problem. Every single party in germany claims to stand for "reasoning", "pragmatism" and accuses others of "ideology". People brandmark anything they disagree with as ideology, as in "heizungsideologie" for example. (The idea that gas heating should be replaced wit…
I think you have a very special definition of reasoning only you can understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I invite anybody to show me any credible evidence the immigration has a positive Net Present Value (NPV). The purpose was the destruction of the status quo, not improved tax revenues and GDP, but rather its replacement with a compliant, desperate, and above all else, an obedient population.
Research by Cato Institute: https://www.cato.org/blog/fiscal-impact-immigration-united-s... “To put their impact in perspective, in 2018, the average per capita fiscal contribution of first-generation immigrants was $16,207. In contrast, the average drain was $11,361, resulting in a net positive fiscal impact of $4,846 per immigrant in 2012 dollars. Multiplied by the number of immigrants present in 2018 (45.4 million…
"The report finds that the total net contribution in 2018 by native Danish people was +41 billion DKK. The contribution of immigrants and their descendants was net negative at -24 billion DKK (Table b)"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I invite anybody to show me any credible evidence the immigration has a positive Net Present Value (NPV). The purpose was the destruction of the status quo, not improved tax revenues and GDP, but rather its replacement with a compliant, desperate, and above all else, an obedient population.
Poland saw net increase of GDP by 1-2% solely due to immigrants in 2023. And that number is from their own Warsaw institute, not some outside entity. In the same time period Poland saw immense monetary inflow from immigrants, who had to spend their money in the country, far more than any spending on those same immigrants. And this is super short term data. Imagine how much better they are in long term, after assimila…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> like stripping away LGBT rights or abortion? These are ideological battles which are specular to those of the left. All these laws to extend and protect LGBT rights? Marginally useful only to a small minority (which should be already protected in its fundamental rights by the normal laws) but great to avoid talking about difficult issues: how to go against established interests to improve the economy, how to modern…
> which are specular to those of the left Are we cosplaying Hellen Keller? The only ones who are upset about the current state of those minorities are conservatives. Not those on the left, the left doesn't care and has moved on. The right is the only one propping up the "culture war" (your dreaded "ideology"). I don't understand how you guys can't see it, it's so obvious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> None of this addresses the problem of making reality illegal. Recognizing that trans people exist in reality and providing them legal backing for it is not new. Trans (or gender-nonconforming, third gender or whatever you want to call it) people have been a thing for millennia. Even back in old Greece their existence was recognized [1], the Talmud has regulations on their status in society [2], various Southern Asi…
>"Reality" is a societal definition Reality can be whatever crazy people want it to be
It did bring us the most well known historical atrocity though.
