Fantasy Faction

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Jmack on September 22, 2015, 01:52:14 PM

Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on September 22, 2015, 01:52:14 PM
Wow. Between the English Prime Minister's piggish behavior and Volkswagen's cynical stupidity, not a great week for the Euros. Of course, Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on September 22, 2015, 02:15:55 PM
Shouted at for Politics in 3-2-1....

We expect no less from our Dave if you are referring to university antics. I would be more concerned about the wholesale destruction of the welfare state to ensure his mates can still turn a profit.

VW a well known 'European' firm gets caught. when Mercedes were caught doing the same the they just posted a tax loss due to the fines and everything carried on as normal.

Trump is great entertainment from here but slightly scarier than half a dozen other potentials at the moment
I guess if you are potential going to saddled with him in charge of anything. If I could I would vote for anyone in your circus it would be McAffee.
Just remember the definition of an honest senator is one who stays bought.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on September 22, 2015, 02:24:56 PM
Wow. Between the English Prime Minister's piggish behavior and Volkswagen's cynical stupidity, not a great week for the Euros. Of course, Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

I'd be more worried at what Hungary is currently doing in regards to the refugee crisis. I don't like to bring WW2 into conversations to make comparisons because it is easy and often misused, but I'll be damned if giving the armed forces the power to search civilian houses (without a warrant) in order to see if they're hiding illegal refugees doesn't make anyone think of other persecuted minorities in the past.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on September 22, 2015, 02:28:49 PM
Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

[politics]This scares me, and I don't scare easy. I really can't comprehend how he has gathered so much support after the things he says.[/politics]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on September 22, 2015, 02:41:16 PM
Wow. Between the English Prime Minister's piggish behavior and Volkswagen's cynical stupidity, not a great week for the Euros. Of course, Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

I'd be more worried at what Hungary is currently doing in regards to the refugee crisis. I don't like to bring WW2 into conversations to make comparisons because it is easy and often misused, but I'll be damned if giving the armed forces the power to search civilian houses (without a warrant) in order to see if they're hiding illegal refugees doesn't make anyone think of other persecuted minorities in the past.

What I don't get about the whole refugee thing is where is the UN?  Why aren't they setting up camps with proper shelter, food, and medical care and helping get everyone processed efficiently?  Isn't this the type of thing the UN should be involved in and if they're not getting involved what purpose does it have? 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on September 22, 2015, 02:43:43 PM
Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

[politics]This scares me, and I don't scare easy. I really can't comprehend how he has gathered so much support after the things he says.[/politics]

Totally love the [politics] marker! Will use this forever on the Forum.  ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on September 22, 2015, 03:21:57 PM
Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

[politics]This scares me, and I don't scare easy. I really can't comprehend how he has gathered so much support after the things he says.[/politics]

[politics]
fox news, human monoculture, stupidity -- lots of reasons.

in those deeply red states, i saw a thing about lifetime mobility and how 90+% of the people living in places like mississippi were born there and have only ever lived there.  their ideas of the outside world are exactly what they see on fox news and scary neocon websites.  i saw something yesterday that 66% of trump supporters still believe obama is muslim.

my family has been subject to some of that deep brainwashing.  my step-mother's sister was telling me yesterday about how she was pissed about the pledge of allegiance was pulled from schools and how SHE WANTED IT BACK!!  i, of course, asked her where she thinks it went and informed her about how i live in hippie southern california, have a 7 year-old and an 11 year-old in public elementary school, and how they still say the pledge.  and about how 45 of the 50 states have laws requiring the pledge and the rest have required some sort of 'patriotic exercise'.  she (who is 60+ years old with no kids in college, much less in grade schools) dismissed what i said because 'children come home and say they're not allowed to say the pledge!'  i just gave up.  for them, the plural of anecdote is data.

brain.  washed.


edit:
i don't want to seem all doom and gloom tho -- this is all actually a good thing.

so, sort of the inside baseball view of it:

what's happened is the brainwashing has kicked off the self-reinforcing, crazy-spiral.  the brainwashers have lost control now and the crazies have taken over.  the best thing for american politics would be if trump won the republican nomination because the 1/3 of voters who are independent won't vote for him -- he will get destroyed in a general election.  the republican leaders are panicking and trying to get him to sign an agreement that he won't run if he doesn't win the primary.  he won't.  this means, the conservative vote will be split between him and whomever wins the primary -- which means someone sane like bernie sanders will coast into the white house.

political observers are saying these fox news brainwashing decades we've had could ultimately mean the end of the republican party as we know it.  it's hard not to believe them when you look at the popularity within the republican base of crazy, non-general-election candidates like trump, ted cruz, and ben carson.  none of them will be able to get even 35% of the general election vote.

[/politics]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on September 22, 2015, 03:23:52 PM
OK, this is an amazing quote:

Quote
the plural of anecdote is data

@m3mnoch (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40419), if you came up with that yourself, I'm in awe.  ;D  If you're repeating an apt quote in a perfect context, I'm still impressed.  8)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on September 22, 2015, 03:38:23 PM
OK, this is an amazing quote:

Quote
the plural of anecdote is data

@m3mnoch (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40419), if you came up with that yourself, I'm in awe.  ;D  If you're repeating an apt quote in a perfect context, I'm still impressed.  8)

heh.  i wish.  it's a nerd industry saying.  for example, when you sell games to the general public, you learn to look at data and not what your most hard-core players are saying on the forums.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on September 22, 2015, 03:38:32 PM
Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

[politics]This scares me, and I don't scare easy. I really can't comprehend how he has gathered so much support after the things he says.[/politics]

Do you want the technical evidence and theories, or the truth that m3mnoch pointed out?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on September 22, 2015, 03:45:52 PM
Ildiko whom I share a cube with is Transylvanian Romanian which means she has Hungarian nationality (Joe Stalin still has a lot to answer for).
She has been showing me clips from the Hungarian border where crowds of people were running across the road in front of stopped traffic. Hundreds if not thousands at a time.

I quite agree with Hedin camps should be set up and the chaos controlled, Hungary actually has space to do this.
Nobody should be living in a refugee camp in Europe but to check on their health, document and move them along to where there heading in a controlled fashion cuts the criminals exploiting people to get them across borders and hopefully stops people being suffocated or frozen to death in lorries.

 what no one seems to be addressing is this is not ever going to end and will bring changes to Europe that may not be as welcome after the first influx of refugees. Nobody has a clue who is where atm.
Hungary has a population of 10 million. A million added to that number will overwhelm schools hospitals and force down pay and unemployment up in the long run. It is a very fragile country in terms of economy and population, and bleeds it's best and brightest to jobs in wealthier countries in Europe.
Even without any cultural or religious friction life will change for Hungarians.

BTW from the little I know of working there for the most part the Hungarians are less insular and more tolerant than the English they also have had some hard times in living memory and keen to keep what they have.
I don't see this ending well, A political shift to the right will be the start of it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on September 22, 2015, 04:58:53 PM
Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

[politics]This scares me, and I don't scare easy. I really can't comprehend how he has gathered so much support after the things he says.[/politics]

Do you want the technical evidence and theories, or the truth that m3mnoch pointed out?

m3mnoch's post summed it up nicely I think!   :D

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on September 22, 2015, 10:21:47 PM
Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

[politics]This scares me, and I don't scare easy. I really can't comprehend how he has gathered so much support after the things he says.[/politics]

Do you want the technical evidence and theories, or the truth that m3mnoch pointed out?
From my side of the fence, it's like this. One, people like him because he's, for the most part, a successful business man. Two, he's not a politician. Three fourths of the nation don't trust the government, which is why him and the woman(I can't spell her name) have a good shot at winning. A lot of people who wouldn't normally be voting will be if those two or Carson wins the Republican nomination. Three, a lot of democrats have said they're not planning on voting for either Clinton or Sanders. Clinton's just... Well, Benghazi(if that's how you spell it). She may be kicked out of the race by the FBI soon. Also, from what I can tell, the majority of Americans who have studied the Iran treaty think it's bs. No democrats are against that at the moment. And four, all the media talks about is Trump. Trump did this, then he did that. Then he said this. People who know nothing about politics are quite aware of what he stands for. Now, to some, that's what makes it easy to mock him. But even by doing that, they're still talking about Trump. No other candidate has that publicity as of now.
As for comments about Fox brainwashing, let's be honest. If it's not Fox, it's CNN or any other media outlet. No one gives the pure hard facts anymore. There's an opinion attached to everything. Each station wants to sway you to their line of thinking, so they're only going to show you what's needed. I'm pretty sure most of us have heard the expression, there's three sides to every story. The news is a prime example. It all just depends on what you hear. No matter which side someone stands on, the extremists are going to stand out. That's in politics, religion, race... Everything. So, I think instead of saying Fox or CNN or whatever news you watch is brainwashing, just go with every one of them is. And, instead of looking at just one news source, look at all of them, even the ones that you think aren't credible. If you don't believe something, look it up. That doesn't mean you'll get the truth. Truth is a rare thing these days. But perhaps, by putting both sides together, it's possible to discover what's actually going on.
I know I'm late to the conversation, but I felt I needed to say that. The quotations were just to give an introduction to the topic, not to call anyone out on something they said. Sorry for the rant, if that's what you want to call it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on September 23, 2015, 12:21:37 AM
It's all good, @ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103), and your comments sound right on a number of points. (And may be on others as well, but hey I'm not gonna roll over on everything.  ;) )

I'm the one who introduced politics, and I wouldn't do it if I didn't think we're all the right kind of folks to allow for a range of opinions and repsect all around.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on September 23, 2015, 12:11:06 PM
Hmmmm.... other ailments of the real world.

I suggest a bracket-style competition with nominations and everything.  ;D
You can nominate general topics, specific people, your corner fast food joint, or mosquitos. Really, anything that fits IYO.

A whole new think to chew over, but safely squirreled away over here.



NO, WAIT! It's not safely squirreled away. It will show up on the most recent posts way of viewing forum.
Hmmmmm.... maybe not such a good idea?  ;)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on September 23, 2015, 01:18:29 PM
"Ailment of the real world" = people who walk around just looking at their phones >:(
I've stopped deviating my current path, and will bang against them if needed to make my point ;D (normally they notice a couple of paces away)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on September 23, 2015, 01:27:13 PM
"Ailment of the real world" = people who walk around just looking at their phones >:(
I've stopped deviating my current path, and will bang against them if needed to make my point ;D (normally they notice a couple of paces away)

As a frequent traveler I wish airports had two separate lanes. One lane would be for people who are walking normally and are trying to get to wherever they need.  The second lane would be people talking or looking at their phone who wander aimlessly around the airport like slow motion pinball.  There would obviously be some sort of high voltage electric fence to keep those people from moving into the normal lane.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lady Ty on September 23, 2015, 01:48:16 PM

I'm the one who introduced politics, and I wouldn't do it if I didn't think we're all the right kind of folks to allow for a range of opinions and repsect all around.

Thank you for starting a separate thread.   I think it's great that forum members should be able to discuss politics and get more information on different systems and viewpoints.  I have had bad past experiences with two happy international forums in the past, where political views have badly disrupted the friendliness. But I believe what Jmack says is right and F-F will be fine.

My personal reasons for keeping out of these discussions is that here in Oz we have lived through two toxic destructive years. There has been seriously alarming authoritarianism and uncertainty in a jingoistic atmosphere of fear mongering. Australia's humanity has been internationally shamed and we have been made to look ridiculous in so many ways.  It has been frightening and depressing for so many different categories of people who both deserve and need help.

I will not bring this here with me, I hope you understand, I never meant to presume or criticise anyone else's choice of discussion.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on September 23, 2015, 04:07:08 PM
I am extremely iffy about this thread idea, but if it works, more power to ya! At least it's out of the King's Paws.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on September 23, 2015, 05:08:59 PM
Quote
"Ailment of the real world" = people who walk around just looking at their phones >:(
I've stopped deviating my current path, and will bang against them if needed to make my point ;D (normally they notice a couple of paces away)

I did a bad thing last summer.In the centre of Bristol A guy stepped out in front of me just before a junction, coffee in one hand texting with the other.
Now on a bike peds who cant be arsed to look where they are going are a real hazzard in towns. Instead of beeping the horn I braked got the clutch in and and as he got 3 steps into the road revved the hell out the bike. Coffee went one way phone went the other and I got out of dodge before he had time to get angry.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on September 23, 2015, 05:20:00 PM
Quote
"Ailment of the real world" = people who walk around just looking at their phones >:(
I've stopped deviating my current path, and will bang against them if needed to make my point ;D (normally they notice a couple of paces away)

I did a bad thing last summer.In the centre of Bristol A guy stepped out in front of me just before a junction, coffee in one hand texting with the other.
Now on a bike peds who cant be arsed to look where they are going are a real hazzard in towns. Instead of beeping the horn I braked got the clutch in and and as he got 3 steps into the road revved the hell out the bike. Coffee went one way phone went the other and I got out of dodge before he had time to get angry.

Bah, sounds like it was completely necessary. You did what you had to do.  ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on September 23, 2015, 05:28:02 PM
Speaking of the real word, did anyone hear about the guy that raised prices of a drug by 5000%? It went from $13.50 per pill to $750. Crazy world we live in.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html?_r=0)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on September 23, 2015, 06:18:45 PM
Speaking of the real word, did anyone hear about the guy that raised prices of a drug by 5000%? It went from $13.50 per pill to $750. Crazy world we live in.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html?_r=0)

I hope a lot of NY's restaurants will put this in their windows. ;)
(http://i.imgur.com/Qej0MA4.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on September 23, 2015, 07:13:34 PM
Speaking of the real word, did anyone hear about the guy that raised prices of a drug by 5000%? It went from $13.50 per pill to $750. Crazy world we live in.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html?_r=0)

He backed down off that.  If he had only raised it to $25 or even $50 he wouldn't have heard a peep.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on September 23, 2015, 09:00:12 PM

Quote
Speaking of the real word, did anyone hear about the guy that raised prices of a drug by 5000%? It went from $13.50 per pill to $750. Crazy world we live in.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html?_r=0

Caught a little of this but not looked into it from what I understand the IP was bought by a hedge fund and did what hedge funds do in the medical world. Looked to kill people for profit.The Sociapathic attitude is it's a TB drug America has a low incidence of TB so its only poor people elsewhere who will die.
You live in a country which holds it's population hostage through healthcare. This is just an extension of the process. The market will provide and all that....(does not necessarily mean for you. Read the T&C's warranty void if opened)
From whe I stand America looks like a very rich part of the 3rd world. It is really disappointing because you tend to be good people who deserve better.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on September 23, 2015, 09:10:37 PM


Quote
Speaking of the real word, did anyone hear about the guy that raised prices of a drug by 5000%? It went from $13.50 per pill to $750. Crazy world we live in.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html?_r=0

Caught a little of this but not looked into it from what I understand the IP was bought by a hedge fund and did what hedge funds do in the medical world. Looked to kill people for profit. . The Sociapathic attitude is it's a TB drug America has a low incidence of TB so its only poor people elsewhere who will die.
You live in a country which holds it's population hostage through healthcare. This is just an extension of the process. The market will provide and all that....(does not necessarily mean for you. Read the T&C's warranty void if opened)
From whe I stand America looks like a very rich part of the 3rd world. It is really disappointing because you tend to be good people who deserve better.

Oh my! This really is a politics thread.  ;D ;D

Rich part of the third world... that's one I'll have to try out on some folks.

It is strange, isn't it, that the land of the people, by the people and for the people fought like a tiger against unionization, human rights, women's rights, gay rights, etc. But we've gotten there/getting there on the individual rights I've mentioned. But where we fall short is any place where there is a whiff of wealth redistribution or interference with conducting business.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on September 23, 2015, 09:31:56 PM


You live in a country which holds it's population hostage through healthcare.

I don't think I have ever read a more accurate statement.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on September 23, 2015, 09:39:24 PM
From here it looks like you have:

A justice system that says you are innocent until proven bankrupt
A healthcare racket that again you get great treatment until bankrupt
A political system that is sold to the highest bidder
Student debt that can never be written off.
3 letter agencies intent on destroying the American way of life and keeping you scared
A constitution that is being used to keep the population in check and it's protections ignored by those in power.
An insistance that capitalism* is the only answer in spite of the evidence to the contary
A paramilitary police force seizing assets from the public without just causehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/)

Yup could be any third world dictatorship. We are following in your footsteps and I am well aware that the future holds little that is good for any of us. This is not an attempt to troll America or Americans. I am aware of how proud you tend to be of your Nation, but you really need to correct the idea that money is more important than anything else.

*Except when to big to fail banks need your tax dollars to continue their racketeering. That's a fine example of socialism
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on September 23, 2015, 10:07:54 PM
@Rostum (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40251), you should really be clearer about your POV.  :D ;D ;D

At some point, I'll muster an argument for some fragment of American exceptionalism. But for the moment, I've had two hard ciders - which is quite enough for me, thank you. I feel like maybe I'm on track with my story (which may be the alcholhol talking thank you very much). And I have a baseball game to stumble wander over to.

[politics] for later   ;) [/politicfs]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on September 23, 2015, 10:09:23 PM
@Rostum (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40251), you should really be clearer about your POV.  :D ;D ;D

At some point, I'll muster an argument for some fragment of American exceptionalism. But for the moment, I've had two hard ciders - which is quite enough for me, thank you. I feel like maybe I'm on track with my story (which may be the alcholhol talking thank you very much). And I have a baseball game to stumble wander over to.

[politics] for later   ;) [/politicfs]

If you're going to watch the Orioles you may need to have several more hard ciders.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on September 23, 2015, 10:09:59 PM
@Rostum (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40251), you should really be clearer about your POV.  :D ;D ;D

At some point, I'll muster an argument for some fragment of American exceptionalism. But for the moment, I've had two hard ciders - which is quite enough for me, thank you. I feel like maybe I'm on track with my story (which may be the alcholhol talking thank you very much). And I have a baseball game to stumble wander over to.

[politics] for later   ;) [/politicfs]

If you're going to watch the Orioles you may need to have several more hard ciders.

Ohhhhh that is so true.





My face is numb.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on September 24, 2015, 03:34:12 AM
I'm not sure I agree with America being a wealthy 3rd world country, but I guess since this is a politics thread I'll make the two most obvious arguments against Rostum's points.

A justice system that says you are innocent until proven bankrupt

Um, the 6th Amendment gives the right to a public defender. While it is based on income proof such as credit documents, a good number of judges will go on your word alone. Of course, this primarily affects criminal court. Civil court is another matter, but the fees inherent there aren't astronomical and even then, you should never go into a civil suit unless you're 100% certain you can win.

Which for anybody who's watched an episode of Judge Judy, shows that's not hard at all.

A paramilitary police force seizing assets from the public without just causehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/)

When I opened that article, I fully expected to hear about the town over cited and their police corruption charges.  ;D But the big problem with search and seizures is not with the police (though as stated, police corruption is still a variable) but the citizen. Unless an officer has probable cause (and a routine traffic stop like speeding or busted tail-light is not probable cause, where all those instances are cited), under the 4th Amendment the officer cannot search your vehicle without your consent. Even then, if they do so without your wish, the defense attorney can have the evidence thrown out in court (and the evidence is needed in court before it can be outsourced to departments).
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Justan Henner on September 24, 2015, 04:01:26 AM
Whoa, hold on there, Chill. Those look like facts. They don't belong in a thread about politics.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on September 24, 2015, 04:29:48 AM
Whoa, hold on there, Chill. Those look like facts. They don't belong in a thread about politics.

Sorry. Whenever I see people dissing our judicial system I go into that mode.

This is why I can't use the [politics] tag lol.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on September 24, 2015, 02:00:06 PM


You live in a country which holds it's population hostage through healthcare.

I don't think I have ever read a more accurate statement.

I don't think it's that accurate.  Yes, medical bills are a hardship for a lot of people but the vast majority of the population has good enough insurance that mitigates a lot of the out of the pocket cost.  For example, my insurance plan will pay 90% of all my medical bills up and when my 10% adds up to $5,000 they pay 100%.  Yes $5,000 is a big chunk of money and I know some people would have some trouble paying for that but I don't feel like you're being held hostage.  I could go into whole thing about our healthcare/pharma system (my job is bascially pharma support) but the cliff notes version is that it could be better but it's not as bad as it seems.

Now if you want to talk about held financially hostage we can talk about student loan debt....
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on September 24, 2015, 02:07:17 PM
So Johnnie Cochran or a public appointed lawyer hmm let me think. you are right it is more applicable to the litigation industry built up around the answer is always to litigate than criminal law. They are destroying the right to legal aid in the UK at the moment and in effect putting justice out of reach, not of the poor but of those who have something to lose.
The issue with seizure is the onus is on the person losing their property to prove it is not the proceeds of crime and not on the police etc. to prove that it is. This is a direct rebuttal of innocent until proven guilty and the reason criminal charges are not filed at the same time is the utter lack of evidence to make a case.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on September 24, 2015, 02:37:04 PM


You live in a country which holds it's population hostage through healthcare.

I don't think I have ever read a more accurate statement.

I don't think it's that accurate.  Yes, medical bills are a hardship for a lot of people but the vast majority of the population has good enough insurance that mitigates a lot of the out of the pocket cost.  For example, my insurance plan will pay 90% of all my medical bills up and when my 10% adds up to $5,000 they pay 100%.  Yes $5,000 is a big chunk of money and I know some people would have some trouble paying for that but I don't feel like you're being held hostage.  I could go into whole thing about our healthcare/pharma system (my job is bascially pharma support) but the cliff notes version is that it could be better but it's not as bad as it seems.

Now if you want to talk about held financially hostage we can talk about student loan debt....

Yes a thousand times for student loan debt. I'll be paying those the rest of my life.

Back to healthcare for a moment. I end up paying 16% of every check to my health plan. My wife is on my plan through my employer also. I have to pay a $50 fee just for her being on my plan, not including the price increase for adding her in the first place.

We need a better system in my opinion.  I'm getting robbed.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on September 24, 2015, 03:08:53 PM
By comparison I pay 10% of my income for my healthcare and pension as national insurance on everything after £155 p/w earned. My employer pays about 12% of what I earn as their contribution.  I actually have BUPA private medical insurance as well. This covers me and my daughter. I have never needed them , but pay additional tax on this as it is provided as a perk by my employer so cost me £57 last year.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on September 24, 2015, 03:45:31 PM
By comparison I pay 10% of my income for my healthcare and pension as national insurance on everything after £155 p/w earned. My employer pays about 12% of what I earn as their contribution.  I actually have BUPA private medical insurance as well. This covers me and my daughter. I have never needed them , but pay additional tax on this as it is provided as a perk by my employer so cost me £57 last year.

If we're doing pre-tax my healthcare costs me about 6% of my bi-weekly paycheck and that covers myself and my whole family. Obviously for that income level matters a whole lot, if I was making $10,000 a year less I would certainly be affected a lot more.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on September 24, 2015, 05:39:10 PM
http://rollingjubilee.org/ (http://rollingjubilee.org/) This is an interesting idea but I am sure it will be accused of being Un-American.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on September 24, 2015, 06:19:18 PM
http://rollingjubilee.org/ (http://rollingjubilee.org/) This is an interesting idea but I am sure it will be accused of being Un-American.

That's really interesting.

I love micro-lending and other initiatives that put lending and borrowing in the hands of everyday people.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on September 24, 2015, 07:44:53 PM
I had heard of rolling jubilee a while back and fell over them looking for something relating to the American student loans system. They buy up Student bad debt at cents in the dollar and write it off. Sadly this is not going to give people their credit rating back as usually someone with bad debt has lots of bad debt but it is a finger held up to the system.

Worth supporting?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 01, 2015, 08:05:46 PM
Oh hey, another mass shooting!  I love how this country freaked out and changed airport security screening due to failed shoe and underwear bombs but refuses to do anything about the repeated mass shootings that keep happening.

Sigh
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 01, 2015, 08:59:31 PM
Oh hey, another mass shooting!  I love how this country freaked out and changed airport security screening due to failed shoe and underwear bombs but refuses to do anything about the repeated mass shootings that keep happening.

Sigh

This is the kind of $#(% that pisses me off. They won't stop either. Let's talk about it on the news all day, interview some politicians about gun laws, then forget about it tomorrow until the next one happens.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on October 01, 2015, 09:43:58 PM
Oh, but if all the students went armed, this would never happen.  :P






Instead, we'd have inter-class/clique warfare and frat houses would become armed camps. Oh goody.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on October 02, 2015, 12:13:46 AM
Oh, but if all the students went armed, this would never happen.  :P






Instead, we'd have inter-class/clique warfare and frat houses would become armed camps. Oh goody.

Concealed carry just went into affect today on Texas public  colleges.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 02, 2015, 12:21:50 AM
Oh, but if all the students went armed, this would never happen.  :P






Instead, we'd have inter-class/clique warfare and frat houses would become armed camps. Oh goody.

Concealed carry just went into affect today on Texas public  colleges.

I just don't understand the need for concealed carry (let alone open carry).   Earlier this summer I saw a guy carrying at the park I took my daughter to and left immediately after I saw it.   What kind of person needs to bring a gun to a children's park?   Does an ordinary person really have that many enemies?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on October 02, 2015, 12:43:01 AM
Oh, but if all the students went armed, this would never happen.  :P






Instead, we'd have inter-class/clique warfare and frat houses would become armed camps. Oh goody.

Concealed carry just went into affect today on Texas public  colleges.

I just don't understand the need for concealed carry (let alone open carry).   Earlier this summer I saw a guy carrying at the park I took my daughter to and left immediately after I saw it.   What kind of person needs to bring a gun to a children's park?   Does an ordinary person really have that many enemies?

I would rather have a gun and not need it then need it and not have it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 02, 2015, 12:57:29 AM
Oh, but if all the students went armed, this would never happen.  :P






Instead, we'd have inter-class/clique warfare and frat houses would become armed camps. Oh goody.

Concealed carry just went into affect today on Texas public  colleges.

I just don't understand the need for concealed carry (let alone open carry).   Earlier this summer I saw a guy carrying at the park I took my daughter to and left immediately after I saw it.   What kind of person needs to bring a gun to a children's park?   Does an ordinary person really have that many enemies?

I would rather have a gun and not need it then need it and not have it.

Have you or anyone else you know ever been in a situation like that?  I sure haven't and no one I know has either.   Even then you're betting that an untrained person is calm, cool, and collected enough to be able to hit the target rather than an innocent bystander.   You're also hoping that the gunman doesn't see you drawing and get you before you even have a chance to get off a shot.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 02, 2015, 01:01:47 AM
Oh, but if all the students went armed, this would never happen.  :P






Instead, we'd have inter-class/clique warfare and frat houses would become armed camps. Oh goody.

Concealed carry just went into affect today on Texas public  colleges.

I just don't understand the need for concealed carry (let alone open carry).   Earlier this summer I saw a guy carrying at the park I took my daughter to and left immediately after I saw it.   What kind of person needs to bring a gun to a children's park?   Does an ordinary person really have that many enemies?

I would rather have a gun and not need it then need it and not have it.


Even with home protection are you really going to wake up, realize it's an intruder and not your kid/significant other wandering around, get the key to your gun safe, and get your gun out in any amount of time that would make a difference?   
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 02, 2015, 01:23:51 AM
Oh, but if all the students went armed, this would never happen.  :P






Instead, we'd have inter-class/clique warfare and frat houses would become armed camps. Oh goody.

Concealed carry just went into affect today on Texas public  colleges.

I just don't understand the need for concealed carry (let alone open carry).   Earlier this summer I saw a guy carrying at the park I took my daughter to and left immediately after I saw it.   What kind of person needs to bring a gun to a children's park?   Does an ordinary person really have that many enemies?

I would rather have a gun and not need it then need it and not have it.


Even with home protection are you really going to wake up, realize it's an intruder and not your kid/significant other wandering around, get the key to your gun safe, and get your gun out in any amount of time that would make a difference?   

I would say yes. I keep a gun in the house for protection. I live in a rural area and have had my home broken into before.

I would rather have the ability to protect my family instead of having no chance to defend them. Just like Chill said. I'd rather have it than not.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 02, 2015, 01:28:00 AM
Oh, but if all the students went armed, this would never happen.  :P






Instead, we'd have inter-class/clique warfare and frat houses would become armed camps. Oh goody.

Concealed carry just went into affect today on Texas public  colleges.

I just don't understand the need for concealed carry (let alone open carry).   Earlier this summer I saw a guy carrying at the park I took my daughter to and left immediately after I saw it.   What kind of person needs to bring a gun to a children's park?   Does an ordinary person really have that many enemies?

I would rather have a gun and not need it then need it and not have it.

Have you or anyone else you know ever been in a situation like that?  I sure haven't and no one I know has either.   Even then you're betting that an untrained person is calm, cool, and collected enough to be able to hit the target rather than an innocent bystander.   You're also hoping that the gunman doesn't see you drawing and get you before you even have a chance to get off a shot.

I don't think the default of a concealed carrier would be untrained. If anything I would think it is the other way around. Most gun owners I know frequent the shooting range.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 02, 2015, 01:53:28 AM
Oh, but if all the students went armed, this would never happen.  :P






Instead, we'd have inter-class/clique warfare and frat houses would become armed camps. Oh goody.

Concealed carry just went into affect today on Texas public  colleges.

I just don't understand the need for concealed carry (let alone open carry).   Earlier this summer I saw a guy carrying at the park I took my daughter to and left immediately after I saw it.   What kind of person needs to bring a gun to a children's park?   Does an ordinary person really have that many enemies?

I would rather have a gun and not need it then need it and not have it.

Have you or anyone else you know ever been in a situation like that?  I sure haven't and no one I know has either.   Even then you're betting that an untrained person is calm, cool, and collected enough to be able to hit the target rather than an innocent bystander.   You're also hoping that the gunman doesn't see you drawing and get you before you even have a chance to get off a shot.

I don't think the default of a concealed carrier would be untrained. If anything I would think it is the other way around. Most gun owners I know frequent the shooting range.

Totally not talking about how to use a gun (although my guess is that default is that more people have not used their weapons, most of the owners I know have not even taken them to a shooting range).  I'm talking about using it in an active shooter situation and really only police officers or members of the military are trained for those type of situations.  Even then you see reports on how many shots trained officers miss in those types of situations. 

When your house was broken into were you home and did you have enough awareness to do something about it if you were armed?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 02, 2015, 02:16:05 AM


When your house was broken into were you home and did you have enough awareness to do something about it if you were armed?

I wasn't home, but the door was busted open. If I had, I don't know where I would have been at the time. If I were sleeping, let's say, I would hear the door busted as it was, plus I have an alarm if a door or window were opened. I would know enough that whoever it was didn't belong in my house.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 02, 2015, 02:28:30 AM
What is it with this forum and goats?

I have known a few other people who have been broken into but none were home at the time.  I'm too lazy to spend time looking it up but I would really like to know what the ratio of break-ins while people are home compared to when they are away, I bet it's heavily weighed to the not home side.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 02, 2015, 02:34:15 AM
What is it with this forum and goats?
Love the rural life  8)

Quote
I have known a few other people who have been broken into but none were home at the time.  I'm too lazy to spend time looking it up but I would really like to know what the ratio of break-ins while people are home compared to when they are away, I bet it's heavily weighed to the not home side.

Probably so. I would also think most burglaries happen during the day when the odds say the homeowner is at work.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on October 02, 2015, 08:25:08 AM
We don't do guns in the UK and it is a damn sight easier to lose a license than it is to get one here.
Someone not on the ticket knowing where the keys to the gun box are kept is grounds for that to happen.
On saying that I have been lucky enough to shoot target pistols, rifles, muskets and shotgun as well as replica cannon.
Most of what I shot was very old and designed for hunting or very old and ex-military.
I was largely taught by people who professionally taught their use and put lots of rounds downrange every day. So I know a little.

I could never understand how Americans with mental health issues were allowed to keep the right to own guns with no controls in place. Or that anybody can own a firearm without proving they are proficient at maintaining, carrying and above all the safety aspects of being in a space with other people. The chances of someone carrying being able to assess the situation ready and fire a gun, hitting what they are aiming for without causing injury to others is slight to non-existent. Unless they practise incessantly both drawing and shooting for that situation. Put hundreds of rounds downrange every week. The police don't do this for the most part, nor do the army.

I have an uncle on leaving the British army retrained as a doctor and emigrated to America. He was a surgeon in Huntsville. He said years ago that the gunshot injuries he saw were largely self-inflicted or inflicted with a gun owned by that household. Often one family member shooting another when they heard a noise at night or occasionally taken off the owner who was not prepared to use it against another human being when it came to the crunch.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on October 02, 2015, 02:11:47 PM
I know I won't sway any strong pro-gun people, so I'll save my breath/key-strokes. I don't come here to debate politics, but I can't resist posting something, so here's some fact checking and statistics:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fact-check
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ClintACK on October 02, 2015, 04:21:17 PM
I know I won't sway any strong pro-gun people, so I'll save my breath/key-strokes. I don't come here to debate politics, but I can't resist posting something, so here's some fact checking and statistics:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fact-check

Quick-draw response to: "Myth #4: More good guys with guns can stop rampaging bad guys.
Fact-check: Mass shootings stopped by armed civilians in the past 30 years: 0"

That's just false.

Obviously, it's hard to know what would have happened in a counterfactual, but it's easy to find many examples where someone opens fire in a crowd and is stopped by a concealed-carry civilian.  Sometimes a few people are killed before the bad guy is stopped -- so you could argue it was still a mass shooting.  Sometimes no one is killed before the bad guy is stopped -- so you could argue that he wouldn't really have hurt anyone.  Sometimes he's stopped shooting (to reload?  to pick a new target area?) and you could argue that he was already done.  I'm sure the fine folks at Mother Jones would wave away all of the examples I could come up with.  But google "mass shooting stopped by concealed carry holder"...

Following the Mother Jones link (The "0" is hypertext.) -- I can see they actually list quite a few, and use exactly the excuses I anticipated.  Mostly the "no proof anyone else would have been shot" line of reasoning.  But they have another particularly bizarre one -- that in most cases, the armed civilian was well-trained (ex-cop, marine, security guard...).

Well, Yes, Duh.  That's the whole point.  The Fort Hood shooting was on an army base -- all the victims were trained soldiers, but the law required them to be unarmed on base, so they were sitting ducks for the one guy who wasn't following the law.  If there were soldiers or veterans or off-duty police officers in the movie theater in Colorado they couldn't legally bring their weapons into the theater.  Could they have shortened the massacre and reduced the casualties?  I doubt I can convince you, or anyone at Mother Jones, but I think these hypothetical well-trained CCW-holders probably could have -- as they have in many real cases.

There are 20 million veterans in the U.S., another million active-duty service members, another million police officers, and about as many retired cops.  That's before we get into well-trained civilians, national guard members, and professional security guards.  That's at least 10% of the population.  I like those odds of having someone trained nearby if I'm ever unlucky enough to be in a crowded area when a crazy person shows up intent on murder.  I'd just like that trained someone to be allowed to carry a gun.

I'm all in favor of mandatory training and periodic proficiency testing for gun licensees -- and I think it's a national disgrace that we're handing out licenses to people who have been diagnosed with severe mental illnesses.  (Note that right now, this is bureaucratic incompetence, not a political disagreement -- see the Washington Navy Yard shooter.)  Heck, I don't own a gun, have no interest in owning one, and no relevant training or experience (Well... I have had a gun pointed at me, but that's an entirely different story).  But a blanket ban on guns, whether local or global, just ensures that only the wrong people have guns when the shooting starts.

Anyway... apologies for the long screed.

Now back to trying to figure out how the heck my protagonists are going to get themselves out of the mess they've gotten themselves into I've thrown them into... with no guns anywhere in sight.

Edited to add: http://www.bookwormroom.com/2015/10/01/five-reasons-that-the-benefits-that-flow-from-guns-far-outweigh-the-risks-inherent-in-guns/ (http://www.bookwormroom.com/2015/10/01/five-reasons-that-the-benefits-that-flow-from-guns-far-outweigh-the-risks-inherent-in-guns/)  just because I can't help myself.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on October 02, 2015, 05:05:11 PM


But a blanket ban on guns, whether local or global, just ensures that only the wrong people have guns when the shooting starts.
But that's the point. Nowhere else in the world starts the shooting as often and as deadly as in the United States of Trigger Happiness...



Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 02, 2015, 05:11:42 PM
I'm all in favor of mandatory training and periodic proficiency testing for gun licensees -- and I think it's a national disgrace that we're handing out licenses to people who have been diagnosed with severe mental illnesses. (Note that right now, this is bureaucratic incompetence, not a political disagreement -- see the Washington Navy Yard shooter.)  Heck, I don't own a gun, have no interest in owning one, and no relevant training or experience (Well... I have had a gun pointed at me, but that's an entirely different story).  But a blanket ban on guns, whether local or global, just ensures that only the wrong people have guns when the shooting starts.

Agreed.

I understand the need for having protection, but something I don't understand is the need for military style weaponry. AK-47's and AR's for instance. There is no reason I can think of that a civilian needs access to those kind of weapons.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 02, 2015, 05:14:53 PM


But a blanket ban on guns, whether local or global, just ensures that only the wrong people have guns when the shooting starts.
But that's the point. Nowhere else in the world starts the shooting as often and as deadly as in the United States of Trigger Happiness...

Not disagreeing. I wish the government could figure out a solution to this entirely. Something that would be interesting to see would be how many gun owners are actually registered to their weapons. Part of the problem is tracking where these guns are, as I am sure a large portion are illegally owned.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ClintACK on October 02, 2015, 05:42:48 PM
I'm all in favor of mandatory training and periodic proficiency testing for gun licensees -- and I think it's a national disgrace that we're handing out licenses to people who have been diagnosed with severe mental illnesses. (Note that right now, this is bureaucratic incompetence, not a political disagreement -- see the Washington Navy Yard shooter.)  Heck, I don't own a gun, have no interest in owning one, and no relevant training or experience (Well... I have had a gun pointed at me, but that's an entirely different story).  But a blanket ban on guns, whether local or global, just ensures that only the wrong people have guns when the shooting starts.

Agreed.

I understand the need for having protection, but something I don't understand is the need for military style weaponry. AK-47's and AR's for instance. There is no reason I can think of that a civilian needs access to those kind of weapons.

Can you define AR?  Automatic weapons *are* illegal.

It's a bit like saying that sure we shouldn't ban cars, but sports cars are dangerous, because they cause people to speed which leads to more deadly accidents.  Then the politicians ban racing stripes and wonder why the accident numbers don't come down.



But a blanket ban on guns, whether local or global, just ensures that only the wrong people have guns when the shooting starts.
But that's the point. Nowhere else in the world starts the shooting as often and as deadly as in the United States of Trigger Happiness...

Again: you hear that statistic all the time.  It's just not true. 

You need to start throwing in qualifiers like "civilized world" or "first world" to exclude basically all of South America and Africa to get there.  Then you have to exclude acts of violence that are classified as terrorist acts or civil wars or rebellions.

And that's before you get to the bigger question of whether a murder victim cares whether it's a gun or a pipe bomb or a thrown rock that does him in.  Using the bulk "intentional homicide rate", the U.S. drops to 111th in the world, right in line with a lot of eastern Europe.

There's clearly a difference between the homicide rate -- gun-related or otherwise -- in the U.S. versus western Europe.  But there seems to be something cultural going on, rather than a difference in legal regimes.  Even if you remove all the gun deaths from the U.S. statistics, we still have more intentional homicides per capita than the U.K., for example.

I want to say that the disparity is about drug gangs and the like -- but you've got those in the U.K. too, don't you?  So I don't know.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 02, 2015, 06:19:19 PM

Can you define AR?  Automatic weapons *are* illegal.

It's a bit like saying that sure we shouldn't ban cars, but sports cars are dangerous, because they cause people to speed which leads to more deadly accidents.  Then the politicians ban racing stripes and wonder why the accident numbers don't come down.

Theoretically, they are banned. But you can go right now and buy a semi-auto AK-47. It's not hard to convert into an automatic. (Well, maybe it is, but there are many people that know what they are doing.)

AR-15 for example. I know several people that have them. I think there is a line in the sand between comparing a sports car to a military rifle. That's basically what AR's are. Why do civilians need military weapons? I see no reason.

AR's are probably the most widespread rifle on the market. Like I said, I know several that have them. I have shot them. They are fun, for sure. I am all about the right to bear arms, but I also think we should look at options for limiting widespread access to the ferrari's of the gun world.


Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on October 02, 2015, 06:44:46 PM
I don't want to be drawn into this, but this guy has got the right point of view ;)

Gun Control speech by stand-up comedian (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=89d_1411198955)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ClintACK on October 02, 2015, 07:37:05 PM

Theoretically, they are banned. But you can go right now and buy a semi-auto AK-47. It's not hard to convert into an automatic. (Well, maybe it is, but there are many people that know what they are doing.)

AR-15 for example. I know several people that have them. I think there is a line in the sand between comparing a sports car to a military rifle. That's basically what AR's are. Why do civilians need military weapons? I see no reason.

I'd say it's exactly the other way around -- I'm being unfair to ARs in comparing them to sports cars.

Lots of people die in car accidents involving sports cars every single year.

When was the last time someone was killed in the U.S. with an automatic weapon -- whether natively so or illegally modified?

I think the last confirmed case was before Al Capone went to prison -- but I could well be wrong.  The squishy way people use terms like "assault weapon" make it really hard to dig out of search engines, and the main places I look for good statistics (the DoJ and CDC have pretty good databases on violent crime and deaths, respectively) don't break out the kinds of weapons involved beyond distinguishing handguns from rifles. 

The closest thing I can find is the North Hollywood shootout, about twenty years back.  The two bank robbers were armed with rifles illegally modified to be automatic, but despite the ridiculously high number of bullets fired, no one was killed by the bad guys.


(My main point here is that so-called "assault weapon" bans seem like a stupid way to address the problem of gun violence -- since the vast majority of gun deaths involve handguns.  Drug legalization and anti-gang policies seem like they'd do far more to reduce gun deaths, and don't get me started on our mental health policy.)


"Why do civilians need military weapons?" is a whole different can of worms -- what's a military weapon?  Cruise missiles?  I see your point.  The most effective personal-defense sidearm money can buy?  The question then answers itself, for civilians with a need for personal defense.  Obviously you mean something in between, but I don't think "military" is enough information to make it a well-formed question, much less something to write into law.

In general, in the life I'm leading, I don't need any kind of firearm.  But I don't know the life that every other American leads, and I'm inclined to resist strong declarations about what other people don't need, when they seem to think they do.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 02, 2015, 08:04:10 PM
Valid points throughout.

Always a tough topic, but one we desperately need to have at many levels. I don't know what can fix the problem, but like you said, it's more than guns. What we can do about it that will make a true impact, that's the million dollar question.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 03, 2015, 06:05:54 AM
994 mass shootings in 1,004 days. (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/oct/02/mass-shootings-america-gun-violence)

1,260 deaths and 3,606 injuries. Didn't realise it was that bad over there. Absolutely ridiculous.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on October 03, 2015, 08:24:18 PM
994 mass shootings in 1,004 days. (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/oct/02/mass-shootings-america-gun-violence)

1,260 deaths and 3,606 injuries. Didn't realise it was that bad over there. Absolutely ridiculous.

Unbelievable.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on October 04, 2015, 11:09:39 PM
So, Portuguese parliamentary elections took place today. And, after four years of austerity, the same political parties were re-elected, despite losing their majority.

It's a really grim day. Portugal lost half a million of its active population to emigration during these last four years, and it seems that my fellow countrymen and women decided that this was the way to continue.

There's still the possibility of a political crisis taking place over the next few weeks / months, as we will have a minority government against a majority of the three major political parties from the Left.

I'm very happy that I got my tickets to Scotland with me. This was a result that I really didn't expect, and that made me greatly disappointed in my fellow citizens  :(
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 06, 2015, 09:43:12 AM
So, Portuguese parliamentary elections took place today. And, after four years of austerity, the same political parties were re-elected, despite losing their majority.

It's a really grim day. Portugal lost half a million of its active population to emigration during these last four years, and it seems that my fellow countrymen and women decided that this was the way to continue.

There's still the possibility of a political crisis taking place over the next few weeks / months, as we will have a minority government against a majority of the three major political parties from the Left.

I'm very happy that I got my tickets to Scotland with me. This was a result that I really didn't expect, and that made me greatly disappointed in my fellow citizens  :(
I don't understand why people still vote for the selfish idiots that are in charge of most western countries.  :-\

Meanwhile, in 'Murrca, an 11-year-old boy shot and killed an eight-year-old girl with a shotgun because she would not show him her puppies. (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/05/tennessee-boy-kills-girl-puppies-sheriff) If only she had had a gun, then this tragedy would not have happened.

Right?  ???

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on October 06, 2015, 11:45:55 AM
@Raptori (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=38840), you finally understand the usefulness of carrying.

Now, the only problem I have left is those people who think we should carry our guns concealed. Because, really, if the point is to avoid violence, then shouldn't we be showing our wares? It would be sort of like having nukes, but not letting any one know. They'd be tempted to press the button, and you'd just be reacting.

Of course, only law-abiding citizens would carry openly. Bad guys would see their gun and get the drop on them first. Therefore, you should carry concealed. The uncertainty will hold them off.

Maybe the answer is to have people with last names beginning A-M carry concealed on Mondays and N-Z carry concealed on Tuesdays. On your off day, you carry openly. Then it rotates. Since the bad guys don't know anyone's last name, it's all good.

Except when there's a family reunion. OK, at that point, we...............
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 06, 2015, 11:50:23 AM
@Raptori (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=38840), you finally understand the usefulness of carrying.

Now, the only problem I have left is those people who think we should carry our guns concealed. Because, really, if the point is to avoid violence, then shouldn't we be showing our wares? It would be sort of like having nukes, but not letting any one know. They'd be tempted to press the button, and you'd just be reacting.

Of course, only law-abiding citizens would carry openly. Bad guys would see their gun and get the drop on them first. Therefore, you should carry concealed. The uncertainty will hold them off.

Maybe the answer is to have people with last names beginning A-M carry concealed on Mondays and N-Z carry concealed on Tuesdays. On your off day, you carry openly. Then it rotates. Since the bad guys don't know anyone's last name, it's all good.

Except when there's a family reunion. OK, at that point, we...............
Or perhaps everyone should have (at least) one openly visible gun, probably a handgun, and then something else concealed? That way the visible gun would be a deterrent, but everyone would know that they don't know how heavily armed the other people around them are. That would obviously go hand-in-hand with increased ownership of semi-auto and other more powerful weapons. I'm thinking weapons stores should stock up on bazookas.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Henry Dale on October 06, 2015, 12:10:46 PM
Or we do something sensible and don't give guns to people in the first place. You don't need them for anything anyway.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 06, 2015, 12:15:07 PM
Or we do something sensible and don't give guns to people in the first place. You don't need them for anything anyway.
Does not compute. Surely an arms race is the most sensible thing imaginable. (http://liberalforum.net/images/smilies/blink.gif)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Henry Dale on October 06, 2015, 12:19:13 PM
Or we do something sensible and don't give guns to people in the first place. You don't need them for anything anyway.
Does not compute. Surely an arms race is the most sensible thing imaginable. (http://liberalforum.net/images/smilies/blink.gif)

throws yarn

Instead of giving people guns, we'll give them cats  :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 06, 2015, 12:28:56 PM
Or we do something sensible and don't give guns to people in the first place. You don't need them for anything anyway.
Does not compute. Surely an arms race is the most sensible thing imaginable. (http://liberalforum.net/images/smilies/blink.gif)

throws yarn

Instead of giving people guns, we'll give them cats  :)
Okay, now that is a plan I can get behind. (http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/GHGecko/ANI_GIFs/TINYs/Smiley_Tiny_Celebrating.gif)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on October 06, 2015, 12:41:43 PM
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkMvKeX7erI[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on October 06, 2015, 01:36:19 PM
http://www.thenation.com/article/combat-vets-destroy-the-nras-heroic-gunslinger-fantasy/ (http://www.thenation.com/article/combat-vets-destroy-the-nras-heroic-gunslinger-fantasy/)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on October 06, 2015, 01:59:30 PM
Please someone tell me how it can be acceptable that an 11 year old has access to a loaded shotgun or both a gun and ammunition? This is simple negligence on the part of the owner. I look forward to them being held accountable.

 In the UK you can actually hold a shotgun licence at 11 but it is illegal to be in the presence of ammunition of a gun unsupervised under the age of 18 (there are a lot of other conditions to be met about how it can be transported and where it can be used as well).
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on October 06, 2015, 02:21:39 PM
Please someone tell me how it can be acceptable that an 11 year old has access to a loaded shotgun or both a gun and ammunition? This is simple negligence on the part of the owner. I look forward to them being held accountable.

 In the UK you can actually hold a shotgun licence at 11 but it is illegal to be in the presence of ammunition of a gun unsupervised under the age of 18 (there are a lot of other conditions to be met about how it can be transported and where it can be used as well).

to be honest, that's the battle pro-gun liberals like me (yeah, it's a thing) constantly fight.  the 'gun control' legislation isn't about taking people's guns.  it's about background checks, licenses, tests and training.  making sure gun owners properly understand weapon safety and responsibility.

it's stuff people agree with overwhelmingly.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/211321-poll-most-gun-owners-support-universal-background-checks

the problem is that the money-politics agenda likes to frame it as "THEY GONNA TAKE YO' GUNS!  FIGHT BACK!".  nobody actually reads the proposed laws, which of course, are filled with stuff 92% of gun owners agree with.

it's stupid.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 06, 2015, 02:44:43 PM
Please someone tell me how it can be acceptable that an 11 year old has access to a loaded shotgun or both a gun and ammunition? This is simple negligence on the part of the owner. I look forward to them being held accountable.

 In the UK you can actually hold a shotgun licence at 11 but it is illegal to be in the presence of ammunition of a gun unsupervised under the age of 18 (there are a lot of other conditions to be met about how it can be transported and where it can be used as well).

to be honest, that's the battle pro-gun liberals like me (yeah, it's a thing) constantly fight.  the 'gun control' legislation isn't about taking people's guns.  it's about background checks, licenses, tests and training.  making sure gun owners properly understand weapon safety and responsibility.

it's stuff people agree with overwhelmingly.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/211321-poll-most-gun-owners-support-universal-background-checks

the problem is that the money-politics agenda likes to frame it as "THEY GONNA TAKE YO' GUNS!  FIGHT BACK!".  nobody actually reads the proposed laws, which of course, are filled with stuff 92% of gun owners agree with.

it's stupid.

I used to be like you in thinking that background checks, licenses, gun registrations, etc would solve the problem but it won't.  At best is those are really just the first steps to something more comprehensive.  The NY Times published something a few days ago about the last 14 mass shootings and all of them passed background checks (it sounds like two of them should have been rejected): http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

The only way to stop gun violence is to take away all of the guns.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on October 06, 2015, 03:01:53 PM
Not answering the question.

If you are licensed to keep a gun fine. The moment someone else can place a hand on that gun whether they are licensed or not you should lose that right.
A child should not be able to access a loaded firearm unless they are under the constant supervision of a licenced adult. FFS they are not toys and the casual attitude Americans seem to have is because you have the right but have a huge industry supported lobby is there to mitigate the responsibilities.
This is not civilised and the loss of children to gunshot should not be a cost against the 2nd amendment.

http://gunwars.news21.com/2014/at-least-28000-children-and-teens-were-killed-by-guns-over-an-11-year-period/ (http://gunwars.news21.com/2014/at-least-28000-children-and-teens-were-killed-by-guns-over-an-11-year-period/)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 06, 2015, 03:27:45 PM
Here is what I would like to see done even though like I said above I don't think it would change much:

1) Comprehensive background checks for all gun purchases whether you buy a gun from a store, gun show, or an individual.  If you're buying a gun from me we both go down to the local gun store and they charge a fee to process the check.   
2) All guns are registered to their buyer just like we do for cars.  If a gun that you own is found to be used in a crime, even if the owner was not present they would be charged with a felony. 
3) All gun owners must receive a license and to obtain that license you have to successfully pass a gun safety course.  Licenses can be renewed every few years and if you don't have a license having a gun in your possession would be a misdemeanor.  Again, this is just like we handle driver's licenses.
4) No open or concealed carry unless you are a member of the police.
5) All guns should be stored at home in a gun safe or have safety locks placed on them.  If you are found to not have these items your guns would be confiscated and you would be charged with a misdemeanor.  If an incident like Rostum mentions where a minor is able to access your gun then it would be a felony.
6) Institute a buyback program for anyone who doesn't want their guns anymore (either give them cash or a tax credit).
7) Charge a heavy tax on guns and ammo.  If you want a weapon it's going to be expensive.
8) Ban assault rifles.  I've shot an AR before and its fun, I do not see the need for anyone to own one. 

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on October 06, 2015, 03:28:30 PM
The only way to stop gun violence is to take away all of the guns.

indeed.  however, that's not practical, nor enforceable, and won't happen.  i prefer a solution that's within the realm of possibility instead of random hope or impotent rage.


If you are licensed to keep a gun fine. The moment someone else can place a hand on that gun whether they are licensed or not you should lose that right.
A child should not be able to access a loaded firearm unless they are under the constant supervision of a licenced adult. FFS they are not toys and the casual attitude Americans seem to have is because you have the right but have a huge industry supported lobby is there to mitigate the responsibilities.
This is not civilised and the loss of children to gunshot should not be a cost against the 2nd amendment.

completely agree.  hence the need for laws, licenses, and training.  you can't drive a car without all the proper training and law enforcement, why are guns different?  they're not.


http://gunwars.news21.com/2014/at-least-28000-children-and-teens-were-killed-by-guns-over-an-11-year-period/ (http://gunwars.news21.com/2014/at-least-28000-children-and-teens-were-killed-by-guns-over-an-11-year-period/)

also, to put that in perspective, there are more preschoolers killed by gunfire each year than police shot in the line of duty.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on October 06, 2015, 04:03:39 PM
in other news, fox news tells us americans that you aussies have no freedom.
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/oct/06/australia-has-no-freedom-fox-news-host-claims-in-discussion-on-gun-laws

man.  it must suck to live in a 1st world country and not have any freedom.


oh, also, it looks like the world is ending on wednesday.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship

i wonder what timezone that refers to.


whew...  busy week.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on October 06, 2015, 04:59:44 PM

oh, also, it looks like the world is ending on wednesday.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship


At first I thought that said "october-edible-fellowship".
That was really interesting.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 06, 2015, 05:33:47 PM

oh, also, it looks like the world is ending on wednesday.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship)


At first I thought that said "october-edible-fellowship".
That was really interesting.
You only thought that because you expected some kind of edible merchandise for the Fellowship of the Ring. (http://www.free-emoticons.co.uk/emoticons/Roll_eye/rolleye0014.gif)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on October 06, 2015, 05:59:18 PM

oh, also, it looks like the world is ending on wednesday.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship)


At first I thought that said "october-edible-fellowship".
That was really interesting.
You only thought that because you expected some kind of edible merchandise for the Fellowship of the Ring. (http://www.free-emoticons.co.uk/emoticons/Roll_eye/rolleye0014.gif)

Elven Waybread - vegan, non-gmo, organic, but not very great on flavor I'm afraid
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 06, 2015, 06:01:41 PM

oh, also, it looks like the world is ending on wednesday.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship)


At first I thought that said "october-edible-fellowship".
That was really interesting.
You only thought that because you expected some kind of edible merchandise for the Fellowship of the Ring. (http://www.free-emoticons.co.uk/emoticons/Roll_eye/rolleye0014.gif)

Elven Waybread - vegan, non-gmo, organic, but not very great on flavor I'm afraid
'Sall good, I'll put some lettuce and some vegan salami on it and I'll be good to go.  8)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on October 06, 2015, 06:11:04 PM

oh, also, it looks like the world is ending on wednesday.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship)


At first I thought that said "october-edible-fellowship".
That was really interesting.
You only thought that because you expected some kind of edible merchandise for the Fellowship of the Ring. (http://www.free-emoticons.co.uk/emoticons/Roll_eye/rolleye0014.gif)

Elven Waybread - vegan, non-gmo, organic, but not very great on flavor I'm afraid
'Sall good, I'll put some lettuce and some vegan salami on it and I'll be good to go.  8)

vegan salami?  ew.  i bet that's worse than turkey bacon.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 06, 2015, 06:18:28 PM

oh, also, it looks like the world is ending on wednesday.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship)


At first I thought that said "october-edible-fellowship".
That was really interesting.
You only thought that because you expected some kind of edible merchandise for the Fellowship of the Ring. (http://www.free-emoticons.co.uk/emoticons/Roll_eye/rolleye0014.gif)

Elven Waybread - vegan, non-gmo, organic, but not very great on flavor I'm afraid
'Sall good, I'll put some lettuce and some vegan salami on it and I'll be good to go.  8)

vegan salami?  ew.  i bet that's worse than turkey bacon.
You'd be astonished. Vegans have a surprisingly good taste.  :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on October 06, 2015, 06:40:18 PM
I bet they don't like Quorn either, Raptori ;)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 06, 2015, 08:22:14 PM
I bet they don't like Quorn either, Raptori ;)

I had to look up what Quorn was.  I always find it funny that people who don't eat meat will eat meat substitutes.  I know most of those people may have originally liked meat and stopped eating it because of ethical issues rather than taste but still I always find it odd.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 06, 2015, 08:46:41 PM
I bet they don't like Quorn either, Raptori ;)

I had to look up what Quorn was.  I always find it funny that people who don't eat meat will eat meat substitutes.  I know most of those people may have originally liked meat and stopped eating it because of ethical issues rather than taste but still I always find it odd.
Most of the taste of meat comes from the cooking method and the spices. And the texture isn't dissimilar to many other things.  ;)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on October 06, 2015, 10:46:52 PM
I bet they don't like Quorn either, Raptori ;)

I had to look up what Quorn was.  I always find it funny that people who don't eat meat will eat meat substitutes.  I know most of those people may have originally liked meat and stopped eating it because of ethical issues rather than taste but still I always find it odd.
Most of the taste of meat comes from the cooking method and the spices. And the texture isn't dissimilar to many other things.  ;)

i disagree with this.  i will grill you chicken, steak, elk, and duck but without any seasoning or spice.  you will definitely be able to tell the difference in taste and textures.

people who put heavy flavoring or sauces on meat (chicken and pork excluded -- there's a reason they're bbq meats) are not to be trusted.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 06, 2015, 10:49:46 PM
I bet they don't like Quorn either, Raptori ;)

I had to look up what Quorn was.  I always find it funny that people who don't eat meat will eat meat substitutes.  I know most of those people may have originally liked meat and stopped eating it because of ethical issues rather than taste but still I always find it odd.
Most of the taste of meat comes from the cooking method and the spices. And the texture isn't dissimilar to many other things.  ;)

i disagree with this.  i will grill you chicken, steak, elk, and duck but without any seasoning or spice.  you will definitely be able to tell the difference in taste and textures.

people who put heavy flavoring or sauces on meat (chicken and pork excluded -- there's a reason they're bbq meats) are not to be trusted.
I said most of the taste, not all. That's why grilled X has an identifiable "grilled" taste to grilled Y. Sure there are differences, but arguably the most noticeable tastes come from the cooking and seasoning rather than the meat itself.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on October 07, 2015, 11:49:17 AM
I bet they don't like Quorn either, Raptori ;)

I had to look up what Quorn was.  I always find it funny that people who don't eat meat will eat meat substitutes.  I know most of those people may have originally liked meat and stopped eating it because of ethical issues rather than taste but still I always find it odd.
Quorn is quite tasty and it beats tofu and sometimes seitan.

I've never eaten meat (besides fish and prawns) in my life so I never felt the need to substitute something.

There is vegan salmon, mouldy salami, drumsticks with fake bone in them, prawns, whole turkeys... It's incredible and I'm not sure I would want to eat all that stuff.

Having a burger without some kind of patty is wrong, though. So that's about the only thing I substitute. ;)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Henry Dale on October 07, 2015, 11:57:51 AM
So to all the veggie guys:

What is your take on parenting?
Do you give your kid the same as the rest of the family (vegetarian food) or do you let him/her choose or will you give him/her meat or...?

Just curious because I hear there is often a lot of controversy on that side.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on October 07, 2015, 12:06:49 PM
So to all the veggie guys:

What is your take on parenting?
Do you give your kid the same as the rest of the family (vegetarian food) or do you let him/her choose or will you give him/her meat or...?

Just curious because I hear there is often a lot of controversy on that side.
A close friend of mine has been vegetarian since she was a teenager. Her husband's not.
She's got a 3 year old boy, and she decided to give him some meat and fish to eat, even though she doesn't cook it: he eats that at her parents' and nursery, while still eating lovely and nutritional veggie meals at home (I know they're lovely, I eat there a lot, hehe)
But yes, it was quite a hard decision for her.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on October 07, 2015, 12:34:14 PM
So to all the veggie guys:

What is your take on parenting?
Do you give your kid the same as the rest of the family (vegetarian food) or do you let him/her choose or will you give him/her meat or...?

Just curious because I hear there is often a lot of controversy on that side.
I don't see any health benefits from eating meat (fish excluded) but think there are a great many reasons (animal cruelty, world hunger, antibiotics in meat and so on) to not eat it.
So why should I give it to him when it will only make it harder for him to abstain from it once he can make an educated choice?
That said, my gf eats meat (not much, but from time to time) and her family does, so if he gets it there that's how it is.

If you are easily offended by stuff about religion, don't read this.
About the letting them choose for themselves: That's a bit like religion. Either you get it from an age on where you can't choose or you won't like it later on. ;)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on October 07, 2015, 01:00:44 PM
So to all the veggie guys:

What is your take on parenting?
Do you give your kid the same as the rest of the family (vegetarian food) or do you let him/her choose or will you give him/her meat or...?

Just curious because I hear there is often a lot of controversy on that side.

Most of the meals we have at home are vegetarian (I don't eat meat or fish, but my husband does). So my kids eat less meat than most. But sometimes my husband will grill something, I'll have a bean burger or a veggie sausage so it I'm having something similar. Outside of home I decided to let my kids decide what they want. Having just one parent that is vegetarian definitely makes it harder to do anything else. Funny thing is my husband was vegetarian when we met and I wasn't, somewhere along the line we swapped, but that works out as he is definitely fine with vegetarian meals which I know plenty of people who would not be.


If you are easily offended by stuff about religion, don't read this.
About the letting them choose for themselves: That's a bit like religion. Either you get it from an age on where you can't choose or you won't like it later on. ;)

Not at all offended, but also don't completely agree
i understand where you are coming from, but I do think there's a difference. Most all of the people I know that are vegetarian made that decision despite how they were raised or the meat they were fed. I have absolutely no issues with others choosing to raise a child vegetarian, but I also don't think allowing them some meat outside the home will prevent them from making that choice themselves. Also, how do you raise a child to not do something like eat meat when one parent does without coming across as judging the other parent? Maybe I have this attitude precisely because I was not raised vegetarian, maybe the the laxer attitude towards it does mean my kids are less likely to become vegetarian. But, they will at least grow up knowing that meat is not an essential part of a meal.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 07, 2015, 01:10:08 PM
So to all the veggie guys:

What is your take on parenting?
Do you give your kid the same as the rest of the family (vegetarian food) or do you let him/her choose or will you give him/her meat or...?

Just curious because I hear there is often a lot of controversy on that side.

Coming from the opposite angle but I do (at least try to) give my daughter fruits and vegetables.  She doesn't really like the texture of most meats so it's hard to get her to eat some but I can usually cut up some small enough pieces that she'll be able to handle.  I won't ever force her to eat anything but I will always make sure there is some on her plate until she reaches a significant enough age (and at this point in time I have no idea when that would be) that she can really decide for herself.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 07, 2015, 01:10:34 PM
Quorn is quite tasty and it beats tofu and sometimes seitan.
Semi agree - the exception is smoked tofu. Perfect savoury food.

I've never eaten meat (besides fish and prawns) in my life so I never felt the need to substitute something.
I wish I could say that. Were your parents vegetarian? My mum was, but she never even mentioned it to me. There's "not being pushy", and then there's not even talking to your child about something that should be a rather major decision. If she hadn't just fed me meat by default I'm certain I'd have been veggie years earlier. Wish I had been.

What is your take on parenting?
Do you give your kid the same as the rest of the family (vegetarian food) or do you let him/her choose or will you give him/her meat or...?

Just curious because I hear there is often a lot of controversy on that side.
On parenting in general, we're not going to have kids, for many reasons.

If we were to have children, we would of course feed them the same as the rest of the family until they're old enough to make their own rational decision about it. We would explain our perspective of course, but we'd try to teach them to think about anything and everything for themselves rather than just take our word for it. If at some point (when old enough) they did decide they wanted to eat animal products, then we wouldn't stop them, but we wouldn't prepare the food for them (or probably eat at the same table in that situation).

I'm completely with xiagan's spoiler though. You were taught that you shouldn't eat dogs - did you decide to do so? The only times I've heard about it are when they just do it to fit in, which is a ridiculous "reason" if I'm honest!

The source of the controversy is that people insist that without meat you cannot be healthy, and that's really a load of bullshit. If anything, you're more likely to eat healthily if you don't eat meat.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 07, 2015, 01:20:06 PM
There is vegan salmon, mouldy salami, drumsticks with fake bone in them, prawns, whole turkeys... It's incredible and I'm not sure I would want to eat all that stuff.

When I first read this I read moldy salami and I couldn't figure out why anyone would eat that.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on October 07, 2015, 01:30:13 PM
Enough about tofu  ;), let's get back to politics.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans (https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans)

The comparisons are between China and the U.S., and all the comments are jeremiads that terrible things are happening in the U.S. But I suspect there's interesting things to consider for all nations.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on October 07, 2015, 01:36:58 PM
Enough about tofu  ;) , let's get back to politics.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans (https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans)

The comparisons are between China and the U.S., and all the comments are jeremiads that terrible things are happening in the U.S. But I suspect there's interesting things to consider for all nations.
(http://www.livefortheoutdoors.com/fckeditor/editor/images/smiley/rte/shock.gif)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ClintACK on October 07, 2015, 03:45:45 PM
Enough about tofu  ;), let's get back to politics.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans (https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans)

The comparisons are between China and the U.S., and all the comments are jeremiads that terrible things are happening in the U.S. But I suspect there's interesting things to consider for all nations.

I'm not sure if it's a Sci-fi geek thing or an RPG nerd thing, but the first thing I do mentally when reading that is think of all the amazing ways to troll and hack the system.  Make a fake persona -- get a bunch of the "right people" to friend you, then publish a massive anti-government screed and watch their "citizen scores" tank.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Henry Dale on October 07, 2015, 03:49:43 PM
Enough about tofu  ;), let's get back to politics.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans (https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans)

The comparisons are between China and the U.S., and all the comments are jeremiads that terrible things are happening in the U.S. But I suspect there's interesting things to consider for all nations.

I'm not sure if it's a Sci-fi geek thing or an RPG nerd thing, but the first thing I do mentally when reading that is think of all the amazing ways to troll and hack the system.  Make a fake persona -- get a bunch of the "right people" to friend you, then publish a massive anti-government screed and watch their "citizen scores" tank.

It's tied to your id though. You'd need a fake id first.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on October 07, 2015, 03:57:17 PM
Enough about tofu  ;) , let's get back to politics.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans (https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans)

The comparisons are between China and the U.S., and all the comments are jeremiads that terrible things are happening in the U.S. But I suspect there's interesting things to consider for all nations.
(http://www.livefortheoutdoors.com/fckeditor/editor/images/smiley/rte/shock.gif)

personally, i see very little corollary with the united states.  i guess there's a credit score component.  but, no offense, if you have cash and a credit score of .001, there's still absolutely nothing you can't buy.

people in the comments seem to be confusing capitalism and democracy with authoritarianism.  for example:
Quote
I HIGHLY suggest you take a look at what people like Anita Sarkeesian and her bunch, the DARLINGS of the media these days, said-and supported-in the recent report from UN Women on "cyberviolence"-and the specific proposals made for its "prevention". That would include censorship by private corporations, enforced by government regulations, and based on whether or not opinions being expressed were deemed "acceptable" under that scheme.

corporate censorship?  not a thing.  if that corporation doesn't sell products people want to buy, it goes out of business because people buy them from someone else.  if there's a market for 'violent misogynistic video games', people will (and do) buy them in frat-boy droves.

*shrug*

if anything, one of the united states' huge issues is the wealth gap and the absolute crushing effect it has on upward mobility.  the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.

there is also some serious privacy business to be concerned with in the united states, but that's more of a 'us digging it out of washington' thing instead of a 'washington puts forth mandates on us' thing.

it is complete and total political suicide to even talk about mandating something like in the article.  if the press gets ahold of anything even remotely nefarious, you're done.  done politically.  done in the history books.  you're like, eternity done.  (see joseph mccarthy)

just ask bill clinton who was impeached(!) for getting a bj.  or howard dean who merely hollered in excitement.  or sarah palin who went 'joe sixpack' on politics.  hillary keeping a private email server is going to cost her the softball, shoo-in presidency she had lined up.  because of that, it's now going to be a landslide victory for bernie over rubio or kasich.

i mean, can you imagine if someone with any legitimate power said "we'd like to make some changes to the first amendment"?  omg.  i can't even imagine the unifying pillory that would happen -- i honestly think they'd literally be burned at the stake.

look at what a ruckus it causes to suggest background checks on guns -- HANDS OFF MY SECOND AMENDMENT BITCHES!!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ClintACK on October 07, 2015, 04:01:06 PM
Enough about tofu  ;), let's get back to politics.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans (https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans)

The comparisons are between China and the U.S., and all the comments are jeremiads that terrible things are happening in the U.S. But I suspect there's interesting things to consider for all nations.

I'm not sure if it's a Sci-fi geek thing or an RPG nerd thing, but the first thing I do mentally when reading that is think of all the amazing ways to troll and hack the system.  Make a fake persona -- get a bunch of the "right people" to friend you, then publish a massive anti-government screed and watch their "citizen scores" tank.

It's tied to your id though. You'd need a fake id first.

True.  The only real system-hack is to create a hipster/punk culture where having a high score is uncool and square.  The fact that the government is providing real consequences for that is a real barrier, though.

In general, this seems like a rich area for dystopian storytelling.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on October 07, 2015, 08:22:04 PM
Quote
Enough about tofu  ;) , let's get back to politics.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans

The comparisons are between China and the U.S., and all the comments are jeremiads that terrible things are happening in the U.S. But I suspect there's interesting things to consider for all nations.

You are aware that China has one of the most comprehensive DNA databases in the world and rumoured to have the worlds least ethical organ donation scheme. They already know too much about their population.

First rule of any database Sh*t in Sh*t out. Provide too much and much of it inaccurate. Social media is ideal for this.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on October 07, 2015, 08:29:09 PM
If you are easily offended by stuff about religion, don't read this.
About the letting them choose for themselves: That's a bit like religion. Either you get it from an age on where you can't choose or you won't like it later on. ;)

Not at all offended, but also don't completely agree
i understand where you are coming from, but I do think there's a difference. Most all of the people I know that are vegetarian made that decision despite how they were raised or the meat they were fed. I have absolutely no issues with others choosing to raise a child vegetarian, but I also don't think allowing them some meat outside the home will prevent them from making that choice themselves. Also, how do you raise a child to not do something like eat meat when one parent does without coming across as judging the other parent? Maybe I have this attitude precisely because I was not raised vegetarian, maybe the the laxer attitude towards it does mean my kids are less likely to become vegetarian. But, they will at least grow up knowing that meat is not an essential part of a meal.

I understand where you come from too. "Most all of the people I know that are vegetarian made that decision despite how they were raised or the meat they were fed." Absolutely, but I think this step is a lot harder if you got accustomed to it and crave it later on. Some people go back to meat not because their reasons have changed but because they aren't strong enough to resist. Hell, I know that I wouldn't manage vegan (I tried as an experiment for 1-2 months) because I'd miss cheese and sour cream too much.
Our appetite is something primordial and it is incredibly hard to unlearn stuff (or learn new stuff like eating insects). So why should I make it harder for him to live healthy? (Sorry, meat eaters, I'm never preachy but may be polemic from time to time. ;))

I'm not raising him to not do something. There just won't be any meat at home. And of course I'm not being judgmental when my gf eats meat. He can try it if he wants to... :)

I could say that. Were your parents vegetarian? My mum was, but she never even mentioned it to me. There's "not being pushy", and then there's not even talking to your child about something that should be a rather major decision. If she hadn't just fed me meat by default I'm certain I'd have been veggie years earlier. Wish I had been.

Yes, they're both vegetarian (since my birth I think), slowly going towards veganism and my grandma is too.

There is vegan salmon, mouldy salami, drumsticks with fake bone in them, prawns, whole turkeys... It's incredible and I'm not sure I would want to eat all that stuff.

When I first read this I read moldy salami and I couldn't figure out why anyone would eat that.
Mouldy/moldy, that's the same and exactly what I meant. :) Don't you know salami with edible, white mold around it? Like some cheeses?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on October 07, 2015, 08:49:09 PM
@m3mnoch (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40419), I agree the comparisons to the U.S. were a little over the top. I just wanted to make sure we are not just talking about China and the U.S., but also the happy home of cameras on every street corner, England (London, at least as I hear it) and beyond.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 07, 2015, 08:54:22 PM
Quote
Enough about tofu  ;) , let's get back to politics.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans

The comparisons are between China and the U.S., and all the comments are jeremiads that terrible things are happening in the U.S. But I suspect there's interesting things to consider for all nations.

You are aware that China has one of the most comprehensive DNA databases in the world and rumoured to have the worlds least ethical organ donation scheme. They already know too much about their population.

First rule of any database Sh*t in Sh*t out. Provide too much and much of it inaccurate. Social media is ideal for this.

I work in logistics and our company stored biological samples from pharmaceutical companies who are running clinical trials.  You cannot get a biological sample out of China as they treat their DNA on the level of a state secret.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on October 07, 2015, 10:28:50 PM
oh my goodness.  just saw this.  totally hilarious: Study finds Donald Trump's Facebook supporters have the worst grammar (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/07/1428822/-Study-finds-Donald-Trump-s-Facebook-supporters-have-the-worst-grammar?detail=facebook)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on October 07, 2015, 10:37:45 PM
^ Funny ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on October 07, 2015, 10:40:01 PM
oh my goodness.  just saw this.  totally hilarious: Study finds Donald Trump's Facebook supporters have the worst grammar (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/07/1428822/-Study-finds-Donald-Trump-s-Facebook-supporters-have-the-worst-grammar?detail=facebook)

I so believe it.  ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on October 07, 2015, 11:46:31 PM
So it's good when the elected leader of your country accuses the leader of the opposition of hating Britain right, as well as a terrorist sympathiser...
Not at all disturbing or McCarthyist.


Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on October 07, 2015, 11:58:02 PM
So it's good when the elected leader of your country accuses the leader of the opposition of hating Britain right, as well as a terrorist sympathiser...
Not at all disturbing or McCarthyist.

Welcome to American politics.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on October 08, 2015, 12:22:36 AM
So it's good when the elected leader of your country accuses the leader of the opposition of hating Britain right, as well as a terrorist sympathiser...
Not at all disturbing or McCarthyist.

Welcome to American politics.
:'( :'( :'( :'(

Also a welcome to democracy. The whole of the Prime Minister's speech was just awful. Depressing really.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on October 08, 2015, 12:51:14 AM
Quote
So it's good when the elected leader of your country accuses the leader of the opposition of hating Britain right, as well as a terrorist sympathiser...
Not at all disturbing or McCarthyist.

Nah call me Dave is just trying to deflect the press from what he stuck where in a dead pig.
The entitled, arrogant Blairites slandered Corbyn when they realised what a silly thing it was to get an actual socialist to run against them. He is hardly going to curl up and die because a Tory has a pop. For those who are unaware family tax credits were stuffed by the Tories today. While this is a system that I disagree with as it subsidises bad paying employers. Lots of working poor will lose any incentive or benefit from work.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Eclipse on October 08, 2015, 07:46:31 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-34468801

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/couple-who-were-wrongly-accused-of-abuse-unlikely-to-see-their-child-again-a6685471.html

I've only seen this today, I feel really sorry for the parents I hope there can get their baby back
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on October 08, 2015, 08:41:04 PM
Quote
I've only seen this today, I feel really sorry for the parents I hope there can get their baby back

The chances of this happening are slim. The child has been adopted and those appointed by the court to protect the childs interests are likely to determine that it is in the childs best interests to leave them with their adoptive family.

That it took three years to come to court is a disgrace.
Family court is utterly secretive and supposedly geared to protect the child, often by silencing parents and leaving them without any recourse under law. Often it is made illegal to discuss where their children have vanished to.
Those responsible for misdiagnosing physical abuse will have acted in good faith and neither be reprimanded or exposed legally as to do so would discourage further diagnosis and put children at risk.

And so lives are destroyed....
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on October 23, 2015, 01:50:11 PM
@Idlewilder, here are my questions.

Is the interest in Scottish independence related to current issues or primarily to the past?

What's your own view on Scottish independence?

I know that the previous referendum last year failed. What is the chance of another referendum and why would one come so soon after the other?

Is there a pretty clear mood or is it pretty mixed up among Scots?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Idlewilder on October 23, 2015, 03:57:30 PM
@Idlewilder (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=13358), here are my questions.

Is the interest in Scottish independence related to current issues or primarily to the past?

What's your own view on Scottish independence?

I know that the previous referendum last year failed. What is the chance of another referendum and why would one come so soon after the other?

Is there a pretty clear mood or is it pretty mixed up among Scots?


1. Difficult to answer this one and I'm short on time right now, so I might come back to it in (even) more detail later. Briefly though, I think it's a mixture of the two, and Scotland has always had that historical/cultural want to break off from the UK - something that may seem a bit sentimental/daft to the outsider, but Scotland every decade or so seems to just inch closer and closer to independence anyway with so much of our government fully devolved from Westminster to Scotland itself now. Education, for instance, is wholly handled by the Scottish government and from Primary schools right up to higher/further education it is actually quite different to that of England. This is true for Health, the structure of local government and other areas of government. But of course when it comes down to anything where MONEY MONEY MONEY is the prominent factor we Scots get the raw deal every time.

I think that the Referendum has sparked a real renewed interest, particularly in the younger demographics (though my parents are staunch PRO-Indys too!), in Scottish politics and Scottish Independence. People across the UK saw in the UK general election a few months ago how much support there is in Scotland for the SNP - though of course the Press would like to remind you that as the SNP are NATIONALISTS they must of course be similar to the more infamous Nationalist groups of history - I think we all know who I'm talking about here. Absurd.

Being a Scot, whether you're ultimately PRO or ANTI independence (more on this later) is quite an inherently cultural thing that really does come across in our National shared identity. Take a room full of 10 people at random from young to old, educated to non-educated and you'll get a lot of shared characteristics despite differences in views/backgrounds. We are miserable, sullen bastards. We do have quite a quick, dry, sweary, self-hating sense of humour. We do dislike 'the English' – at least as a…I dunno, concept maybe. (I'd just like to point out here that more than half of my friends, including obviously many of you here, are English. It's more of a thing that comes up with regards Sports and Politics, and it runs deeeeep.) But I think personally that the vast, vast majority want Independence. The media and the UK government just did an amazingly underhanded job of bombarding the less involved or bothered voters with promises of more devolved powers, scaremongering and threats in the final week or two. (The BBC, our 'non-bias' media juggernaut, is and was worst of the lot.) What kind of country/people wouldn't want its Independence; the chance to vote for its own government in entirety?

2. If it's not obvious by now, I'm PRO-Independence, and voted a big fat YES last year, and I do believe another Referendum - as frustrating as it may be for those who couldn't care less having to sit through weeks and months of debating again (let's be honest, it hasn't stopped anyway) - will happen in the next 5 years and that it needs to happen.

3. There's a high likelihood because: a) The Scottish government's (The SNP) top goal is basically Independence and the almost complete whitewash of Scottish Labour, the LibDems, and the already pretty non-existent Scottish Conservatives in Westminster this year by the SNP shows a massive leap in confidence by Scottish voters since the Referendum in the SNP. Next year's Scottish elections will see another IndyREF move forward very quickly if the SNP do similar at Holyrood. b) Polling data shows a big slide into the majority wanting Independence, and with the 'promises' made by Westminster coming to nothing (unsurprisingly) and worse happening for Scotland under the next 5 years of Tory rule at Westminster, more Scots are seeing clearly that Independence is a realistic way forward. c) Let's not forget that the vote went 45/55 in favour of the NO vote last year. That's not exactly a decisive majority, particularly when you consider that something like 85% of the population voted. Big changes in polling this soon after the REF suggest another REF is the democratic thing to do.

4. I think there's still a mix, but it's becoming clearer in Scotland that people want Independence, they're just still not 100% convinced it will work...yet. The demographics for voters last year saw a wild difference in the numbers of young who voted YES (vast majority) to older (a minority). I think it's the old who need to be convinced, and when the British government has such a stranglehold on the media/press it's very difficult to convince older people they're just reading or seeing anti-SNP/anti-Independence/anti-Scottish propaganda.


As Americans know better than anyone – never underestimate these 3 things:

1. The power of the Press to influence voting. And in Scotland we basically don’t have that foundation (or at least one that isn’t fundamentally based in London or with its interests in appeasing Westminster).

2. The power of Personality in politics. Alex Salmond rubs a lot of people up the wrong way (he also inspires and pushes people; a type of person who’s always going to have as many detractors as he does supporters). Nicola Sturgeon, on the other hand, is someone I think has the personality, the drive, the likeability, the sense to rally people in a way Alex Salmond may split people. It will be interesting to see what happens in next year’s elections.

3. The power of people to be fucking stupid. They don’t care about politics. They don’t care about voting. Every politician is the same. He looks funny, she talks funny, they seem a couple of arseholes. Blah blah fucking blah. There’s always going to be that person, and there’s a lot of them everywhere. Making these people care and get involved in this, whether just from the simple act of voting, or rolling up their sleeves and chucking fliers through letterboxes, could be the deciding factor. And it seems, to me at least, that people in Scotland actually care about their country again – the IndyREF has certainly stirred up some passions.


Oof, jeez. Got carried away a bit there. I have to go for now, but anything else you want me to discuss just fire it at me. I’m sure I’ve said something stupid, or something someone disagrees with, but I’ve said my piece, and with that, I’ll leave you with this…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3eVonYn7eg
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Idlewilder on October 23, 2015, 03:59:13 PM
Longest post I think I have ever written, btw.

Guess I do give two shits about something in this country.  ;)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on October 23, 2015, 05:49:40 PM
Longest post I think I have ever written, btw.

Guess I do give two shits about something in this country.  ;)

Loved your post, @Idlewilder (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=13358). When I was working at my family's restaurant, I often brought up the Independence topic with those Scottish customers that really enjoyed talking. I noticed that the opinions varied greatly depending on the professional background of these people, although, as you said, you could never be completely sure how someone stood on the issue, as there are too many factors to take into account.

In a group of 10 golfers from Perth, 7 were for and the other 3 against independence. What touched me most was that everyone had only one regret about the whole thing: friends had been lost because of this issue, as many people take it very much to heart, and some would turn the debate into a "us vs them (traitors)".

Still, looking forward to see how things develop in the future. England itself is changing, with a much more left-leaning Labour party, and that may recover some of the ground lost to the SNP in Scotland - although, from what I've read, it seems the Scottish aren't that keen on Corbyn.

Anyway, despite being a politician, I wish there was someone like Nichola Sturgeon in Portuguese politics. Our country is going through one of the most turbulent times in recent democratic history, all because of the elections that took place earlier this month with surprising results, and I'd be much more hopeful if we just had a really strong personality in current politics, someone who just stood by what he/she believed, and not what the European Union decreed as right and wrong.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on October 23, 2015, 05:53:21 PM
Okay this is going to be interesting.

For the record I am as English as most Scots are Scottish. I have Polish, Russian, Georgian and Italian blood in my near ancestors. On my mothers side my lineage goes back to A long way and is likely as varied. I can also legitimately wear Campbell and Thompson Tartan through my bloodline on my fathers side, not that I am likely to do so, as I identify as British. I feel an Independent Scotland should exist if that is what Scotland wants,
However there can be no bailout from the UK if it fails. I do not trust the SNP to deliver this in a responsible manner as being independent appears to be more important than being functional. English nationalism is synonymous with fascism and football hooliganism while Scottish nationalism seems to be something to be applauded.

Scotland was brought into the union as England received a Scots king, James the fourth of Scotland became James the first of England. Elizabeth dying was an act of providence for Scotland as the Nation was bankrupt at the time and the Scottish pound was worth less than a fifth of an English one. The gold content had been diluted repeatedly to create more coin. English gold resolved the issue in this case and again later when the country bankrupted itself trying to establish a colony/empire of it's own.

It is inevitable that Scotland will become independent. The demographics show a vast majority of under 25's voted for and a lot of those approaching retirement or retired voted against. It emerged recently that the trigger point for another referendum will be when 60% are in favour. This assumes the SNP maintain their control of the majority of seats to bring this about. As NO voters die off it becomes inevitable.

The Labour party in the UK held it's core seats in Scotland since I have been able to vote and safe seats in Scotland have lead to giving us both Blair, who I can only view as a war criminal who has evaded justice and Brown whose treasonous actions led to destroying the pensions of a vast number of UK workers and British gold being traded for paper to support the Euro so I am no great fan of having foreign politicians foisted on me which is a favourite argument put up by Scots for Scots independence.

At the time of the referendum Alax Salmond was offering the moon on a stick. An utterly unworkable economic policy which was why he was determined that Scots currency would remain the English pound. Oil was also $112 dollars a barrel at the time. Six months later it was $36. Had Scotland become Independent I do not believe it would have an economy at all or everything would be owned by the banks.
Scots independence is likely to mean a generation of hardship, but long term may work out very well for the nation. EU membership is unlikely as Spain will veto as it has no wish to see an independent Catalonia and wont like the precident, but a trading partnership with Scandinavia could work.

85% of the oil Scotland would receive also falls within Shetlands waters and there were very real calls for Shetland to hold an independence referendum should Scotland become so. Presumably because the locals are not keen to see their oil tax spent in Glasgow and Edinburgh. This is too volatile a resource to base an economy around.

Yesterday there was a successful vote to prevent Scots and Welsh MP's voting on English matters. SNP MP Pete Wisharts response was SNP MP's was they are now 2nd class citizens. This is the sort of inflammatory nonsense The English are expected to tolerate.
Scotland is over represented in westminster and has more per head spent on them than anywhere else in the UK. The exceptionalism is staggering. The victim card is always played. Independent or not The English will always be to blame for Scotlands woes.
English MP's have not been able to vote on Scots matters for years decades, but the idea of the English who make up the vast majority of the population of the UK actually having an uninterrupted say in their country is something to be fought.

For those of us in England who have children we will of course remember 41 Scots labour MPs voting with the Labour party to impose university tuition fees on the English. Just enough to make a difference. These fees do not apply to the Scots or Welsh and are currently capped at £9,000 a year.
so perhaps that is another good reason the English would like the Scots out of our politics.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on October 23, 2015, 10:05:18 PM
So glad this is in its own thread, and that we're all good with contrasting points of view.

Thanks all three for comments. Very interesting and enlightening for the uninformed (me).
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on October 24, 2015, 01:30:04 AM
Part of the problem that came out of the referendum is there are a sizable number of idiots on both sides.
English who believe we should chuck the Scots out of the union and Scots who are desperate to get one over on the English. So there is a lot of noise around the whole issue and lots of cawing and point scoring by MP's.
My politics actually align closest with the SNP's, however I am underwhelmed by what I saw in the run up to the referendom and as stated feel that Scotland had a lucky escape.

The SNP were meeting in a pub 35 years ago to now be the dominant force in Scots politics is an incredible achievement. I think that now Salmond has stepped down and the rash promises have stopped they have a very real chance to improve the lives of the people of Scotland. However if they just maintain the status quo as Labour would have done I can see them losing support rapidly.

Just to put it in perspective the (partial)Genral election results

Conservative 330 seats         11,300,109 votes cast
Labour          232 seats           9,347,324 votes cast
SNP                58 seats           1,454,436 votes cast
UKIP                 1 seat            3,881,099 votes cast

UKIP who are to the right of the conservatives and the left of your politics in the USA gained a single seat for their couple of million extra votes over the SNP, such is UK system. So when the news is talking about an SNP landslide it is a comparitively small number of votes they are talking about. The population of Scotland is below 5.5 Million.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on October 24, 2015, 01:51:27 AM
Had to do a project the other day, and stumbled across this.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/fair-and-humane-immigration-policy/
Just... Whah? :O
Tell me I;m not the only one who sees a problem with this. If I am, just wow. but otherwise, I do not understand how the majority of that sounds like a good idea. Some things, I don't agree with, but I can understand. Tearing apart families sucks, but if you had just come here legally in the first place, or taken advantage of the 3 years you had to do so... But others. Decreasing border patrol? Whah? Legalizing everyone, no matter what? Huh?
So in other words... Hi. I'm a terrorist. Looks like I'll be headed to America if this guy gets elected.
Any of you guys on here not from America, if you ever want to come here without the paperwork, just catch a flight to Mexico if this happens. We will have thrown wide the gates to the castle keep.
Despite my passion, I would seriously love to hear from someone, if anyone, who would be willing to vote for this guy only based on his immigration policy. I am always willing to listen, and will keep my mind open if logical reasons are presented. Or, if this is too touchy, we do not have to discuss it. Just figured I would throw it out there.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on October 24, 2015, 03:16:20 AM
So in other words... Hi. I'm a terrorist. Looks like I'll be headed to America if this guy gets elected.

No....just no.  All of the 9/11 hijackers had visas to get into the US and all arrived via international flights.  There were other potential hijackers that did not receive visas and yet none of them tried to enter illegally.  The border has been relatively open for decades and yet there is no evidence that any terrorist has come in that way. There are millions of undocumented immigrants in the country now but yet we have yet to have any international terrorist action since 9/11. Even in the small chance that they did they wouldn't care about immigration status, they would just be here to do one thing.  To say that a more open immigration policy would mean the terrorists get in is just fear mongering of the worst kind, the immigration policy would have absolutely nothing to do with any of that.

Personally I think someone who is willing to risk everything to come into this country to work and make a better life for themselves and their families is worth having here.  Plus 11 million undocumented workers means there are 11 million people not generating tax revenue for the services they are using every day so it would be a great economic benefit to get them signed up.  You're never going to be able to stop people from coming in but if you make it easier more people will follow the rules and that would also take a large chunk of income from the cartels.

The main reason why immigration policy is so difficult is not because we're afraid of who is coming in (that's just a scare tactic) but because of pure politics.  Hispanics generally tend to vote primarily Democrat and Republicans are worried about what would happen if all of the sudden there were 11 million new voters that the majority would not vote for them.  They don't care about the people and what sort of life they came from, all they care is about is trying to maintain their power base.  I'm also not going to pretend all of the Democrats are acting out of the goodness of their heart either, they know if they champion this they'll benefit as well.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on October 24, 2015, 03:17:37 AM
Had to do a project the other day, and stumbled across this.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/fair-and-humane-immigration-policy/
Just... Whah? :O
Tell me I;m not the only one who sees a problem with this.

Nope. Seems fairly reasonable to me.

Quote
Tearing apart families sucks, but if you had just come here legally in the first place, or taken advantage of the 3 years you had to do so...

Have you maybe considered the reason that these people are coming to America illegally is because, you know, they can't come there legally? And not because they're criminals or lazy but because the (pretty outdated) US immigration laws make it impossible for a lot of otherwise innocent and hard-working people to immigrate. I have no doubt that, if they could, the vast majority of immigrants would choose to enter the country legally. But they can't. Hence why they're illegal.

Quote
Decreasing border patrol? Whah?
Um... but the webpage doesn't actually say that. It simply says he 'Opposes tying immigration reform to the building of a border fence.' Aka, adding more security.

And that's perfectly reasonable. Adding more border security really isn't going to do that much and is largely just waste of money. People will still get through. Maybe you'll put off a few but a lot of these people are genuinely desperate and have nowhere else to go. Putting up a few guards isn't going to stop them. And, indeed, it may force them into the hands of criminal traffickers, many of whom may end up exploiting them in far worse ways.

The only reason border security gets brought up so often is because it's one of those 'common sense' measures that politicians full of hot air use to make it look like they're making a difference when they're really not.

Now I'm not trying to say that border security should be done away with all together, or even that the US has the perfect amount at the moment, but it's a very debatable issue and not one that should be tied with immigration reform that really is necessary at the moment.

Quote
Legalizing everyone, no matter what? Huh?
So in other words... Hi. I'm a terrorist. Looks like I'll be headed to America if this guy gets elected.
Any of you guys on here not from America, if you ever want to come here without the paperwork, just catch a flight to Mexico if this happens. We will have thrown wide the gates to the castle keep.
Yeah, funnily enough, it doesn't say that either. The closest it says is giving legal status to people who are already there. People and children who have already lived there for a decent period of time, enough to make a life for themselves. People for whom it would probably cost far too much to deport and would probably do more bad than good. Not people who come there in the future. So it's not going to be an open doors policy.

Second of all, even taking into account that it's referring to people already in the country, it's not going be a case of 'Legalising everyone, no matter what.' Just because a large number are, it doesn't mean all will. I'm fairly certain known serious criminals and terrorists are going to be shipped out or locked up. And if anything, this policy helps make you safer because, in order for an immigrant to become legal, they're obviously going to need to supply details like name and address. Thus, if it's easier to keep track of any potential than if they were constantly going undocumented and trying not to get found and deported like basically every other illegal immigrant.

Quote
Despite my passion, I would seriously love to hear from someone, if anyone, who would be willing to vote for this guy only based on his immigration policy. I am always willing to listen, and will keep my mind open if logical reasons are presented. Or, if this is too touchy, we do not have to discuss it. Just figured I would throw it out there.
I'm not an American myself (although I have a fair knowledge of your political system) but yeah, I'd vote for Sanders. Admittedly not only based on his immigration policy (since I'm not the kind of guy who votes for someone based on just one issue), but he has a lot of favourable policies I agree with and he isn't as obviously sucking up to big corrupt businesses like most other candidates.

Honestly though, as long as anyone from the Republican Clown show doesn't get in, I'd probably be happy.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on October 24, 2015, 08:51:26 AM
It's a bit strange that the US (former melting pot of nations, 99% of the citizens immigrants or descending from immigrants, ...) have such a strict immigration policy.

Do you know how many Syrian refugees the United States took in in the last four years?
The same amount my hometown took in this August...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on October 24, 2015, 11:46:37 AM
I like the 'idea' of independent Scotland more than believing the reality of it. The same way that I like the 'idea' of independent Yorkshire, for example.
But all this is basically based on an idealised and romantic historical foundation.

I lean more towards 'united we stand' (and have a true future), and it's time that people realise that, including the government 'in the south', and others who think that 'the UK is London'.

This is all irrelevant to the future of the country where I live and call my own, of course, because I'm not allowed to vote.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nora on October 25, 2015, 08:31:40 AM
Yeah, America's upcoming elections make for the usual interesting turmoil and crop of pictures ...

(http://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a8jXAqQ_700b.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on November 13, 2015, 10:58:15 PM
Poor Paris  :(
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on November 14, 2015, 12:05:53 AM
Poor Paris  :(

Makes me furious.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lady Ty on November 14, 2015, 12:35:15 AM
Paris, great sadness no words enough, @Nora (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40237) hope you have company today. We're here for you.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on November 14, 2015, 12:54:14 AM
Poor Paris  :(

Makes me furious.

Just now catching the news. Terrifying.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nora on November 14, 2015, 01:01:14 AM
Yeah, I just woke up to that.... I called my best friend. Shootings happened in her street apparently but started as she arrived in at a friend's place further down the district.
Most of my family and friends are safe, though I'm still missing one of my cousins, who owns and runs a restaurant in the shooting area, so still a bit of a knotted stomach right now.

I'm just... dazed. It happened home. My step mom works in the stade de france that had a bomb with some 35 dead. It was her night off. And I hate her...  ::) but seriously it puts things in perspective. It happened at the end of my boulevard, where I used to live. It's terrifying. We're past 135 dead right now. A 100 of these were people in a concert hall, watching a metal band.

It's so infuriating, because the population always was massively against our involvement in the middle eastern wars. My step dad of the time was in the army, I've met lots of army personnel, officers... No one wanted to go to war against Syria. And now we get that...
Living in Paris was already scary and stressful 3 years ago, but now that. Damn. Being scared of going out in your neighborhood to buy some bread... Yeah, it sure is payback.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on November 14, 2015, 01:20:18 AM
Was thinking about you, Nora. I hope your cousin is OK.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lady Ty on November 14, 2015, 01:20:41 AM
Glad for you that most are safe and hope you hear about your cousin soon.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on November 14, 2015, 02:29:18 AM
As terrible as this is it could gave been so much worse.   Imagine if they had waited until after the soccer match was over to attack when thousands of people in a small area.   That's what always bothers me about our over security, we bottle people up for checks and those bottlenecks are even better targets than if they would be able to get through.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Henry Dale on November 14, 2015, 06:37:22 AM
Poor Paris  :(

Makes me furious.

Something's up with the French?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on November 14, 2015, 08:48:22 AM
Henry, please check the news.

I woke up to that (my alarm is BBC4) and I was horrified :'(
The 'things' who do these can't be called people, they don't even deserve to be called 'animals' because animals attack to survive.
And now they're dead, so they can't bloody suffer anymore.

But what can you do to stop them? Generalisation (of race, religion or nationality) will be the worst consequence...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Eclipse on November 14, 2015, 08:52:25 AM
My thoughts are with the French people at this sad time,take care all.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on November 14, 2015, 08:56:42 AM
Hope you cousin and those you know are safe and accounted for soon Nora.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Henry Dale on November 14, 2015, 09:03:28 AM
Henry, please check the news.
Oh I see.

I rarely do read news of any sorts because it rarely says anything.

My heartfelt sympathies to the people involved in this crime (not including those who are responsible obv) and to those who will suffer under its consequences.

@Nora (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40237), I really hope you manage to contact your cousin and relatives in the area. Let us know if the situation resolves itself.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ArcaneArtsVelho on November 14, 2015, 10:56:16 AM
 >:(
 :(

Hope everyone you know is all right, Nora.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on November 14, 2015, 08:55:25 PM
It's truly awful, I'm sure you'll hear from your cousin soon Nora, hope you and your family/friends are holding up.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Elfy on November 14, 2015, 11:48:26 PM
Henry, please check the news.

I woke up to that (my alarm is BBC4) and I was horrified :'(
The 'things' who do these can't be called people, they don't even deserve to be called 'animals' because animals attack to survive.
And now they're dead, so they can't bloody suffer anymore.

But what can you do to stop them? Generalisation (of race, religion or nationality) will be the worst consequence...
Oxygen thieves are the words I use, Bea. I just don't understand their thinking, what do random acts of violence against everyone (even the people they purport to be representing get caught up in what they do) accomplish? My heart goes out to the people of Paris. We were there last year and stayed quite close to where a lot of this took place.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nora on November 15, 2015, 12:10:26 AM
Henry, please check the news.

I woke up to that (my alarm is BBC4) and I was horrified :'(
The 'things' who do these can't be called people, they don't even deserve to be called 'animals' because animals attack to survive.
And now they're dead, so they can't bloody suffer anymore.

But what can you do to stop them? Generalisation (of race, religion or nationality) will be the worst consequence...
Oxygen thieves are the words I use, Bea. I just don't understand their thinking, what do random acts of violence against everyone (even the people they purport to be representing get caught up in what they do) accomplish? My heart goes out to the people of Paris. We were there last year and stayed quite close to where a lot of this took place.

The problem is precisely that none of this is random. We're not a peaceful country.
Every since the first Sarkozy gvt, we've been following the States in Any and Every campaign they've wrecked the middle east with. We followed officially out of political solidarity and for our politic's own interest.
The fact is that we've been spending hundreds of thousands of Euros in bombing Syria. After we laid waste to Lybia... We're still involved in Syria today. Not by any wish of the people mind you...

I still have had no news of my cousin, but no bad news either, so I'll keep assuming that no news is good news so far. Everyone else is safe, just shocked for most, since my step mom works at the stadium that was bombed and my best friend lives a street away from the shootings and was luckily visiting a friend for diner as they started.

I'm just shocked and angry, really, at the ongoing political reaction spreading like wildfire. Ministers are calling to us french to be strong and united, while they go AT WAR against that terrorist group, intensify bombings on Syria, yet acknowledge it's this very involvement that got us under the interest of terrorists, all in the same paragraph of their speeches.
They say they'll strike back. Solving war-brought problems with more war, while we're in deepening economical crisis and social unrest.
The whole country shut borders and is in emergency state, giving the gvt all the powers to do a lot of illegal things for our good.
That's nice and all, but it includes things like forbidding any protest or even peaceful homage gathering in the whole parisian area (over 12 million people) until at least wednesday. And so they make rash political decisions now already, while we're still looking out for our friends and families, and forbidden to gather.
We don't have a word to say. It's disgusting.

Just a day prior to our attacks there was a huge suicide bomb in Syria that also did many dead, and no one cares anymore. Worse, many Syrians have been fleeing to us. We're so strained it's always been tense with the recent flows of immigration, but one of the terrorist was registered as an immigrant in Greece, with a Syrian passport.
Guess what happens next? We'll be vilifying and amalgamating people who precisely tried to flee the same types of terror at home.
It's just sick, and instead of backing off and opting out of all these conflicts, calling our troops home and saving them and money to make it better at home and help refugees, we're going to get deeper in, dig our debt so we can kill more, and feed the terrorists with exactly what they want.
After all it's a backlash that they need, to strengthen their gibberish. More aggression from the West my brothers! See how they bomb us! - Right.

I don't feel like I'm a democratic citizen in such instances, when WE bleed in our streets and we never get a single say about how WE want to react.
I just feel so sad, because we've been doing - unwittingly - so much harm, that I can't sing like a wronged victim. What is it to me that people died a district away from where I lived, since it happened because we killed their people by the thousands? How is a kalachnikov any fairer than a plane-dropped bomb? There are no excuses or justifications to terrorism, it's morally wrong on every angle. But what of the french air strikes? Was that fairer?

So yeah, I'm angry, darker times are coming, and it's more motivations to keep out of my own country.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on November 15, 2015, 11:07:57 AM
(not replying directly to Nora)

Some ideas:
Stop advertising them.
Say 'a bomb went off in X place', give details if you must, don't mention by whom.
Only advertise events related to people - if the news didn't make such a fuss of the archeological destruction, would they have bothered? yes, it touches me deeply, but if being hidden will protect them, I'd rather not know.
Restrict news to facts, stop mentioning potential reasons (those will also always be reasons for other people to join them).
Restrict the official (ie on TV and official news sites) reporting of opinions and discussions.
They want attention, let's stop giving them that.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nora on November 15, 2015, 11:30:15 AM
I don't think it's realistic because the people want the reasons. We all look behind the act, crave to dig out the "Why?" - that's the whole point of my story in the works really, it's almost funny.
Some want to understand because they're concerned, others because they're morbidly curious. Aren't we all? Isn't it the basis of our entire judiciary system, to understand in exact detail what happened, and the perpetrators' self justifications, so we can judge better?

I also think that creating such murder and mass chaos is their own self reliant form of advertisement.

But I definitely agree on the report of discussions, opinions, and worse : decisions. I'd bet you my savings that a lot of ugly, restrictive laws and decisions will be passed in the coming weeks, while the people are shocked enough to accept them. It's a political classic.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on November 15, 2015, 12:14:58 PM
The problem is that France and the other western countries react exactly as the terrorists want.

It wasn't accidentally that that (fake) Syrian passport was found.

If the refugees and the Muslims in general become more stigmatized they're more open to the terrorists radical propaganda...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on November 15, 2015, 12:15:51 PM
When I'm home in a few hours I can move all this to the politics thread. Is that okay with you?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nora on November 15, 2015, 12:24:22 PM
When I'm home in a few hours I can move all this to the politics thread. Is that okay with you?
That's a good idea. I've probably dampened the mood with my rant >_<
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on November 15, 2015, 12:31:20 PM
When I'm home in a few hours I can move all this to the politics thread. Is that okay with you?
That's a good idea. I've probably dampened the mood with my rant >_<

The rant was fine. It's a complex set of issues with terrible consequences on all sides.

I started just now to write some of my views on it all, and quickly found that I'm not confident of any of the "facts" on which I base them. So I deleted them.

Peace for all, is my prayer.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on November 15, 2015, 12:33:50 PM
When I'm home in a few hours I can move all this to the politics thread. Is that okay with you?
That's a good idea. I've probably dampened the mood with my rant >_<

Xia, yes, I was thinking about it, and Nora, not at all - some things have to be said, shows we're human
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on November 15, 2015, 03:03:10 PM
Hmmm American Democracy, and I thought we did it badly.

http://www.collegehumor.com/post/7034693/why-the-electoral-college-ruins-democracy?ref=videos (http://www.collegehumor.com/post/7034693/why-the-electoral-college-ruins-democracy?ref=videos)

Loads of important stuff got moved behind this post and now I feel bad.it was following Nora's Trump halloween post.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on November 20, 2015, 03:28:18 PM
Good news coming from home: adoption by same-sex couples has just been approved in the Portuguese parliament!  ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on November 20, 2015, 03:38:16 PM
Good news coming from home: adoption by same-sex couples has just been approved in the Portuguese parliament!  ;D

This is something that has always bothered me.  There are more kids (at least in the US, not sure about elsewhere but would imagine it would be about the same) who are awaiting adoption but yet we're not allowing perfectly capable people adopt and give them a good home.  I mean I know all of the BS arguments people use to try to justify their discrimination but to me its something that should have been done a long time ago.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 01, 2015, 05:31:54 PM
Back to the gun control issue Prof. Jaun Cole on firearm ownership and related murders in the USA.
Interesting numbers if correct but I make no supporting claims for accuracy. On the subject of alternate energy he has published what amounts to propaganda in the past.

http://www.juancole.com/2015/11/156549.html (http://www.juancole.com/2015/11/156549.html)

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ClintACK on December 01, 2015, 07:46:04 PM
Back to the gun control issue Prof. Jaun Cole on firearm ownership and related murders in the USA.
Interesting numbers if correct but I make no supporting claims for accuracy. On the subject of alternate energy he has published what amounts to propaganda in the past.

http://www.juancole.com/2015/11/156549.html (http://www.juancole.com/2015/11/156549.html)

Hard to take his numbers too seriously when the article includes the standard claim of increasing violence side-by-side with a plot that shows violent deaths decreasing 50% in the U.S. over the last forty years.  And when that chart specifically compares the U.S. to other developed countries with less violence by simply excluding the ones that are more violent.

Then there's the chart of "handgun mortality" -- with no reference to the fact that a large majority of those deaths are suicides.  (I'm not saying that suicide isn't bad -- just that gun control isn't a way to reduce suicidal depression.)  The text on either side of that chart obfuscates this fact -- talking about violent crime and firearm murder.  He even writes, "There is some correlation between high rates of gun ownership and high rates of violent crime in general, globally (and also if you compare state by state inside the US):" as the lead in to the chart. 

But here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state)) are the state-by-state statistics.  The state with the lowest gun murder rate (Vermont) has 42% gun ownership.  The state with the highest gun murder rate (Louisiana) has 44% gun ownership.  Compare the gun murder rate statistics for the ten highest gun ownership states (0.6, 2.8, 0.8, 3.2, 4.0, 1.5, 1.0, 1.2, 2.7, and 0.9: avg 1.87, with >50% gun ownership) to those for the ten lowest gun ownership states (0.5, 2.8, 1.8, 1.5, 2.7, 2.7, 2.8, 3.4, 5.1, and 3.9: avg 2.72, with <25% gun ownership).  (all rates in the standard per 100k per year)  I wouldn't draw any conclusions from this without a lot more analysis -- but 2.72 isn't less than 1.87, and gun ownership is 2-4x higher in the high-ownership states I used.

And gun control can't explain the disparity of violence between the U.S. and the U.K.  The state with the lowest gun ownership -- Hawaii at 6.7% still has a murder rate twice that of the U.K.  The second lowest -- NJ at 12.8% -- has a murder rate four times that of the U.K.  Not one U.S. state has a murder rate lower than that of the U.K. despite a wide, wide range of policies on guns and violence.  (New Hampshire ties the U.K. with 1.0 violent murders per 100k per year.  New Hampshire has 30% gun ownership.)

TL;DR: Gun Control's a really contentious issue -- and a really complicated one.  Most of the statistics one would like in order to make an informed decision are completely unavailable.  No one knows how many lives are saved by the defensive use of guns, or even how often guns are used defensively -- estimates vary wildly (the reasonable ones range from 70k/year to 5M/year).  No one knows how many people who used guns to commit suicide would have found another method if guns were unavailable. Or how many premeditated murders of non-strangers would just switch methods.  Or even how much gun violence involves legally owned guns vs. ones that are already illegal.

In this vacuum, it's really easy to make assumptions that fit what we already believe.

Still TL; DR any of that: Yeah, Juan Cole is playing fast and loose with numbers and charts.  As he usually does.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 02, 2015, 06:24:47 PM
Big answer.

In the UK legal Firearm ownership is now extremely rare and tenuous at best.
There are all sorts of reasons you can have your guns taken from you instantly including someone else knowing where the key to the cabinet is or that you are going through a divorce.
Nobody owns 'a' gun as the licence allows multiples and as you need a three gun cabinet and acquiring another gun is the cheap bit after the hoops you have to jump through. Statistics on ownership are usually skewed by the receiver being licensed and the weapon being licensed and suddenly ownership doubles or halves. Some air weapons require a full FAC here.

2.4% of murders in the UK were carried out with Firearms. I have no breakdown for illegal/legal
or antique weapons in these numbers. Which is pertinent in the UK.
It is legal to own a muzzle loading pistols and revolvers and used to be legal to own some obsolete calibre pistols, but I am not sure now if that is still the case A walker Colt is still as effective now as a 130 years ago.

You need a licenses for black powder both keep and acquire. Re-enactment involving firearms is a bureaucratic nightmare at best and untenable at worst.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on December 02, 2015, 09:31:22 PM
Meanwhile it looks like we had another mass shooting today in California.

I find this paragraph pretty damning against guns:

Quote
In 2010, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 67% of all homicides in the U.S. were conducted using a firearm.[7] According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns.[8] 61% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. are suicides.[9] In 2010, there were 19,392 firearm-related suicides, and 11,078 firearm-related homicides in the U.S.[10] In 2010, 358 murders were reported involving a rifle while 6,009 were reported involving a handgun; another 1,939 were reported with an unspecified type of firearm.[11]


Usual Wikipedia information gathering caveats apply (I haven't had time to check all of the references) but those numbers are pretty damning.  I'm not going to say that if we get rid of guns that all of those suicides and homicides wouldn't still happen but I would bet a significant amount of money they would be greatly reduced. 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 02, 2015, 09:34:23 PM
Ach bad timing on nmy part not checked the news yet
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 02, 2015, 09:37:06 PM
Just heard about this five minutes ago before I read this.
I think at first the rate of murders would decrease, but we're the human race. We adapt quickly. Give it a few months and we would go back to brutally stabbing and beating each other.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on December 02, 2015, 09:45:13 PM
Humans will always do awful, terrible things, we know this.

But this is not humans, this is America, this is happening on regular occasions. It is the only place where it regularly happens, and I cannot believe there is even a debate frankly for even 'some' form of control, any little bit of regulation will do. The mind fucking boggles.

"We have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world" - Obama, if the president himself acknowledges this and can do shit all about it, good luck.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 02, 2015, 09:59:38 PM
Humans will always do awful, terrible things, we know this.

But this is not humans, this is America, this is happening on regular occasions. It is the only place where it regularly happens, and I cannot believe there is even a debate frankly for even 'some' form of control, any little bit of regulation will do. The mind fucking boggles.

"We have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world" - Obama, if the president himself acknowledges this and can do shit all about it, good luck.
I won't claim to be an expert on any of this, but just a couple things.
First, "This is not humans, this is America," cracked me up.
As far as the only country where mass shootings happen on a regular basis, I don't agree with that. We hear about it in America because that's where we live. All I hear from other countries are shootings that involve some form of terrorism. And, no offense to anyone, but other countries don't like us. They love our culture, but take the chance to put us down at any moment. You're not going to hear one of their politicians or officials stand up and announce to the world, "I am sad to admit that we have lots more shootings here than America does." They would never say that.
Mainly though, I would just look at the post at the top of this page. There's some good information in there that I feel doesn't get brought up enough.
Also, the country isn't supposed to be run by the President. Too often we blame issues on whoever's in office, or exaggerate their power. It's Congress who has all the power. Or is supposed to. Could Obama sign an executive order? He's done it before, so maybe he can get away with another one. And Congress has no way to stop it. But other than that, all he can do is veto any bills that come out, and command the military once we're at war.
In reality, if us Americans would focus less on the Presidential race and more on who we elect into Congress, more stuff might get done. But for the most part, we just vote for whoever represents the party we think we fit into best.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on December 02, 2015, 11:32:24 PM
I agree that Congressional elections are probably more important than Presidential elections.   That said, your local elections are probably the most important as far as your day-to-day life is concerned and holy crap do we elect a lot of idiots from both sides locally.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 03, 2015, 12:00:27 AM
personally, i think it's hilarious that congress has a 14% approval rating, but "my local congressman" has a 60% approval rating.

it's those *other* guys who are messing everything up.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on December 03, 2015, 12:12:31 AM
Watching this on the news right now. They have a car surrounded and shot all to hell. Apparently a suspect still armed inside.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 03, 2015, 12:16:58 AM
where's cobra when we need him?

(http://40.media.tumblr.com/935ee27404a8e5bf6cf21fa94c18774c/tumblr_mk0p9p0UQu1rsqvbwo1_500.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on December 03, 2015, 12:19:02 AM
where's cobra when we need him?

(http://40.media.tumblr.com/935ee27404a8e5bf6cf21fa94c18774c/tumblr_mk0p9p0UQu1rsqvbwo1_500.jpg)

Man, I wanted his car so bad when I was a kid.
(http://stallonezone.com/imgs/news/2009/dec/120109cobra_car.png)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 03, 2015, 03:19:02 AM
Man, I wanted his car so bad when I was a kid.

right?  i chewed on a matchstick forever after watching that.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on December 03, 2015, 01:05:51 PM
As usually, twitter has it all:

https://twitter.com/NYDailyNews/status/672234341800521728 (https://twitter.com/NYDailyNews/status/672234341800521728)

https://twitter.com/MatthewKeysLive/status/672300595898744832 (https://twitter.com/MatthewKeysLive/status/672300595898744832)

https://twitter.com/tparsi/status/672177432426897408 (https://twitter.com/tparsi/status/672177432426897408)

https://twitter.com/kcIMT122/status/672235708090736640 (https://twitter.com/kcIMT122/status/672235708090736640)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 03, 2015, 02:54:08 PM
In the first  link. The rage at the Daily news headline is so scary. To my reading people who could make real change offer thoughts and prayers instead of action to the berieved while continuing to pocket gun lobby money and most of the commentaters are incenced and spouting off about it being anti christian?
In a secular state it would be deemed an attack on hypocracy.

Elsewhere in the post it's mentioned that 6% of terrorist attacks are carried out by muslims.
Numbers look wrong but I am presuming the other 94% are your christian fundementalists and neo nazis?
These incidents are not sensationalised on international news sites.

For comparrison

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/brit-jailed-keeping-secret-stash-weapons-bedroom-article-1.2453688 (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/brit-jailed-keeping-secret-stash-weapons-bedroom-article-1.2453688)

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 03, 2015, 04:21:59 PM

For comparrison

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/brit-jailed-keeping-secret-stash-weapons-bedroom-article-1.2453688 (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/brit-jailed-keeping-secret-stash-weapons-bedroom-article-1.2453688)

That one just seems kind of... sad.
5 years in jail? I guess so, but, man, I hope we never make Legos illegal.

(Yes, I know. The one has nothing to do with the other, except for the potential of unhealthy obsessions.
And the fashioning of weapons.)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 03, 2015, 04:58:03 PM
Quote
That one just seems kind of... sad.
5 years in jail? I guess so, but, man, I hope we never make Legos illegal.

There is a idiocy known as zero tolerence. Due to some knee Jerk reactions to shootings in this country and a lack of understanding of how every time licencing became stricter there were more illegal guns available (totally unrelated) to criminals. A policy tying the hands judges was put in place and a minimum of 5 years enforced for illegal possession of a firearm or ammunition Irrespective of anything else.

Now if grandad dies and I find his service revolver in the attic what do I do?
If my licence expires do I run the risk of being raided?

More to the point if the police corner someone who is armed once they would have said nobodies been hurt. Put it down and lets keep it that way. Now they know they are going down for 8 years (+3 for intent) and there life as they know it is in effect over there is less reason not to point it at the policeman who may or may not be armed in the UK.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Eclipse on December 05, 2015, 03:46:16 PM
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/guntv-sell-firearms-us-viewers-002644396.html?vp=1&cache=clear

'GunTV' to sell firearms to US viewers ,A new home shopping channel will offer weapons for sale
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 05, 2015, 07:59:42 PM
Surprised this didn't already exist, but to an outsider it is insane.

I am curious about the next developments in Body armour, whith the improvements occuring will Flechette and explosive rounds become available to the American public to counter them?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 06, 2015, 12:46:11 AM
Surprised it hasn't been mentioned here - a couple of days ago in the US, Republicans blocked a bill that aimed to stop terrorists from buying guns.

Are they completely insane?

 ???
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 06, 2015, 03:43:52 AM
Surprised it hasn't been mentioned here - a couple of days ago in the US, Republicans blocked a bill that aimed to stop terrorists from buying guns.

Are they completely insane?

 ???

Just focused on personal political survival.
Total cretins.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 06, 2015, 04:11:18 AM
Could be wrong, but from what I heard they blocked the bill because there was planned parenthood stuff attached to it. Otherwise most of those people would've been for it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 06, 2015, 05:43:15 AM
Could be wrong, but from what I heard they blocked the bill because there was planned parenthood stuff attached to it. Otherwise most of those people would've been for it.
Can't find anything mentioning anything like that - the only reports I've found say that they were supposedly "defending the rights of Americans who might be wrongly on the terrorist list". Even though the bill included a right to appeal if you're mistakenly on the watchlist. Besides, why would a bill to do with gun laws have anything to do with planned parenthood attached to it?  :o
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 06, 2015, 06:04:54 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/8HzcOmV.jpg)


welcome to the party of 'no'.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 06, 2015, 11:52:00 AM
Otherwise known as the party of Me.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 06, 2015, 03:30:12 PM
Quote from: ultamentkiller on Today at 04:11:18 AM

   
Quote
Quote
Could be wrong, but from what I heard they blocked the bill because there was planned parenthood stuff attached to it. Otherwise most of those people would've been for it.

Can't find anything mentioning anything like that - the only reports I've found say that they were supposedly "defending the rights of Americans who might be wrongly on the terrorist list". Even though the bill included a right to appeal if you're mistakenly on the watchlist. Besides, why would a bill to do with gun laws have anything to do with planned parenthood attached to it?  :o

This is a deception game in American politics if you want to get something unpopular passed you dress it up in something that makes sense and is popular hiding the nasty part away where it is not going to get read until it is too late. Conversely if you want to kill a bill you get amendments added to it that would be unpopular and get it voted down. Relevance to the original bill is no longer required.

There are a certain part of the American public that will object to anything mentioning Planned Parenthood and it seems you have to be a religious fundamentalist to get elected to the republicans. The idea that the state should have control over someone’s reproductive process in the land of the free .

Please sort out this separation of the Church and State as while it can be fascinating to watch it can be barbaric and scary as well.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 06, 2015, 03:39:31 PM
Quote from: ultamentkiller on Today at 04:11:18 AM

   
Quote
Quote
Could be wrong, but from what I heard they blocked the bill because there was planned parenthood stuff attached to it. Otherwise most of those people would've been for it.

Can't find anything mentioning anything like that - the only reports I've found say that they were supposedly "defending the rights of Americans who might be wrongly on the terrorist list". Even though the bill included a right to appeal if you're mistakenly on the watchlist. Besides, why would a bill to do with gun laws have anything to do with planned parenthood attached to it?  :o

This is a deception game in American politics if you want to get something unpopular passed you dress it up in something that makes sense and is popular hiding the nasty part away where it is not going to get read until it is too late. Conversely if you want to kill a bill you get ammendments added to it that would be unpopular and get it voted down. Relevence to the original bill is no longer required.
:o

I'm so glad I don't live in America.  :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 06, 2015, 04:26:30 PM
This is a deception game in American politics if you want to get something unpopular passed you dress it up in something that makes sense and is popular hiding the nasty part away where it is not going to get read until it is too late. Conversely if you want to kill a bill you get amendments added to it that would be unpopular and get it voted down. Relevance to the original bill is no longer required.

truth.


There are a certain part of the American public that will object to anything mentioning Planned Parenthood and it seems you have to be a religious fundamentalist to get elected to the republicans. The idea that the state should have control over someone’s reproductive process in the land of the free .

right?  they somehow reconcile:
"we need smaller government, less interference, and more freedom!"

with things like:
"we need to legislate control of your reproductive rights!"
"we need to legislate english as the official language!"
"we need to legislate christianity as the official religion!"

it's an amazing view into managing cognitive dissonance on a grand scale.

the part that boggles is their thinking that moving farther to the right and 'getting out the evangelical vote' will win a general election.  they learned nothing from 2012.

keep in mind, 'they' is really a small-ish minority of conservatives.  i have many friends who are struggling with the perceived direction of the party, so just turn off the tv and avoid politics at all cost.

but, the crazies are loud and they are EATING UP things like trump signing women's breasts and ben carson fielding questions at town halls like "are you going to be a puppet like obama of the new world order?"

if they can't get rubio or jeb (anyone actually *electable*) to win the primary, the general election is going to be the biggest landslide in history.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 06, 2015, 04:29:40 PM
If only it were that simple...
Christians don't see it as being just "apart of the reproductive process." They see it as dealing with a human life. So, using that argument against the process is kind of like saying, "To think you can't kill someone in the land of the free..."
Another reason Republicans are against it. Not all of Planned Parenthood is about this, but when the videos came out about how much money they could get for which baby parts, that made a lot of people very angry. When more information came out about how they were crushing the babies' bones to get them out feet first, that made people even more angry. Now, whenever someone mentions planned parenthood, that's what a lot of people think of over where I am, even though the whole thing isn't about abortion.
As far as birth control goes, that one just depends on the type of Christian you are. I think most denominations over here are fine with it. After all, what's the point of having kids if you can't afford to take care of them? But the ones who are against can be quite outspoken about it. There's also 4 out of the 24 brands that people find a particular issue. I can't remember what brands or why.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 06, 2015, 04:35:12 PM
if they can't get rubio or jeb (anyone actually *electable*) to win the primary, the general election is going to be the biggest landslide in history.
Actually, you might be wrong there. There's a good number of independents out there willing to vote for anyone whose not a politician, even Trump. Jeb won't get anywhere near the top of the primaries because he's a Bush, plain and simple. Rubio has a chance, but apparently Cruz is crushing him at the moment?
If the Republicans want to win the vote, they need to elect Carlie however you spell her last name. She's a woman meaning she has a chance against Clinton, and she's a non-politician almost securing the independent vote. However, apparently the party isn't thinking like this, and just wants another guy up there.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 06, 2015, 05:09:38 PM
if they can't get rubio or jeb (anyone actually *electable*) to win the primary, the general election is going to be the biggest landslide in history.
Actually, you might be wrong there. There's a good number of independents out there willing to vote for anyone whose not a politician, even Trump. Jeb won't get anywhere near the top of the primaries because he's a Bush, plain and simple. Rubio has a chance, but apparently Cruz is crushing him at the moment?
If the Republicans want to win the vote, they need to elect Carlie however you spell her last name. She's a woman meaning she has a chance against Clinton, and she's a non-politician almost securing the independent vote. However, apparently the party isn't thinking like this, and just wants another guy up there.

nope.  not remotely wrong.

if someone far, far to the right wins the primary, it will be a landslide for hillary/bernie/trained ape.  even the gop is freaking out about this.  that's why they're trying like hell to get trump out of the lead.  that's why he's at war with fox news.  that's why they had him sign an 'i won't run as an independent' pledge, because if he does, he takes all the crazies with him and they can't win a general election on logic and issues alone.  it will be absolute chaos if trump splits the party.

welcome to pandering to your base.

also, keep in mind there's a severe difference in number of voters between 'moderates' and 'independents'.  trump may get some of the independent votes (at least until he has to field policy questions in a presidential debate) but he will certainly not get any of the moderate votes.

and carly "liar liar pants on fire" fiorina?  heh.  there's a reason she dropped out of sight after the 'baby parts' thing.  she's a freakin' political third rail now.  even fox news told her to her face no video of what she described exists.  and she's just doubling down on it.

oh, and despite the 'we just need a woman in there' sentiment, they're not going to make it out of the primary.  the core of the base is just too white-guy-hungry.  again, there's a reason the evangelicals are moving from carson to cruz in droves.

the gop nomination is seriously a clown car.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 06, 2015, 05:24:39 PM
Two comments:

I have to agree with @ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103) about abortion being a complex issue. I'm not a fan, because I'm not a fan of anything that defines a person as not a person. I also know it's an entirely reasonable position of divergence around what truly constitutes a person. But in an area where I just don't think we know the answer, it's hard for me to assert one person's rights over another's death. But again, I see this as an area where reasonable and moral people can disagree. The overall POV in the U.S. is that abortion should be legal, safe and rare. I find myself having to be in that camp.

On a separate point, I think some the key problems in the U.S. government structure are around proportion of representation in the Senate and voting district manipulation for cementing power in the House of Representatives (called gerrymandering).

In the Senate, there are two senators for each U.S. state. But 70% of the population lives in the 18 most urban states. The other 32 states tend to be much more rural, which also tends toward more conservative politics. Oddly, because senators serve for 6 year terms, the Senate is still more careful and centrist than the House. But still, 30% of the voters in smaller states (below 5M population) control about 66% of the Senate votes.

In the House, voting districts are usually controlled by the state legislatures. If a legislature and the state governor are of the same party and have sufficient majority, they almost immediately start manipulating voting district lines to split supporters of the other party into separate districts so that their party has a permanent majority. Both sides do this. That said, over the last two decades or so (and I may be wrong on some details, but I think I'm correct in general), conservatives have had control of state legislatures and governorships and so the Republican majority - after years of Democratic majorities - has been cementing its place.

One last comment. Race is a big driver, too. During the Civil War, Lincoln was form the Republicans and represented the more "progressive" party. As a reaction to this, Democrats became the party of the South. At the time of the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt took the Democrats far to the left, but southern democrats stayed in the party, giving it a strong majority for many years. When Kennedy and Johnson supported civil rights, the southern democratic wing dissolved. Southern states are now almost entirely Republican.  See small state over-representation in the Senate; see gerrymandering and permanent majorities; see voter registration malarky; see.......
 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 06, 2015, 05:49:00 PM
Quote
Christians don't see it as being just "apart of the reproductive process." They see it as dealing with a human life.

There is a big difference between holding beliefs and stopping others from making a choice. That comes under fumdementalism not religion.
A tiny fraction of Planned Parenthood is about abortion. There is a massive amount of information on the web opposing abortion in the cases or rape and incest by various American pro-life religious groups.
I am aware This is the extreme but the rights of the victim are not equal to the rights of a foetus? Even the catholic countries in Europe are not that backward.
I do not like the idea of abortion but I do not in any way feel compelled to force my beliefs on others and certainly feel there are situations where a choice should be given anything else is tyranny.

Quote
if they can't get rubio or jeb (anyone actually *electable*) to win the primary, the general election is going to be the biggest landslide in history.

Just like us you pretend to have a democracy. You really think another Bush in power will make America a better place, just like the last two did...or another Clinton (actually the last one made you a more prosperous place)? Perhaps getting away from political dynesties would be a plan. Or just admit you have an egolitarian fascade are class based and have an aristocracy based on money not bloodlines like everyone else.

Quote
they need to elect Carlie however you spell her last name

Really? I am not a fan, but maybe that was something to do with joining a company which literally wrote the book on labour relations made fantastic stuff and provided the best customer support I have ever encountered.
In those days it was run by engineers and managed double digit growth and they were embarressed to talk about the money. At a certain point shareholder pressure meant getting business persons involved. Massive cuts in staffing about 30,000 from memory all the perks and benefits stripped from the workforce no pay increases and the company was asset stripped. 14 months after she joined the division of Lucent she came from collapsed. She had sold the buildings and plant and the business was renting them back, but it gave her a spectacular quarter to jump ship. Oh no growth and the employee bonus scheme was sabataged (later destroyed by Hurd) after she took control. Eventually the board got rid of her and brought in a succession of greater idiots wielding MBA's and a disdain for making or doing things. If you really want a self entitled sociopath in power thats up to you but I can promise you American lives wont matter and everyone elses less so.





Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 06, 2015, 06:07:12 PM
Two comments:

I have to agree with @ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103) about abortion being a complex issue. I'm not a fan, because I'm not a fan of anything that defines a person as not a person. I also know it's an entirely reasonable position of divergence around what truly constitutes a person. But in an area where I just don't think we know the answer, it's hard for me to assert one person's rights over another's death. But again, I see this as an area where reasonable and moral people can disagree. The overall POV in the U.S. is that abortion should be legal, safe and rare. I find myself having to be in that camp.

On a separate point, I think some the key problems in the U.S. government structure are around proportion of representation in the Senate and voting district manipulation for cementing power in the House of Representatives (called gerrymandering).

In the Senate, there are two senators for each U.S. state. But 70% of the population lives in the 18 most urban states. The other 32 states tend to be much more rural, which also tends toward more conservative politics. Oddly, because senators serve for 6 year terms, the Senate is still more careful and centrist than the House. But still, 30% of the voters in smaller states (below 5M population) control about 66% of the Senate votes.

In the House, voting districts are usually controlled by the state legislatures. If a legislature and the state governor are of the same party and have sufficient majority, they almost immediately start manipulating voting district lines to split supporters of the other party into separate districts so that their party has a permanent majority. Both sides do this. That said, over the last two decades or so (and I may be wrong on some details, but I think I'm correct in general), conservatives have had control of state legislatures and governorships and so the Republican majority - after years of Democratic majorities - has been cementing its place.

One last comment. Race is a big driver, too. During the Civil War, Lincoln was form the Republicans and represented the more "progressive" party. As a reaction to this, Democrats became the party of the South. At the time of the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt took the Democrats far to the left, but southern democrats stayed in the party, giving it a strong majority for many years. When Kennedy and Johnson supported civil rights, the southern democratic wing dissolved. Southern states are now almost entirely Republican.  See small state over-representation in the Senate; see gerrymandering and permanent majorities; see voter registration malarky; see.......

i have two more things too!

1) the 'complex issue' is really hitting the nail on the head.

the far right (i say this as i personally know many people 'on the right' who are more moderate and to whom this statement doesn't apply.  also, i have lots of experience personally with the far right as much of my family exists squarely in the space) believes there are not really any complex issues -- everything can be solved simply.  they don't see the world is a big bucket of gray.  they only see black and white.  good and bad.  it's weird.

welfare drug testing is an amazing example of this.  "if i have to take a drug test for a job, they need to take one for welfare."  sounds simple, right?  then, you go into 'well, how much does it cost to test everyone?  and how many people is it going to catch?'  come to find out, if you're so poor you're on welfare, you don't have money for drugs.

the numbers have been proven it wastes tax payer money in every state that's tried it, but it still comes back because the answer is 'simple' so there must be some level of corruption.  after all, we know those bastards are making at more than minimum wage just being on welfare.  bunch of 'takers' anyway!

except -- if you take the number of people on welfare (we're a nation of takers!!) which is 110,000,000 or so and multiply that by 'more than minimum wage' (they're making over 40k a year!  on welfare!) of $43k per year, you come up with a number that's about a trillion dollars more than the entire federal budget.

so, yeah, taking the entire social system budget (it's about $400 billion, btw) from both state and federal, you end up with an average of $3600 a month.

you can't simultaneously say 'there are tons of people on welfare' and 'welfare recipients are making tons of money' without math proving you wrong.

so, no -- it's not simple.  none of our divisive issues are.  that's why they're divisive.


2) i'm totally going to drive everyone's opinion of the u.s. political system further into the ground.  yes, even farther than it is now.

oh, and i guess it's not me doing it -- it's adam.  he ruins everything.

[youtube]90RajY2nrgk[/youtube]



Quote
they need to elect Carlie however you spell her last name

Really? I am not a fan, but maybe that was something to do with joining a company which literally wrote the book on labour relations made fantastic stuff and provided the best customer support I have ever encountered.
In those days it was run by engineers and managed double digit growth and they were embarressed to talk about the money. At a certain point shareholder pressure meant getting business persons involved. Massive cuts in staffing about 30,000 from memory all the perks and benefits stripped from the workforce no pay increases and the company was asset stripped. 14 months after she joined the division of Lucent she came from collapsed. She had sold the buildings and plant and the business was renting them back, but it gave her a spectacular quarter to jump ship. Oh no growth and the employee bonus scheme was sabataged (later destroyed by Hurd) after she took control. Eventually the board got rid of her and brought in a succession of greater idiots wielding MBA's and a disdain for making or doing things. If you really want a self entitled sociopath in power thats up to you but I can promise you American lives wont matter and everyone elses less so.

similarly, i was working with hp when she came in there.  similarly, it was a complete, unmitigated disaster.  similarly, the board fired her.  i, too, am not a fan.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 06, 2015, 06:30:00 PM
Quote
similarly, i was working with hp when she came in there.  similarly, it was a complete, unmitigated disaster.  similarly, the board fired her.  i, too, am not a fan.

Same company same experiences different side of the pond.
Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 06, 2015, 07:37:58 PM
while we're on the subject.

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MsYuMXkDOBY/VmM58-2RfOI/AAAAAAAA-h4/_XYYk2ZdVwQ/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2015-12-05%2Bat%2B11.21.48%2BAM.png)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 06, 2015, 07:39:17 PM
Crumped. Hate Love it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 06, 2015, 08:16:24 PM
Quote
Christians don't see it as being just "apart of the reproductive process." They see it as dealing with a human life.

There is a big difference between holding beliefs and stopping others from making a choice. That comes under fumdementalism not religion.

Again, you're simplifying the passion people feel about this. Normally, I would completely agree with you. Just because you believe something, doesn't mean everyone else has to. Gay marriage is the prime example of that. But with abortion, you're talking about life and death here. Pro Life activists believe that we're allowing the death of thousands of children.
Let me put it into perspective. Imagine a religion that believes a certain race aren't actually people. Hell, let's take this fantasy. Imagine elves wandering around America. They like it here, even though we cut down there trees. A group of people have formed an elf hunting group and dedicate themselves to vacating them from forests. They are saying it's perfectly legal since they're not humans or animals. Now, I'm apart of a group that believes this is completely wrong. You're taking the life of something for land. Would it be  suppressing their beliefs to make elf hunting illegal? Sure. But it's a thing's life that's at stake.
Even though the example is a bit extreme, that's how a lot of Christians feel about abortion. A lot of the Christians I know have an argument that goes like this. "Yes, I believe in freedom of religion. That doesn't mean I'm going to let another one sacrifice an animal at the altar."
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 06, 2015, 08:28:49 PM
Yes. Stopping people from making a choice to kill is a good thing. The question is whether it's killing to abort a child/foetus.

Now, believing that a speck of tissue is a human because one bit of scripture says "I knew you before you were in the womb" is a little closer to fundamentalism. But admitting that we don't know when "human" begins - and wanting to protect the rights of children against parents - is, to my way of thinking, rational and fair. So is the counter-argument. (It's just tissue, for Pete's sake!) What we do from there is the tough part. But rejecting "pro life" because of fundamentalists is sort of like throwing out socialism because of East Germany.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 06, 2015, 08:41:57 PM
What we do from there is the tough part. But rejecting "pro life" because of fundamentalists is sort of like throwing out socialism because of East Germany.
I have to disagree. While I see your point, we can see the pros and cons of socialism and capitalism in the real world. Abortion comes down to a mixture of religion and science, both of which are a bit more abstract.
Science abstract? You mean the thing that gives us answers and can be proven by evidence is abstract?
Yes, because in this case, we don't have the answer. Not completely. We're always learning something new. Sometimes we think we know, but then we find something else that proves it wrong. So while it's a bit more concrete than religion itself, it's still abstract.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on December 06, 2015, 09:05:03 PM
What bugs me most about pro-life is that it's really pro-birth and not pro-life. If you are pro-life, you should care for the baby that is brought into this world ( = health care, the well being of the mother/parents, ...) and not just that it is brought into this world.

(http://files.explosm.net/comics/Kris/cooked.png)
Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on December 06, 2015, 09:33:34 PM
Oh wow, that Adam ruins everything Video was incredible... You really managed to drive my opinion of your system deeper into the ground...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 06, 2015, 09:40:12 PM
What we do from there is the tough part. But rejecting "pro life" because of fundamentalists is sort of like throwing out socialism because of East Germany.
I have to disagree. While I see your point, we can see the pros and cons of socialism and capitalism in the real world. Abortion comes down to a mixture of religion and science, both of which are a bit more abstract.
Science abstract? You mean the thing that gives us answers and can be proven by evidence is abstract?
Yes, because in this case, we don't have the answer. Not completely. We're always learning something new. Sometimes we think we know, but then we find something else that proves it wrong. So while it's a bit more concrete than religion itself, it's still abstract.

Hmm. I think we're in "violent agreement" (as we say at work) on the complexity thing.
As far as my comparison, yeah, okay probably not great. But to push it a tad, i think we can see the ffects of fundamentalism in the real world. You don't throw out Socialism as a concept because of the horrors of how it has been implemented in some places. Just as you don't throw out an argument for life because of the perils of fundamentalism.

But yeah. Probably not the best comparison.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 06, 2015, 09:42:46 PM
The 'complex question' comes down to whether you should have control over your own body or the state should?
Whether is is right to force someone, possibly a child to carry a foetus to term and then provide them with none to minimal support. Whether the much translated changed and abridged set of rules for living in a middle eastern kingdom 3,000-1,000 years ago should hold sway over knowledge and Science of now. How do you claim the moral ground while forcing someone to bring a child to term they dont wish to carry, don't want when it is born and often cannot provide for. Never mind the medical cost of the birth.
As you elect the likes of Donna Campbell

The all (human) life is sacred bit would possibly stand up better if you led by example. You could provide healthcare and a first rate education for all for free. Show you value your people, end poverty. You hold over a 1/3 of the world commerce and 1/2 its wealth lead by example, but instead America as a nation has not done this. Even the daily shootings that no sane country would tolerate cannot be stopped but abortion can be. instead you vote for the likes of senator Donna Campbell.

Back in the late 80's I worked as a librarian for a midwives charity. Detroit had the highest child mortality bar 3 mid African cities in the world the pro life arguement would sit better if places in your incredibly rich country were not the third world.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 06, 2015, 09:44:21 PM
What bugs me most about pro-life is that it's really pro-birth and not pro-life. If you are pro-life, you should care for the baby that is brought into this world ( = health care, the well being of the mother/parents, ...) and not just that it is brought into this world.

(http://files.explosm.net/comics/Kris/cooked.png)

A reasonable critique of many of the "pro-life" folks. My other is that so many pro-lifers are pro death penalty. This is one of the places where I appreciate the Catholic church's consistency: pr-birth, pro-human dignity, anti-death penalty. I think the church takes its position too far in respect to contraception, and there are many other areas where i disagree with its POV strenuously. But at least in regard to the current discussion, there's a consistency there.

My own position is pro-contraception, anti-abortion, pro-legal/safe abortion, pro-dignity, anti-death penalty.

If only everyone agreed with me!  :o ;)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 06, 2015, 09:50:03 PM
The 'complex question' comes down to whether you should have control over your own body or the state should?
Whether is is right to force someone, possibly a child to carry a foetus to term and then provide them with none to minimal support. Whether the much translated changed and abridged set of rules for living in a middle eastern kingdom 3,000-1,000 years ago should hold sway over knowledge and Science of now. How do you claim the moral ground while forcing someone to bring a child to term they dont wish to carry, don't want when it is born and often cannot provide for. Never mind the medical cost of the birth.
As you elect the likes of Donna Campbell

The all (human) life is sacred bit would possibly stand up better if you led by example. You could provide healthcare and a first rate education for all for free. Show you value your people, end poverty. You hold over a 1/3 of the world commerce and 1/2 its wealth lead by example, but instead America as a nation has not done this. Even the daily shootings that no sane country would tolerate cannot be stopped but abortion can be. instead you vote for the likes of senator Donna Campbell.

Back in the late 80's I worked as a librarian for a midwives charity. Detroit had the highest child mortality bar 3 mid African cities in the world the pro life arguement would sit better if places in your incredibly rich country were not the third world.

I'm not making any defense of the U.S. position on these things. Just stating my own, and trying to be consistent in my views.

And yes, control of one's own body is the rub. I know you wouldn't countenance a mother aborting at 8 months, 7 months, 6 months... Per Wikipedia, the youngest foetuses ever to survive outside of the womb were about 21 weeks. A foetus can't control its own body. At what point does society through the actions of the state say that the right of the unborn trump those of the mother. At what point are there two bodies in conflict?

I agree there is an early point where human life has not begun. It's why I don't support out-lawing abortion fully. It's an extremely tough problem, simplified by both sides to support their own views.


But I'm starting to repeat myself. Discussion is great, but not table thumping. I hope I'm not coming off that way.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 06, 2015, 10:00:52 PM
There is a point where an embryo is the protien building blocks for life and the point where a foetus is a sustainable human being.
I am certainly not qualified to judge, but If I had to religious considerations would be well down the list.


Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 06, 2015, 10:36:07 PM
What bugs me most about pro-life is that it's really pro-birth and not pro-life. If you are pro-life, you should care for the baby that is brought into this world ( = health care, the well being of the mother/parents, ...) and not just that it is brought into this world.

(http://files.explosm.net/comics/Kris/cooked.png)

A reasonable critique of many of the "pro-life" folks. My other is that so many pro-lifers are pro death penalty. This is one of the places where I appreciate the Catholic church's consistency: pr-birth, pro-human dignity, anti-death penalty. I think the church takes its position too far in respect to contraception, and there are many other areas where i disagree with its POV strenuously. But at least in regard to the current discussion, there's a consistency there.

My own position is pro-contraception, anti-abortion, pro-legal/safe abortion, pro-dignity, anti-death penalty.

If only everyone agreed with me!  :o ;)
So, you have me lost on the middle three. I'm thinking pro-dignity means a woman has the right to her own body. You also said anti-abortion, but pro-safe abortion. I'm confused on what the difference is. Is abortion when a baby can be killed even after it's a proven lifeform? And safe abortion is otherwise?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 06, 2015, 10:45:05 PM
Pro-dignity means everyone has the right to a life of meaning and opportunity. Including gay people to love, women to be free from sexual predation, and on and on.

I'm against abortion as something that can kill a potential human being. I worry that defining potential people as tissue risks other ways in which we define away rights and dignity.

But I recognize that I don't know exactly when the line is crossed from tissue to human. Since I won't stand judge over this, I can only hope that people are careful and responsible. In the extremis, I believe people have the right to make their own choices. Therefore, legal and safe. Still, I also believe society can limit this. At a certain point, the person-hood of the child is clear.

Maybe: abortion is to tissue; murder is to viable unborn human. I'm not smart enough to know when the line is crossed.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 07, 2015, 04:22:34 AM
Completely with Jmack in that pro-life philosophy seems utterly mental to me. Saurus shared a quote with me that sums it up pretty well:

Quote
I cannot understand anti-abortion arguments that centre on the sanctity of life. As a species we've fairly comprehensively demonstrated that we don't believe in the sanctity of life. The shrugging acceptance of war, famine, epidemic, pain and life-long poverty shows us that, whatever we tell ourselves, we've made only the most feeble of efforts to really treat life as sacred.

My personal morality is pretty clear-cut. If a creature has the neural substrates required for consciousness, it counts as a person (which includes all vertebrates and some invertebrates (http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf)). I find all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, a person to be morally wrong, and always try to cause as little impact on others as I can while still maintaining my own rights.

If the fetus literally does not have the capacity to think, then for me it's not a person, and doesn't have any rights at all. Those neural substrates begin to develop between the 24th and 28th week of pregnancy.

However, that's actually completely irrelevant. Another quote (again shared with me by Saurus):

Quote
There’s a concept called bodily autonomy. It’s generally considered a human right. Bodily autonomy means a person has control over who or what uses their body, for what, and for how long. It’s why you can’t be forced to donate blood, tissue, or organs. Even if you’re dead. Even if you’d save or improve 20 lives. It’s why someone can’t touch you, have sex with you, or use your body in any way without your continuous consent.

A fetus is using someone’s body parts. Therefore under bodily autonomy, it is there by permission, not by right. It needs a person’s continuous consent. If they deny or withdraw consent, the pregnant person has a right to remove them from that moment. A fetus is equal in this regard because if I need someone else’s body parts to live, they also can legally deny me their use.

By saying a fetus has a right to someone’s body parts until it’s born, despite the pregnant person’s wishes, you’re doing two things.

1) Granting a fetus more rights to other people’s bodies than any born person.
2) Awarding a pregnant person less rights to their body than a corpse.

So, even if you consider a fetus at any stage to automatically be a person, the mother should still be well within her rights to have an abortion. Unless you believe that the mother should have no rights at all.

Also, here's an interesting link that explains the mechanics of what pregnancy is really like (https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-evolutionary-benefit-or-purpose-of-having-periods/answers/4625918) (in answer to a question about why women have periods). In short, despite the "beautiful pregnancy" narrative, a baby is essentially a parasite that wages war on the mother.  :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 08, 2015, 12:33:36 PM
Donald Trump gets scarier and crazier every day.
How soon til his supporters start doing violence themselves?
Hope not, but easy to see it going that way.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on December 08, 2015, 03:27:41 PM
Donald Trump gets scarier and crazier every day.
How soon til his supporters start doing violence themselves?
Hope not, but easy to see it going that way.
It's hard to imagine that he actually has followers who take him serious - and not only trolls who want to see what happens...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on December 08, 2015, 04:10:49 PM
Donald Trump gets scarier and crazier every day.
How soon til his supporters start doing violence themselves?
Hope not, but easy to see it going that way.
It's hard to imagine that he actually has followers who take him serious - and not only trolls who want to see what happens...

Edit: Added links for those curious.

For those who aren't in the States, Trump's supporters are already committing violence. They recently beat up a protestor who showed up at one of Trump's rallies, and Trump responded with something along the lines of "Well, the protestor probably had it coming".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/22/black-activist-punched-at-donald-trump-rally-in-birmingham/ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/22/black-activist-punched-at-donald-trump-rally-in-birmingham/)

“Maybe he should have been roughed up, because it was absolutely disgusting what he was doing,” Trump said on the Fox News Channel on Sunday morning. “I have a lot of fans, and they were not happy about it. And this was a very obnoxious guy who was a trouble-maker who was looking to make trouble.”

Trump's supporters are very real, and they agree with pretty much everything he says. If anything, they are even more blatantly racist and close-minded. As someone who has to live in this country, knowing people like the average Trump supporter are out there is a bit terrifying.

His candidacy isn't a joke any longer, as much as we wish it was. His toxic dialogue is having real and dangerous effects on the most volatile and angry people within our borders.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on December 08, 2015, 08:34:35 PM
Donald Trump gets scarier and crazier every day.
How soon til his supporters start doing violence themselves?
Hope not, but easy to see it going that way.
It's hard to imagine that he actually has followers who take him serious - and not only trolls who want to see what happens...

unfortunately I have learned to never assume voters will come to their senses when it comes time to go to the polls. There are too many voters who are easily swayed by campaigning that fuels fear and feeds on ignorance. Trump is just the latest example, and one that takes advantage of all the traits that people find addictive in reality TV. Sad thing is, this isn't just a TV show. Sadly, there are too many people that do agree with him, and him being so visible in the media spotlight is like a rallying call for crazy town.

The good news is, I do know people who are Republican and have always voted Republican, that will refuse to vote for him because he is so far out there and so open about his bigotry. My hope is that he won't be able to carry the vote, but I have been so disappointed by some previous elections, I won't bank on it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 08, 2015, 09:19:22 PM
meh.  not all of us are freaking out about trump.  just sayin'.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/dear-media-stop-freaking-out-about-donald-trumps-polls/
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on December 08, 2015, 09:29:14 PM
meh.  not all of us are freaking out about trump.  just sayin'.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/dear-media-stop-freaking-out-about-donald-trumps-polls/

Well, I'm just speaking from past experience thinking "There is no way the American public could possibly vote for this guy". And I was wrong. More than once. If he has enough to win the primary, which right now he is in the lead, then he will likely get on the ticket (unless the Republican party revolts and force him to be an Independent choice). If he does get on the ticket, some of the people currently supporting other Republicans may move their vote to him. But I hope not. But honestly, I do wish they would stop covering him so much because it feeds the reality tv fan base (or at least that is my very in-expert opinion)
Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 08, 2015, 09:38:19 PM
...but how would we know when he was singing some lady's boobs?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on December 08, 2015, 09:39:02 PM
My concern with Trump isn't necessarily that he'll get elected (though, there is a remote possibility) but that the way he's running his candidacy actually has real-world consequences.

I've seen some glee from folks on the left about how Trump is "destroying the Republican party"... and while sure, I can understand why it might be amusing to one side to see the other side trying to deal with a guy as crazy as Trump, the problem (for me) is that Trump's sheer level of crazy is moving the whole conversation to the right.

As an example, pre-Trump, requiring every citizen who subscribes to a particular religion to register on a national watchlist wouldn't have been suggested by even the rightmost of right wingers, at least not on a national stage. It was too badshit even for someone like Rush Limbaugh.

Post-Trump, starting that list is now the new far-right. Putting American citizens on a watchlist based on their religion is now a topic that's actively in our political discussion. Some of the most right-wing of right-wingers are now saying "Well, that's not such a bad idea".

Meanwhile, abroad, people are looking at the US and saying "Wait, the US really has a presidential candidate who endorses registering people by religion or (most recently) banning all people of a religion from the county?"

So, that's where Trump gets scary for me. Also, even if he *doesn't* get the Republican nod or, if he does get it but doesn't win, he's already fired up his supporters. He has shown he has absolutely no qualms about repeating lies ("Muslims celebrated 9/11 in the streets of New Jersey", for example) and his followers BELIEVE those lies. Absolutely. Planting false beliefs that toxic in people, especially people who are going to be VERY disgruntled if Trump doesn't win the presidency, is irresponsible and dangerous.

Now, just to give you an idea of how closely I've been following this, I *never* talk politics in public. :) I've stayed away from threads like this for that reason. I have my own beliefs and I welcome you to have yours, and I don't think anyone is going to change their mind because of what someone said on the Internet.

That said, given where Trump is now, I am now comfortable going on record with the following:
- You should not encourage your followers to physically assault people who disagree with you politically, and
- You should not suggest we put American citizens on a "government watchlist" because of their religious beliefs.

I know. Crazy thoughts! But if someone disagrees with me on those points, then I'm okay with that. :0
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 08, 2015, 09:57:10 PM
The real danger towards democracy is when people reach the point of despair where instead of saying "Do your job and fix this" they say "Tell us what to do?" I don't think you are at that place yet.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on December 09, 2015, 04:34:50 AM
Jumping in late on the abortion conversation (I'm personally against it but I also think I shouldn't be making moral decisions for other people and let them choose their own way).  What gets me is that a large part of the group that is against abortions are also against good sex education and birth control.  If we really want to lower the abortion rate we should be passing out birth control pills and condoms like candy at Halloween rather than making it harder for them to get the appropriate protection.  Instead they equate anyone who takes birth control is a promiscuous slut who shouldn't have any protection because they are sinning in their actions. 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 09, 2015, 11:35:01 AM
Jumping in late on the abortion conversation (I'm personally against it but I also think I shouldn't be making moral decisions for other people and let them choose their own way).  What gets me is that a large part of the group that is against abortions are also against good sex education and birth control.  If we really want to lower the abortion rate we should be passing out birth control pills and condoms like candy at Halloween rather than making it harder for them to get the appropriate protection.  Instead they equate anyone who takes birth control is a promiscuous slut who shouldn't have any protection because they are sinning in their actions.

This^.
Meanwhile one of these days I'll reply to raptoris last post on the subject because it seems to take its argument to an extreme with which I'm quite uncomfortable.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 09, 2015, 02:12:31 PM
Jumping in late on the abortion conversation (I'm personally against it but I also think I shouldn't be making moral decisions for other people and let them choose their own way).  What gets me is that a large part of the group that is against abortions are also against good sex education and birth control.  If we really want to lower the abortion rate we should be passing out birth control pills and condoms like candy at Halloween rather than making it harder for them to get the appropriate protection.  Instead they equate anyone who takes birth control is a promiscuous slut who shouldn't have any protection because they are sinning in their actions.

This^.
Meanwhile one of these days I'll reply to raptoris last post on the subject because it seems to take its argument to an extreme with which I'm quite uncomfortable.
I shall look forward to it.  ;)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 09, 2015, 04:28:15 PM
Campaign on 38 degrees to strip D Trump of his honoury degree from Robert Gordon University Aberdeanshire.
Sign the petition if you feel he is not a good role model for students. You May or may not know but he created havoc in Scotland as well.

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/donald-j-trump-revoke-rgu-degree (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/donald-j-trump-revoke-rgu-degree)

This may actually backfire and merkins resolve to support Trump just because the british think he is an arse.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35052505 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35052505)


Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 09, 2015, 06:08:06 PM
Campaign on 38 degrees to strip D Trump of his honoury degree from Robert Gordon University Aberdeanshire.
Sign the petition if you feel he is not a good role model for students. You May or may not know but he created havoc in Scotland as well.

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/donald-j-trump-revoke-rgu-degree (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/donald-j-trump-revoke-rgu-degree)

This may actually backfire and merkins resolve to support Trump just because the british think he is an arse.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35052505 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35052505)

Most mercans think he's an arse too.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 09, 2015, 06:37:52 PM
Ok to explain?
Should the British appear to be doing anything to involve themselves in your political process their will be howls of outrage and the 'Patriotic' to do is stand firm behind the poor defenceless billionairre deemed to have been wronged through his own actions. There are those who will think he is an arse ass who will support him anyway because the British have the temerity to discuss denying him right of entry to their country.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on December 09, 2015, 09:19:47 PM
Meanwhile one of these days I'll reply to raptoris last post on the subject because it seems to take its argument to an extreme with which I'm quite uncomfortable.
I liked the two quotes from Saurus. The first because it is true and the second more from a philosophical point, since it's the other extreme to the so called pro-lifers, theoretically allowing abortion at any moment during the pregnancy - something I don't support of course.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on December 09, 2015, 10:04:38 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/3C5bb6y.png)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 10, 2015, 09:55:45 AM
Meanwhile one of these days I'll reply to raptoris last post on the subject because it seems to take its argument to an extreme with which I'm quite uncomfortable.
I liked the two quotes from Saurus. The first because it is true and the second more from a philosophical point, since it's the other extreme to the so called pro-lifers, theoretically allowing abortion at any moment during the pregnancy - something I don't support of course.
On the second quote, in a practical sense it's incredibly unlikely for someone to reach the later stages of pregnancy without realising it - they'll know early enough that they can make their decision without leaving it late. Obviously that won't cover every situation, and it's much harder to work out what the most appropriate approach is in unusual cases, but I think it's the most logical baseline from which to start those discussions.

The question central to the debate is whether or not abortion is morally wrong; anything that comes after that should come later on. :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 10, 2015, 11:39:20 AM
This won't solve anything, but I say we agree on the following:

Removing life from a child is morally wrong.
Therefore, a parent does not have the moral right to kill their child to achieve their own goals.
Removing tissue from one's own body is morally acceptable.

Now the rub: When does the tissue that is, unless interfered with, becoming a child... actually become a child?

I would posit that she is a child if she can think - inside or outside the womb.
She is a child if she can feel pain or pleasure.
It is tissue if none of the above.

if a child, removing life is killing, and under many conditions, murder.
If tissue, abortion and morally neutral from the point of view of society unless other factors are involved, such a rape.


Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 10, 2015, 01:24:36 PM
This won't solve anything, but I say we agree on the following:

Removing life from a child is morally wrong.
Therefore, a parent does not have the moral right to kill their child to achieve their own goals.
Removing tissue from one's own body is morally acceptable.

Now the rub: When does the tissue that is, unless interfered with, becoming a child... actually become a child?

I would posit that she is a child if she can think - inside or outside the womb.
She is a child if she can feel pain or pleasure.
It is tissue if none of the above.

if a child, removing life is killing, and under many conditions, murder.
If tissue, abortion and morally neutral from the point of view of society unless other factors are involved, such a rape.
Yeah I more or less agree with that logic, and completely agree with the outcome. We don't know exactly when consciousness (and therefore ability to feel pain and so on) truly begins, but we do know that the capacity for consciousness starts developing at 24-28 weeks.

Since that means we can be (essentially) certain that the fetus is not conscious until at least 24 weeks, I think that's a reasonable cut-off point for abortions that most people would agree to.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 10, 2015, 01:41:21 PM
And to complicate things around the point an embryo is refered to as a foetus the spine and nervous system develop. The brain is a life support system only at this point and develops later, but it is highly likely a foetus can feel before it can think.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 10, 2015, 01:51:33 PM
And to complicate things around the point an embryo is refered to as a foetus the spine and nervous system develop. The brain is a life support system only at this point and develops later, but it is highly likely a foetus can feel before it can think.
If there's no consciousness there to experience the pain, then the 'pain' is simply electricity imo.  :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 10, 2015, 02:16:21 PM
just out of curiosity...

raise your hand if you have a strong opinion as to when an embryo becomes a baby AND you've gone through pregnancy either as the mother or father.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 10, 2015, 02:25:20 PM
just out of curiosity...

raise your hand if you have a strong opinion as to when an embryo becomes a baby AND you've gone through pregnancy either as the mother or father.
Surely it'd be just a little more relevant to ask "who has a strong opinion as to when an embryo becomes a baby and has gone through an abortion"? A lot of couples begin to think of their prospective child as a baby even before conception - parental perception doesn't affect the reality of when the baby becomes a sentient being.  :P
 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 10, 2015, 02:40:43 PM
just out of curiosity...

raise your hand if you have a strong opinion as to when an embryo becomes a baby AND you've gone through pregnancy either as the mother or father.
Surely it'd be just a little more relevant to ask "who has a strong opinion as to when an embryo becomes a baby and has gone through an abortion"?  :P

i don't think so.  maybe?  i would imagine the answer to that would be nothing but crickets.  i'm just curious on the intersection of strong timeline opinion (early, late, whenever) plus the personal experience of having a baby.

my own thoughts, having a handful of miscarriages (for fellow commiserators, one was even the ugly d&c-style) before eventually having two amazing boys and my step-sister recently delivering her first child stillborn -- surprisingly, i don't have a strong opinion on when an embryo becomes a baby.

is it biophysics related?  maybe.

is it when you start talking to her stomach?  maybe.

is it when you see the heart beating at your first doctor visit?  maybe.

is it when you find out?  maybe.

it just feels really, really subjective and i was wondering if that was a common feeling.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 10, 2015, 03:58:38 PM
just out of curiosity...

raise your hand if you have a strong opinion as to when an embryo becomes a baby AND you've gone through pregnancy either as the mother or father.
Surely it'd be just a little more relevant to ask "who has a strong opinion as to when an embryo becomes a baby and has gone through an abortion"?  :P

i don't think so.  maybe?  i would imagine the answer to that would be nothing but crickets.  i'm just curious on the intersection of strong timeline opinion (early, late, whenever) plus the personal experience of having a baby.

my own thoughts, having a handful of miscarriages (for fellow commiserators, one was even the ugly d&c-style) before eventually having two amazing boys and my step-sister recently delivering her first child stillborn -- surprisingly, i don't have a strong opinion on when an embryo becomes a baby.

is it biophysics related?  maybe.

is it when you start talking to her stomach?  maybe.

is it when you see the heart beating at your first doctor visit?  maybe.

is it when you find out?  maybe.

it just feels really, really subjective and i was wondering if that was a common feeling.
Fair enough, completely different discussion then!  :P

I don't really qualify for what you asked, but as someone who has personal experience of my mother being pregnant (twice, while I was in my early teens, one was stillborn the other was fine), it was a gradual thing. The closer it got to birth, the more real the baby was.

However I think that when you're talking about working out at what point an abortion is no longer appropriate, the only thing that matters is the science, and that's a much more clear-cut thing.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 10, 2015, 05:43:58 PM
Mayo Clinic. Week 11. Baby's genitals begin to form.
Definitely human at that point.  ;)



Which is actually probably week 9. Mayo counts from start of last period, so their weekly calendar isn't actually... right.  >:(
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on December 10, 2015, 05:52:39 PM
Mayo Clinic. Week 11. Baby's genitals begin to form.
Definitely human at that point.  ;)
Huh, so genitals define what makes you human? Who knew!  :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 10, 2015, 06:12:14 PM
Mayo Clinic. Week 11. Baby's genitals begin to form.
Definitely human at that point.  ;)
Huh, so genitals define what makes you human? Who knew!  :P

pah.  rookies.

i'm pretty sure mine were fully formed well before anything resembling a brain existed.

oh.

um.

dammit!  inside voice, chris!  that was an inside voice thing!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on December 10, 2015, 07:20:35 PM
just out of curiosity...

raise your hand if you have a strong opinion as to when an embryo becomes a baby AND you've gone through pregnancy either as the mother or father.

With my daughter we heard her heartbeat at 8 weeks during the first ultrasound and that really hit me in the feels department.  So on one hand you have an actual heartbeat going on but on the other the fetus is more of a human tadpole than anything else.  In my mind I have always considered 20 weeks the cutoff but that seems very arbitrary and I don't believe its as cut and dry as that.  Still if things were cut and dry with this topic we probably wouldn't be having a discussion about it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 10, 2015, 07:35:02 PM
Let's say that parents heard a heartbeat at 8 weeks.
At 8.5 weeks, there is a terrible accident caused by a drunk driver, resulting in a loss of the child/foetus/what-have-you.
Are the parents justified in saying that the drunk driver killed their child?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 10, 2015, 10:02:18 PM
Yes.
Maybe I'm saying this because I'm so passionate about drunk driving, but if a woman is pregnant, and enough harm is inflicted so that she can never have the baby alive, yes. The driver killed the child. I don't care how far into pregnancy you are.
Since we're all stating our beliefs here, I might as well state mine, if it wasn't obvious already. I don't believe in abortion unless the mother's life is at risk. Being a Christian, I believe that from the very beginning, it has a soul.
Can I enforce that belief on others? No. Sadly, I have to rely on science to tell me when something is "human." But, when the majority of biologists have agreed on an answer, that's what we should stick to. Laws should be made making any abortion that happens beyond that point illegal.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lady Ty on December 10, 2015, 10:36:26 PM
I have tried to keep out of this emotive discussion but it has become so male dominated that I will contribute but am not prepared to go into long debate over. I made my mind up on this long ago and will not be changing it.

Maybe you could consider the following points and even discuss it with all the women in your life, like Raptori actually did.


Who should make the final decision on whether or not they should have an abortion? Don't you think the actual woman involved has the right to be able to make this choice?

Do you think that decision is made lightly and easily? Or with sadness, guilt, desperation and fear?

Have you considered all the circumstances of conception? Not just the extreme of rape but of sections in society where contraception is considered 'unmanly',  or, worse still, banned by religion?

Have you considered the social circumstances of the woman and the possible future for the child?  Not everyone lives a comfortable middle class life. And don't bring out the argument they might be Einstein or a saint. They're just as likely to be sold for sex or have to live on the streets.

Do you think that by tightening the abortion laws you are going to actually stop it happening outside those laws?

When I was an 18 year old student I sat up with a friend all night and the next day, after she returned from a back street abortion and came to me for help. This is before there were any legal clinics and proper care was only available to the wealthy, discreetly and safely at huge cost. Her experience had been vile, you do not need to know details.

That night was painful, horrible and we were both very frightened, torn between seeing it through or getting official medical help which would mean the end of her university life and terrible disgrace in her strict family. It ended up alright, but now in retrospect I know we should have got help because she might have died from blood loss or infection.

Safe legal abortion readily available would go a long way to stopping such back street risky illegal trade which no doubt still exists.

My first pregnancy ended in a 34th week still birth and it broke my heart at the time and is still a sad clear memory. I was very fortunate to have a son and a daughter later on and they and their children are the joy of my life.  I never had to make that terrible choice of abortion and honestly do not know what decision I would have made.

I would never advise for or against to anyone else, but I would stand by them with any support or love or help I could offer whatever they chose.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on December 10, 2015, 11:32:43 PM
Those are all good questions and I would also add that with genetic testing you can know in advance of any major issues that may sway your choice.  For me it comes down to choice and despite what I may feel about it I strongly believe each person needs to have the opportunity to make their own choice.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 11, 2015, 12:46:58 AM
I would never advise for or against to anyone else, but I would stand by them with any support or love or help I could offer whatever they chose.

/shakesfist

you...

you and your feels.  making me all weepy.

must.  not.  cry.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Overlord on December 11, 2015, 09:30:04 AM
Wow. Between the English Prime Minister's piggish behavior and Volkswagen's cynical stupidity, not a great week for the Euros. Of course, Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

You will note that I avoid this thread based on the fact I work for the English Prime Minister :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 11, 2015, 03:44:02 PM
Wow. Between the English Prime Minister's piggish questionable behavior and Volkswagen's cynical stupidity, not a great week for the Euros. Of course, Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.

You will note that I avoid this thread based on the fact I work for the English Prime Minister :P

Fixed that for you.  ;) ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lanko on December 11, 2015, 07:49:38 PM
Just coming by to share the news from down here.

Just barely 20 years of Democracy, with 4 presidents. And we are already on our way to our second impeachment because of major corruption schemes and catastrophic administration. Great, eh?  ::)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 11, 2015, 11:19:31 PM
You get used to it. There will always be an element who see it as a way to enrich themselves or their friends.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: DireWolfSnow on December 17, 2015, 06:51:20 AM
Of course, Donald Trump still leads in polls for the Republican Party's Presidential candidate, so we're not in too great a shape over here in U.S.land.


The worst part is that apparently he is running because of a "dare" from Bill Clinton. A good number of people are saying that he is actually out to purposely fracture the conservative voting block into the "extreme right" apart from the "moderate right" and even the undecided voters. Especially if Trump runs as an independent, we will see about 5-10% of the electorate vote for him, 30-35% will vote for the Republican, leaving an almost certain chance that that the Democratic party will get the majority.

If he gets the nomination, I can actually see a larger margin of victory for the Democratic party as that will mobilize people to actually go out and vote against him.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 17, 2015, 06:03:09 PM
Quote
The worst part is that apparently he is running because of a "dare" from Bill Clinton. A good number of people are saying that he is actually out to purposely fracture the conservative voting block into the "extreme right" apart from the "moderate right" and even the undecided voters. Especially if Trump runs as an independent, we will see about 5-10% of the electorate vote for him, 30-35% will vote for the Republican, leaving an almost certain chance that that the Democratic party will get the majority.

If he gets the nomination, I can actually see a larger margin of victory for the Democratic party as that will mobilize people to actually go out and vote against him.

Mabye it will help highlight the dangers of a stagnating political class and system to you all.
The world survived Mondale as VP a man who made Regan look sane. Mabye Trump would give you a never again moment and you can persuade the coperate financial base that you have had enough of the the nutters they expect you to vote for and would actually like to choose someone with your, not their interests at heart.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 17, 2015, 06:05:30 PM
ha!  just saw this today!

http://politicalo.com/trump-responds-to-the-brits-we-already-banned-the-english-from-america-once-in-1776-well-gladly-do-it-again/

take that brits!  we banned you once, we'll do it again!  ban all the things!

heh.  he's an amazingly ignorant human being.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 17, 2015, 08:14:11 PM
Aww bless. He did lose his planning permission appeal this week as well as his honoury degree so is probably vexed with the scots as well. Is he going to deport all the Scots and Irish as well? We couldnt cope, seriously.

By the way those millions in London are real scary no wonder our schools and hospitals are collapsing under the strain. They are not paying taxes or contributing in any meaningful way. They must be plotting.
Or it may be ther are less than a million adult muslims in the whole of Great Britian.

While not wanting to get into a patriotic arguement over independence. The only reason you got it was because you were not worth the bother and had little of value at the time. There were only British 8,000 troops to tie down America and the Spice Islands which had a GDP about ten times greater and were under threat from the French. We were a bit busy at the time fighting France, Spain the Netherlands and Mysore in India. America was a sideshow nothing more.
Every time the British took a town they had to abandon the one they were holding and it still took you a nearly 2 years to win a battle.

After you got Independance you manufactured some really bad mechanical devices (clocks mostly) this was due to the British needing something to buy off you (and flog cheap to the commonwealth) so you could afford to buy our goods. Started you on the path to industrialisation, which was probably a bad move from our perspective.

For comparison today our entire armed forces is slightly smaller than your Marine Corps. We no longer rule the waves so yes if you want to keep us out you are both entitled and capable of doing so. If you choose to do it on Trumps account fair enough but remember he was insulting to a segment of our (and your) population in a personal capacity which is why a petition was raised.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on December 17, 2015, 08:49:14 PM
http://politicalo.com/trump-responds-to-the-brits-we-already-banned-the-english-from-america-once-in-1776-well-gladly-do-it-again/
This makes me want to see how many diplomatic incidents he'd cause as the president of the USA. Not enough to root for him, but still.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on December 18, 2015, 04:11:25 AM
Aww bless. He did lose his planning permission appeal this week as well as his honoury degree so is probably vexed with the scots as well. Is he going to deport all the Scots and Irish as well? We couldnt cope, seriously.

By the way those millions in London are real scary no wonder our schools and hospitals are collapsing under the strain. They are not paying taxes or contributing in any meaningful way. They must be plotting.
Or it may be ther are less than a million adult muslims in the whole of Great Britian.

While not wanting to get into a patriotic arguement over independence. The only reason you got it was because you were not worth the bother and had little of value at the time. There were only British 8,000 troops to tie down America and the Spice Islands which had a GDP about ten times greater and were under threat from the French. We were a bit busy at the time fighting France, Spain the Netherlands and Mysore in India. America was a sideshow nothing more.
Every time the British took a town they had to abandon the one they were holding and it still took you a nearly 2 years to win a battle.

After you got Independance you manufactured some really bad mechanical devices (clocks mostly) this was due to the British needing something to buy off you (and flog cheap to the commonwealth) so you could afford to buy our goods. Started you on the path to industrialisation, which was probably a bad move from our perspective.

For comparison today our entire armed forces is slightly smaller than your Marine Corps. We no longer rule the waves so yes if you want to keep us out you are both entitled and capable of doing so. If you choose to do it on Trumps account fair enough but remember he was insulting to a segment of our (and your) population in a personal capacity which is why a petition was raised.
Uh...
Okay, I'm not a historian but...
Let's just ignore everything you said about taking two years just to win a battle as if we had a seasoned army in the first place. Let's just ignore how the British, 8000 of them if what you're saying is true, got beat by people who were mostly fighting their first war, and sucked at it.
If America was just a sideshow, and if America was truly as invaluable as you say, then why, oh why, did the British come back in the War of 1812 and try to take us back? Again, I'm no historian, so maybe there's a valid reason why a country would send an entire war force and risk lives for a country that was worthless to them.
To be fair, I hate our current government. I believe we're as corrupt as can be, with few exceptions. That doesn't mean I don't support the idea the majority of the founding fathers had for this country. What I am interested in is history, but in no professional capacity. I paid attention because it shows where a lot of corruption began, and since we're destined to repeat ourselves, may give me warning signs as to what is next. So, from what my corrupted government has taught me, that makes no sense. From what John Green has taught me, that makes no sense. Pretty much everything I've heard all my life  doesn't match up with what you're saying.
I know you said you didn't want to go into a lot of detail, but I would love some more information, as well as any sources you can find.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 18, 2015, 11:21:02 AM
It would be very interesting to compare the conquering of India to the loss in America. What were the military, environmental, and political/social factors in each.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 18, 2015, 03:06:28 PM
rostum (while clearly biased) is basically correct.  we were a distraction.  france was the big fish at the time.  the british had to make a choice.

my best friend had to read a gritty, accurate book on the whole george washington / revolutionary war thing at navy war college when he was working at the pentagon. (he's an air force colonel)  if i recall correctly, that particular book was all about the strategy and tactics and such at the time.  he was telling me how it debunked a lot of the general public's white-washed view of the war.

i guess washington lost 99% of the battles.  the other 1% happened to be the ones that ended up mattering.

i've just sent him a note to get the book title.  i'll drop it in the thread when he gets back to me.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 18, 2015, 03:38:09 PM
too good not to share.

your republican frontrunner, america:
[youtube]UZ1L013k5Hw[/youtube]

it starts getting amazing about 2 minutes in.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on December 18, 2015, 03:46:13 PM
OMG!!

the hits just keep coming!  i'm in youtube hell!

[youtube]qUGT30gGtiI[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on December 18, 2015, 03:57:44 PM
Maybe people should stop linking and commenting and gving him a stage (same thing with terrorists).
Without the media platform, no one would know or care...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on December 18, 2015, 04:52:49 PM
OMG!!

the hits just keep coming!  i'm in youtube hell!

[youtube]qUGT30gGtiI[/youtube]

But with the British accent... I BELIEVE him!
 ;D ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on December 18, 2015, 05:16:31 PM
Maybe people should stop linking and commenting and gving him a stage (same thing with terrorists).
Without the media platform, no one would know or care...

This has been my thinking for the longest of times. I teach Political Science at the college, and I can assure you, maybe half of my students know somebody other than Trump, Clinton, Bush, or Bernie. It isn't the platform that wins you an office but the media attention.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on December 18, 2015, 05:53:40 PM
Maybe people should stop linking and commenting and gving him a stage (same thing with terrorists).
Without the media platform, no one would know or care...

As someone who is likely voting for the other party I want to keep the clown show going for a long time.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on December 18, 2015, 07:42:31 PM
Quote
If America was just a sideshow, and if America was truly as invaluable as you say, then why, oh why, did the British come back in the War of 1812 and try to take us back? Again, I'm no historian, so maybe there's a valid reason why a country would send an entire war force and risk lives for a country that was worthless to them.

The French, Mostly.

Some of it was about press ganging English and Irish sailors out of American ships and the interferance in American Trade by the Royal Navy.

The 1812 war was fought on American soil only if you count supplying factions in the southern states where there was still support for British Colonial rule and some troops landed in the deep south, After a half arsed attack on New York. The rest of it was a defensive war in Canada until the French were being chased back into France and troops could be freed up in Europe to be transported to do anything else. In 1814 and 15 there was fighting in America and It was pointles from a British perspective. There was no threat from America of supplying resources or troops to A beaten Napolean.

Europe was involved in a little tiff at the time and had their been British troops available to retake America then I am sure there would have been those in favour of doing so. There were not. Holding down an Empire and fighting the French meant Britain was on a defensive footing in all its wars.

From a British standpoint 1812 is only significant in that you beat a number of blockading Frigates in naval duels. The Royal Navy wasn't used to that and it caused panic on the stock exchange and demoralised the population. Not used to losing at sea.
From An American perspective it is a lot more important and did a lot to unify you as a Nation.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on January 05, 2016, 01:40:15 PM
I have no intention of ever voting as I find it futile, but I have enjoyed Trump's antagonizing of the Democrats and their supporters; as well as his revealing the cowardice of the GOP when it comes to voicing what their supporters actually want.

People are too wrapped up in the power that the president allegedly has. The President of the US doesn't have dictatorial powers, so whatever possibly outrageous claims they make and how if they are voted in what drastic measures they will take is just done to stir up the voters emotions.

Unless he had an overwhelming support base in both the house and senate, there's a snowball's chance in hell that Trump could get legislation passed to build an actual wall across the southern border. He's just taking the immigration issue and sensationalizing it so that the press is going to spend more time than they would on the more down to Earth proposals put fourth by other members of the GOP.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on January 05, 2016, 01:47:51 PM
I respectfully disagree that voting is futile. Votes put Obama in office. Votes put GW is office. Two very different views for our country, leading to many differences in regulation, legislation, foreign policy and overall national POV. Trump's utter and public cynicism degrade our national mindset. Maybe there is a role for exposing the failings of the political corpus, but I'd rather it not be done by someone who panders to the worst racism and jingoism of the populace.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on January 05, 2016, 02:07:16 PM
I disagree that voting is futile too.  I live in a fairly Republican state and I vote mostly Democrat depending on who is running (I never do a straight party ticket, I try to vote for the person who seems like the best fit for me regardless of party) so yes at times it feels like I'm wasting my vote.  However Obama did win the state in 2008 and in the the last election the Democrats picked up a Senate seat so it does swing.  Indiana had a 58% voter turnout in 2012 which is actually higher than I thought it would be.  If half, or probably even just a quarter, of those who didn't vote actually voted the results would have been a lot different.  Even if your candidate doesn't win, if they end up winning 55-45 instead of 60-40 that might actually tell them something about their constituency and maybe they will moderate their policies a little.

I do agree the primaries bring out the crazies as the candidates have to pander to their base and ignore the moderates for awhile. 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on January 05, 2016, 02:35:20 PM
I have no intention of ever voting as I find it futile, but I have enjoyed Trump's antagonizing of the Democrats and their supporters; as well as his revealing the cowardice of the GOP when it comes to voicing what their supporters actually want.
But the thing is, he's not really voicing what Republican supporters want. He's voicing what a specific subset of Republican voters want to hear (specifically, low educated, working-class white people).  It just so happens that that demographic is a rather large bloc in the Republican party and the huge number of candidates are splitting up the 'less-insane' Republican vote. I swear I've heard 'I'm a Republican but I hate Trump' many many times since this election season began.

Also, he's far from antagonising Democrats. He's basically delivering the election on a silver platter by alienating the vast majority of the electorate. Women, Latinos, Immigrants, Disabled People, you name it. There's a reason one of the most widespread rumours about Trump is that he's secretly a Democrat attempting to undermine the Republican party. (Personally, I just think he's in it for the attention and publicity and is saying anything to keep the spotlight on him.)

But the one thing that is very worrying about him is the way that he's in a way legitimizing all these insane, disgusting, bordering-on-fascist proposals by bringing them into public discussion. Ideas like 'killing terrorist families', 'building an anti-immigrant wall', 'banning all Muslims' shouldn't even be on the table when it comes to the most powerful country on Earth, but Trump is effectively saying 'Hey, it's all right to talk about these things because the Republican frontrunner is saying them.' It's just plain damaging to the country. And on that subject, you are right in calling out the cowardice of the Republican candidates who really should've called Trump out on his bullshit months ago, but have instead been tiptoeing around him in an attempt to court his supporters.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 05, 2016, 02:38:59 PM
in the last 20 years, i've lived in either idaho or california.  so, yeah -- my presidential vote has been futile.

i still vote, however, because there are tons and tons of state and local issue that are always close and important.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on January 05, 2016, 02:42:58 PM
in the last 20 years, i've lived in either idaho or california.  so, yeah -- my presidential vote has been futile.

i still vote, however, because there are tons and tons of state and local issue that are always close and important.

Actually that's probably the #1 reason to vote.  Your state and local elections will affect your day-to-day life a lot more than any national election.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 05, 2016, 02:49:29 PM
Also, he's far from antagonising Democrats. He's basically delivering the election on a silver platter by alienating the vast majority of the electorate. Women, Latinos, Immigrants, Disabled People, you name it. There's a reason one of the most widespread rumours about Trump is that he's secretly a Democrat attempting to undermine the Republican party. (Personally, I just think he's in it for the attention and publicity and is saying anything to keep the spotlight on him.)

But the one thing that is very worrying about him is the way that he's in a way legitimizing all these insane, disgusting, bordering-on-fascist proposals by bringing them into public discussion. Ideas like 'killing terrorist families', 'building an anti-immigrant wall', 'banning all Muslims' shouldn't even be on the table when it comes to the most powerful country on Earth, but Trump is effectively saying 'Hey, it's all right to talk about these things because the Republican frontrunner is saying them.' It's just plain damaging to the country. And on that subject, you are right in calling out the cowardice of the Republican candidates who really should've called Trump out on his bullshit months ago, but have instead been tiptoeing around him in an attempt to court his supporters.

i agree with all of that.

i'll add also the angle of him possibly still being in it because he is honestly out of touch and feels like he's standing up for the 'silent majority' because his poll numbers are pretty unprecedented.  "look!  i've tapped into what the people want!"  it's not like trump historically suffers from delusions of grandeur or anything.  but the thing is, his supporters?  they ain't silent, much less a majority.

if he wins the republican ticket, it will be one of the largest landslides in history.  the democrats may just win all 50 states.  the side of me that wants the republican party to address their ridiculous appeal to zealotry kinda wants him to get on the ticket.  force their hand into looking long and hard at how far to the right they've shifted.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on January 05, 2016, 02:51:33 PM
I respectfully disagree that voting is futile. Votes put Obama in office. Votes put GW is office. Two very different views for our country, leading to many differences in regulation, legislation, foreign policy and overall national POV. Trump's utter and public cynicism degrade our national mindset. Maybe there is a role for exposing the failings of the political corpus, but I'd rather it not be done by someone who panders to the worst racism and jingoism of the populace.

I will only say one thing about voting in regards to this discussion, as I feel sometimes, it gets lost, especially with the statement "your vote doesn't matter" in regards to living in a red or blue state, and voting the opposite.

Sure, if you live in Texas (for example) voting for Obama isn't going to accomplish much (yet), just as voting for Romney in Maryland would have been rather useless. But people forget about how much influence the president has in what actually affects YOU, in regards to where you live. People focus on huge macro-issues that really don't matter in the context of their individual lives (who's going to bomb the terrorists the most?) and forget that the issues in their hometown actually affect them.

In America, there's a huge focus on national elections for president, but very little focus on local races. Which is funny to me (in a kind of sad way) because when it comes down to what actually affects YOU - the rules in your county, the taxes you pay on your house and gas, the regulations for everything from driver's licenses to voting to political districts - it's the local politicians who have the most sway.

As an American, you're far more likely to be affected by policies implemented by your town mayor or state governor, all of whom are elected in local elections that often occur in off-cycle election years. The turnout for these is often even more dismal than presidential elections, so your vote there does matter quite a bit.

One recent example: my wife is a college professor, and after 5 years with no pay raise whatsoever, she *finally* got a 2% "cost of living" increase this last year. Unfortunately for us, a Republican governor was elected in Maryland that same year, and the first thing he did is cancel the cost of living increase in the typical Republican focus on cutting education budgets wherever possible.

So while Obama won Maryland, it hasn't really changed our lives in any significant way. By comparison, Governor Hogan's election has directly affected my wife's take home income. :)

EDIT: And I just noticed while I was writing this, three people posted the same thing regarding local elections! Heh.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on January 05, 2016, 02:56:11 PM
Also, he's far from antagonising Democrats. He's basically delivering the election on a silver platter by alienating the vast majority of the electorate. Women, Latinos, Immigrants, Disabled People, you name it. There's a reason one of the most widespread rumours about Trump is that he's secretly a Democrat attempting to undermine the Republican party. (Personally, I just think he's in it for the attention and publicity and is saying anything to keep the spotlight on him.)

Fun bonus fact: Regardless of whether Trump actually believes the insane things he spouts and is running with genuine hopes of winning the Republican primary by appealing to the most base instincts of uneducated voters, or whether he's running a false-flag operation to try to get Hillary Clinton elected by making the Republican party look scary/ridiculous, he would run his campaign the EXACT same way.

The campaign strategy to do both of those things is identical. Think about that for a second. :0
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on January 05, 2016, 10:01:03 PM
I strongl
I respectfully disagree that voting is futile. Votes put Obama in office. Votes put GW is office. Two very different views for our country, leading to many differences in regulation, legislation, foreign policy and overall national POV. Trump's utter and public cynicism degrade our national mindset. Maybe there is a role for exposing the failings of the political corpus, but I'd rather it not be done by someone who panders to the worst racism and jingoism of the populace.

I will only say one thing about voting in regards to this discussion, as I feel sometimes, it gets lost, especially with the statement "your vote doesn't matter" in regards to living in a red or blue state, and voting the opposite.

Sure, if you live in Texas (for example) voting for Obama isn't going to accomplish much (yet), just as voting for Romney in Maryland would have been rather useless. But people forget about how much influence the president has in what actually affects YOU, in regards to where you live. People focus on huge macro-issues that really don't matter in the context of their individual lives (who's going to bomb the terrorists the most?) and forget that the issues in their hometown actually affect them.

In America, there's a huge focus on national elections for president, but very little focus on local races. Which is funny to me (in a kind of sad way) because when it comes down to what actually affects YOU - the rules in your county, the taxes you pay on your house and gas, the regulations for everything from driver's licenses to voting to political districts - it's the local politicians who have the most sway.

As an American, you're far more likely to be affected by policies implemented by your town mayor or state governor, all of whom are elected in local elections that often occur in off-cycle election years. The turnout for these is often even more dismal than presidential elections, so your vote there does matter quite a bit.

One recent example: my wife is a college professor, and after 5 years with no pay raise whatsoever, she *finally* got a 2% "cost of living" increase this last year. Unfortunately for us, a Republican governor was elected in Maryland that same year, and the first thing he did is cancel the cost of living increase in the typical Republican focus on cutting education budgets wherever possible.

So while Obama won Maryland, it hasn't really changed our lives in any significant way. By comparison, Governor Hogan's election has directly affected my wife's take home income. :)

EDIT: And I just noticed while I was writing this, three people posted the same thing regarding local elections! Heh.
This is so true. And, for the people that do vote in local elections, lots of them just look at the party name and not the people. It annoys me.
I used to be one of these people who wouldn't vote. I'll admit it's going to be hard to get me out there this year. But there's this Christian rapper I like named Andy Mineo and he said something like this.
We still make decisions for the fact that their awesome, not just for the profit margin.
And he's right. We're lucky that we can vote to decide who runs our country, even if the system is corrupt and the pawns will probably win out anyway. I'll vote because I shouldn't waste what this country was founded for. Freedom. You never know when it might matter.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on January 06, 2016, 12:24:30 AM
@ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103), check my new post signature.

It says "Freedom. Cuz you never know when it might matter." Attributed to you.  ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on January 06, 2016, 01:10:30 AM
Lol nice.
I probably should've said...
Freedom. Because you never know when you're votes might matter.
Yay for messing up pronouns. :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on January 06, 2016, 02:50:38 PM
Am I allowed to ask the question as to why a tiny country in the middle east determines your foreign policy in the region.
You are a free country right, a democracy and the first amendment protects your right to free speech.
Yet anybody who criticises Israel while standing for office in America is vilified, loses their funding and are actively attacked and campaigned against by AIPAC who will fund anybody opposing them for the election.
As an outsider it looks somewhere between bizarre and treasonous to put the interests of a foreign power before your own.
Having discussed this with Americans in the past I get three stock answers:

It is racist to ask
I am not going to discuss this with you
I don't know either.

You are well aware that I have as little regard for your political system as I do our own, but I really am not trolling here. I am interested and to my mind it is a near perfect example of everything wrong with political lobbying. I would guess that about 5% of the American population have any interest whatsoever in Israel.
 I also believe that providing billions and vetoing any resolution at the UN concerning Israel is as harmful to the USA as it to Israel. This tiny country can will never be a responsible neighbour while this arrangement continues. As they are a net importer of power and food inevitably they will be in a very bad place, better to be tolerated than hated at that point.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on January 06, 2016, 11:28:50 PM
We love Israel for two big reasons. the first is their version of our CIA, massad(or however you spell it). Those people are scary. They're like ninjas. The second is that they have a heavy Christian connection in the Bible. Israel is supposed to be God's chosen country. So we don't want anything bad to happen to them.
Of course, that isn't all of Americans, but Israel is our friend.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on January 07, 2016, 04:01:23 PM
I have no reason to take a politician at his/her word, ever.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on January 07, 2016, 06:55:33 PM
We love Israel for two big reasons. the first is their version of our CIA, massad(or however you spell it). Those people are scary. They're like ninjas. The second is that they have a heavy Christian connection in the Bible. Israel is supposed to be God's chosen country. So we don't want anything bad to happen to them.
Of course, that isn't all of Americans, but Israel is our friend.

Plus Israel is "under siege by Muslims" which unfortunately plays up quite well here.  The ironic thing is that the Koran shares many of the same stories as the Torah and Bible but you never hear talk like that.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on January 07, 2016, 07:31:43 PM
Plus Israel is "under siege by Muslims" which unfortunately plays up quite well here.  The ironic thing is that the Koran shares many of the same stories as the Torah and Bible but you never hear talk like that.

Hmm, I don't think it's stated much because it's pretty obvious. They're all Abrahamic Religions, so they have to share a good bit, but that's like saying Westboro Baptist Church is the same as my home church. It's in the interpretation of similar writings that creates such discourse. I mean, look at how many denominations there are in Protestantism, let alone the divide between that, Catholicism, and Orthodoxy! There's also the main problem of their core beliefs, such as the difference between Law, Grace, and The Five Pillars, which is where most disagreement falls under.

No, I'm not a fan of the "Israel is God's Land so we must protect it" narrative when that can be thrown under the rug for nonbelievers. Our major allies in the Middle East? Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. Israel just happens to receive the most air time, receives the most publicity to create a substantial voting bloc in America (let us not forget that more than half of Americans are either Christian or Jewish), and I believe our ally ties have held the longest, though I need to research that. Plus it helps that Israel is the most vehement against Iran, the other big superpower in the Middle East, which has ties to Russia, which is our biggest rival since the Cold War. But when did Israel form again? That's right. During the Cold War.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on January 08, 2016, 03:17:32 AM
Double posting but this is pretty funny. (Map of the world according to a Trump supporter.)

(http://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/funny-world-map-donald-trump-latest-raw.jpeg)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nox on January 08, 2016, 08:50:13 PM
Here's a bit of good news (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2016/01/06/a-big-win-for-animals-the-fbi-now-tracks-animal-abuse-like-it-tracks-homicides/) for a change.


Uhh, you may not want to watch the video in the article as the sounds will probably stick in your mind for a while.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lanko on January 08, 2016, 10:12:32 PM
As much as animal cruelty is disgusting, is it something that should be handled on this scale by the FBI?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nox on January 08, 2016, 10:23:44 PM
As much as animal cruelty is disgusting, is it something that should be handled on this scale by the FBI?


“There is overwhelming evidence that [animal abuse] is linked to crimes against people, including violent crimes and domestic violence,” she said. “It’s not about protecting people or animals, it’s protecting them both.”


I think this is a large part of it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lanko on January 08, 2016, 10:42:12 PM
"Overwhelming evidence."

Hm, now I'm curious, as I never thought about that.
I'm wondering if the guys that bombed Boston or the ones who shot people in schools because of bullying had discounted their frustrations on animals before. Among other criminals and other violent crimes. I wish they had given examples of cases.

I thought having animals helped people with their problems. Of course, not everyone, but most.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nox on January 08, 2016, 10:54:18 PM
It's actually surprisingly high.


In the United States alone, roughly 63% of violent criminals started with animal cruelty — that number jumps to 70% when other crimes, such as theft, are included, the New York State Humane Association reports (http://www.nyshumane.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Connection_Animal_And_Human_Abused.pdf). (In Australia, 95% of people who are involved with drugs, theft, assault, murder or rape participated in animal cruelty, too.)


It's actually insanely high.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on January 08, 2016, 11:02:11 PM
"You give me a violent criminal, and I will show you a record of animal abuse." -One of my professors.

See, animals are the easiest victims, which makes deviants ecstatic because they can answer their violent questions through these mediums. I'm not entirely sure a database by the FBI is going to solve anything, but to each their own.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lanko on January 08, 2016, 11:27:02 PM
Most (if not all) kids naturally like animals.

The article says violence to animals leads to violence to people, but then what starts violence against animals, specially at an early age?
I feel like they are missing the roots of the problem, like bullying, family problems, violent neighborhood, etc.

If they kept track of kids who have been bullied (and who bullied, specially), more support for kids with family problems (although I don't know how much this is reported) and researched where and when criminals grew up and how violent the place was, and did actions to do something, it could even avoid a lot of violence (to animal and people).
Much more preemptive, but then again, I think that's expecting too much of any government.

Feels like when info actually reaches the FBI, the damage to the animal will be done anyway and one would wonder  how they would keep track of the criminal, even more if it's some kid, to avoid him hurting people later.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on January 08, 2016, 11:50:04 PM
Most (if not all) kids naturally like animals.

Yeah, let's not start that conversation. ;D I know plenty of kids that don't like animals.

The article says violence to animals leads to violence to people, but then what starts violence against animals, specially at an early age?
I feel like they are missing the roots of the problem, like bullying, family problems, violent neighborhood, etc.

Yeah, this so much. In fact, most problems that people report when it comes to crime aren't the problems at all. If you want to get down to it, poverty is the number one cause of crime, but that's getting deep into sociological theory soooo...

Anyway, I agree. While a database is nice in theory (and actually kinda practical for tracking and predicting some semblance of crime through the juvenile system), there's other and better ways to go about preventing crime. Though it's a nice step. :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nox on January 08, 2016, 11:57:09 PM
It's a thing. Keeping statistics is very close to profiling. People wouldn't be all that crazy if FBI were to do that.
Plus, not much money in animal abuse so they'll probably continue just focusing on piracy and other "terrible" crimes. Still, one dickhead paying for making a dog produce the sounds in that video is already nice.


In other news; Guzman has been caught...again. (http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/08/americas/el-chapo-captured-mexico/)


I will now be taking bets on how long he stays in prison this time. House rules say one week.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on January 11, 2016, 02:35:10 PM
Animal cruelty tends to mean a lack of empathy. Dahmer for example had a pretty twisted childhood history of animal abuse. Seems to be a warning sign in children for possible sociopathic or psychopathic behavior in the future.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on January 15, 2016, 09:41:22 AM
USA!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPRfP_TEQ-g[/youtube]

@Saurus (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40290) finds the best videos.  8)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on January 15, 2016, 11:28:10 AM
I expected them to be singing in (north) Korean.

I just don't understand how intelligent people don't look at Trump and not see Mussolini or the chance of worse.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on January 15, 2016, 01:12:48 PM
I expected them to be singing in (north) Korean.

I just don't understand how intelligent people don't look at Trump and not see Mussolini or the chance of worse.

He doesn't have nearly the power. Unless he goes nuts and declares martial law he is still subject to the checks and balances that have been put in place.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on January 15, 2016, 01:56:26 PM
Quote
He doesn't have nearly the power. Unless he goes nuts and declares martial law he is still subject to the checks and balances that have been put in place.

Would those be the same checks and balences applied to the NSA?

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 15, 2016, 02:18:07 PM
WE'RE TAKIN' OUR COUNTRY BACK!  GONNA MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!

get your gear here:
http://northwestfront.org/storefront/


p.s.  just realized, i should point out: SARCASM!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on January 15, 2016, 02:44:27 PM
Quote
He doesn't have nearly the power. Unless he goes nuts and declares martial law he is still subject to the checks and balances that have been put in place.

Would those be the same checks and balences applied to the NSA?

So you're saying that was an executive order by Obama?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on January 15, 2016, 06:22:06 PM
I am saying nothing of the sort. Information is power and when you spy on politicians (legally or illegally)the assumption must be that they can be coerced to the will of an unelected organisation and so democracy is subverted and your vote is worth even less. Checks and balences no longer apply.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on January 15, 2016, 07:34:05 PM
Also, here's the thing most people miss about Trump. He's not stupid.
he knows his best chance at winning the Republican nomination is doing exactly what he's doing now. I'm willing to place money on if and when he wins the nomination, his tune will change. Notice how he's barely spoken on social politics? That's because he's liberal on those issues. If he spoke up, he would lose the vote. As crazy as it seems,  the more he talks, the higher his numbers seem to go. That's his strategy. Meanwhile, keep all the attention on him and away from the other candidates, so the majority of the party has trouble seeing past him.
Also, yes, it's true he won't have that much power in a way. He still has the power to veto bills though, and with people not paying attention to who they elect in their state or town, he can get away with it if he tries. the NSA can get away with more because there's no public accountability. We can all see, for the most part, what the president is doing.
Am I scared of who becomes President? Not really. If any president tries to do something rediculous, congress will lose their shit. And yes, they can stop him. Or her.
So just sit back, relax, and vote, with the hopes that the people's decision will matter this time around.
Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 16, 2016, 01:23:37 AM
i've said it before.  i'll say it again.

if trump wins the nomination -- biggest landslide in history.

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on January 16, 2016, 09:21:27 PM
i've said it before.  i'll say it again.

if trump wins the nomination -- biggest landslide in history.

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx

Agreed. He may win a few southern states, but that's about it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on January 26, 2016, 03:59:42 PM
i've said it before.  i'll say it again.

if trump wins the nomination -- biggest landslide in history.

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx

Agreed. He may win a few southern states, but that's about it.

i've said it before.  i'll say it again.

if trump wins the nomination -- biggest landslide in history.

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx


Hmm. Are we sure about that?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/26/politics/donald-trump-ted-cruz-polling/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/26/politics/donald-trump-ted-cruz-polling/index.html)

Note: I'm linking CNN since people often accuse MSNBC of being left-biased, though MSNBC also has Trump leading by a good margin in Iowa. For those outside the US curious why we care bout Iowa, for some reason we always let tiny Iowa vote first for our Democrat and Republication candidates. This means winning Iowa has a huge effect on voting in successive states, and who Iowa voters pick has an outsized effect on the nomination process as a whole. Basically, people want to back a winner, and Iowa shapes the perception of who's a winner.

Fox News, naturally, doesn't seem to be covering the fact that Trump might win the Republican nomination at all (or if they are covering, they've got it pretty well buried) since they've pretty much been working in lockstep with most of the established Republican apparatus to ensure anyone BUT Trump gets the Republican nod. Doesn't seem to be working for them.

So ... that's happening.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on January 26, 2016, 04:16:19 PM
The funny thing is that Cruz is far from an establishment candidate and I bet the Republican elite are pulling for him pretty hard right now.  I find it a little interesting that it doesn't seem like Rubio is picking up a lot of support.
Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on January 26, 2016, 04:19:55 PM
Sooo.... What's up with Bloomberg?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 26, 2016, 04:37:31 PM
i've said it before.  i'll say it again.

if trump wins the nomination -- biggest landslide in history.

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx

Agreed. He may win a few southern states, but that's about it.

i've said it before.  i'll say it again.

if trump wins the nomination -- biggest landslide in history.

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx


Hmm. Are we sure about that?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/26/politics/donald-trump-ted-cruz-polling/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/26/politics/donald-trump-ted-cruz-polling/index.html)

Note: I'm linking CNN since people often accuse MSNBC of being left-biased, though MSNBC also has Trump leading by a good margin in Iowa. For those outside the US curious why we care bout Iowa, for some reason we always let tiny Iowa vote first for our Democrat and Republication candidates. This means winning Iowa has a huge effect on voting in successive states, and who Iowa voters pick has an outsized effect on the nomination process as a whole. Basically, people want to back a winner, and Iowa shapes the perception of who's a winner.

Fox News, naturally, doesn't seem to be covering the fact that Trump might win the Republican nomination at all (or if they are covering, they've got it pretty well buried) since they've pretty much been working in lockstep with most of the established Republican apparatus to ensure anyone BUT Trump gets the Republican nod. Doesn't seem to be working for them.

So ... that's happening.

yup.  so totally sure.

he's got the lowest "likability" index in history among the center and left and his campaign is pretty much mirroring barry goldwater's.  we all know how that turned out.  the people who love him, really, really love him.  fortunately for the rest of us, the other 95% of the country NOT in his part of the hard-core republican base can't stand him.

word on the street is now that the gop establishment has given up and they'd rather get behind trump losing the whitehouse this cycle than even the teeny-tiny possibility of a cruz term.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on January 26, 2016, 04:42:24 PM
word on the street is now that the gop establishment has given up and they'd rather get behind trump losing the whitehouse this cycle than even the teeny-tiny possibility of a cruz term.

The question with a Trump nomination is what happen to the Republican ticket downstream.  It's one thing to throw in the towel on the presidency but how many anti-Trump voters come out and how much would they sway the Republican majorities in Congress (and not to mention any affects on local races)?

Sooo.... What's up with Bloomberg?

As someone who mostly votes Democrat, a Bloomberg entry worries me as much as the Republicans would be if Trump went independent.  I'm not going to pretend I know a ton of all of his policies but from what I do know it's more likely that he would leech Democratic votes rather than Republican ones.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on January 26, 2016, 05:02:05 PM
My concern is that people will start to get comfortable with the idea of Trump.

And Hillary is NOT well-liked. He can completely attack her. Any thought that it's hands-off because she's a woman is wishful thinking by her fans. I think it's gloves off.

Bloomberg has no chance, and would pull support from Hillary.

Meanwhile, I'm actually starting to think Bernie might have legs. (Not that I'm ready to vote for him.) Trump can't really attack him personally from what I can see.
Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on January 26, 2016, 05:39:25 PM
From across the pond Bernie looks the most reasonable.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on January 26, 2016, 05:45:06 PM
My concern is that people will start to get comfortable with the idea of Trump.

And Hillary is NOT well-liked. He can completely attack her. Any thought that it's hands-off because she's a woman is wishful thinking by her fans. I think it's gloves off.

Bloomberg has no chance, and would pull support from Hillary.

Meanwhile, I'm actually starting to think Bernie might have legs. (Not that I'm ready to vote for him.) Trump can't really attack him personally from what I can see.

Unless you believe the conspiracy theory (I don't but find it funny to think about) that Trump is a Clinton plant to disrupt the Republicans. 

I don't really care for Clinton and I like most of what Sanders says but I think Clinton is more electable and would make a better President than Sanders.  There is no way Sanders can get through all that he wants to with a Republican Congress and I think Clinton could fight them on a policy front better.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on January 26, 2016, 06:14:19 PM
Heard an interesting interview this morning on Public Radio with one of the Koch brothers. For Non-'Mercans, the Koch brothers are owners of the largest privately owned company in the U.S. (Koch Industries) and huge money men behind ultra-conservative politicians and policy think tanks. They are heroes to the right (mostly) and just the other side of Sauron to the left. They require fealty to their positions, or they will go after establish politicians with all the $billions at their disposal.

This particular brother explained their view that government and elected officials have enormous and growing power to influence elections, and therefore their billions are an important counter-weight. What power does government have to influence elections? The power of wealth redistribution. People will vote for the politicians that buy their votes - whether with corporate tax breaks or personal income (welfare, subsidies, tax deductions, etc.).

There was nothing particularly surprising in the interview, but it did put a voice to the name I've been hearing in the press for some years now.

I do have to say that I personally struggle with the balance between individual freedom and communal solidarity.

I do not struggle with the balance between arrogant, ignorant, insulting (Trump & Cruz) and relatively polite, thoughtful (Clinton, Sanders and others).
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 26, 2016, 07:04:43 PM
The question with a Trump nomination is what happen to the Republican ticket downstream.  It's one thing to throw in the towel on the presidency but how many anti-Trump voters come out and how much would they sway the Republican majorities in Congress (and not to mention any affects on local races)?

man, but i would love that.  we *really* need to get rid of stupid gerrymandering.  let the voters pick their representatives instead of the representatives picking their voters.


From across the pond Bernie looks the most reasonable.

yah.  as a betting man, i think he's probably going to be the next president.


Meanwhile, I'm actually starting to think Bernie might have legs. (Not that I'm ready to vote for him.) Trump can't really attack him personally from what I can see.

the establishment right is excited to run against bernie.  they just want to throw the socialist label at him like it's disqualification dust.

not super sure they've been paying attention to popular opinion for the last 8 years.  all the angry people slinging terms like 'socialist' are already going to be voting for trump no matter what.  they also didn't vote for gay marriage.  and they think planned parenthood sells baby parts.  they're not voting democrat regardless.

some of my more thoughtful, lifelong republican friends are of the mind sanders will be the one who does the least damage to our country.


There is no way Sanders can get through all that he wants to with a Republican Congress and I think Clinton could fight them on a policy front better.

this is absolutely true.  but, do we want more fighting?  don't we want reasoned discourse instead of congressmen standing up and shouting "liar!"


This particular brother explained their view that government and elected officials have enormous and growing power to influence elections, and therefore their billions are an important counter-weight. What power does government have to influence elections? The power of wealth redistribution. People will vote for the politicians that buy their votes - whether with corporate tax breaks or personal income (welfare, subsidies, tax deductions, etc.).

the citizen united ruling and gerrymandering are without any doubt the two largest problems in american politics.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on January 26, 2016, 09:03:38 PM
This particular brother explained their view that government and elected officials have enormous and growing power to influence elections, and therefore their billions are an important counter-weight. What power does government have to influence elections? The power of wealth redistribution. People will vote for the politicians that buy their votes - whether with corporate tax breaks or personal income (welfare, subsidies, tax deductions, etc.).

Shouldn't my representatives "buy" my vote and the others in my community by working on policies that will improve our quality of life?  Reasonable minds can differ what those policies should be but a politician should listen to what their constituency wants rather than some extremely rich people who don't live in the area.  I get the whole freedom of speech argument with campaign financing but really all of the money comes ends up neutering the voices of the common person.

There is no way Sanders can get through all that he wants to with a Republican Congress and I think Clinton could fight them on a policy front better.

this is absolutely true.  but, do we want more fighting?  don't we want reasoned discourse instead of congressmen standing up and shouting "liar!"

Reasoned discourse?  In Congress?  That's not happening for a long long time.  Until we can get a point in time where things become less polarized and both sides can compromise better you will need a strong executive who can cut through it all to get things done. 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on January 26, 2016, 09:47:24 PM
I just find it funny that lots of people who support Sanders are the same ones that turn around and say, "The government is corrupt! They're evil! Justice for blah blah blah and blah blah blah! Evil government!" Sanders comes around. "Yes! More government control! Let's do it!"
And then you have what's happening on the other side. Obama comes around in 2009. "There's no solid proof he was born on American soil. Get him out! No person not born in America shall be president. It is against our constitution!" Cruz comes around. "Yes! So what that he even admits he was born in Canada and is violating the constitution. We love him! It's our turn to break the rules!"
So, let's see. We have a socialist who will give the government more power, when everyone argues that the government has too much power and doesn't know what to do with it. We have the politician whose accused of... treason isn't it? We have the guy who lots of people hate because one, the media misquotes him, and two, he doesn't have anyone edit his speeches and says whatever he's thinking. Which, by the way, only helps him. Trump will completely change if he wins the nomination. Then there's the one who violates the constitution if he becomes president. Good start country.
And yet, all four of those are who we want in power in America?
The saddest part? People who are for or against these politicians have no clue what they're talking about. How many people hate Trump because of how he's performed during the debates, instead of some news headline? How many people have actually watched the democratic debates and heard what these people have to say? Not many on either side.
I can say this. Have I watched any of the democratic debates? Not past a few minutes, and what I heard was enough for me. When Sanders said global warming was the cause of ISIS, I backed out. I already knew I wasn't going for Clinton because of the whole dynasty thing. I will admit I should have watched more, but that's said and done.
With the Republican debates, I've watched around two. Based on what I've seen, I've formed an educated opinion on who I would like, and it makes sense to me.
Most people haven't watched either, and yet they'll go out and vote based on what comes up on their twitter feed and YouTube. Again, good job America. All this while completely ignoring local elections, except for whose running for which party. People like to place blame on so many things for why this country is falling apart. "Oh, it's all this President's fault." "It's politicians like these who ruin our country." "It's those damn republicans or those damn liberals!" You know whose fault it really is? Ours.
I had a conversation with a friend of mine the other day about this organization I'm apart of. He said he refused to take part in it because we were crazy. When I explained to him that you're only going to see the radicals, he still refused to get involved, saying there's just too many problems that need to be fixed. If you want to fix something, you have to become apart of it first. Standing on the sidelines and only stepping up when you have to, or making uninformed decisions because that's no better than staying out of it, hurts more than it helps. There's also getting involved locally. "Oh, but I can't do it. I'm not qualified. I don't know enough. I don't... I just... La la la." You certainly thought you knew enough about it when you were telling me all the problems with the establishment. You thought you knew enough about it when you sent five or six tweets, giving me all the reasons for why it sucks and what needs to be fixed. So why won't you step up in your community? Or, why not do something small by making informed decisions, like watching debates or looking up what these people have to say? There websites can tell you a whole lot about them. "Oh no, I don't have time. I have to take care of the kids, work, eat..." Really? Because you're sitting here tweeting. You're sitting here having this conversation with me. You're sitting here googling if dogs have a sense of time. And you're telling me you don't have time for it?
No. What you're really telling me is this. "I just want to feel apart of something. I want to be in the crowds full of the rest of the people who don't know what they're talking about. I want to be able to participate in political conversations, so I can look like I did my research and can sound awesome. I really don't care what happens outside of a political discussion and voting day. What I really care about is if I'm having pizza or chicken for dinner. Or watching this anime that I need to catch up on. Yes, these are the priorities in my life."
I don't claim to have sat down and done hours of political research. I don't claim to be completely educated on the politics of this country. But maybe, just maybe, if I took one day, just one day, out of the month to sit down and check things out, I could make an even more informed decision, thus bettering this country.
At this point, I'm just thankful for those who have watched at least one debate, no matter which side. It seems that's almost too much to ask for this country.
Also, if you feel like I'm targeting you personally, I assure you that's not the case. If so, I would've quoted it, or at the very least mentioned a name. This is just how I feel.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lanko on January 26, 2016, 09:55:10 PM
Paragraphs! Although you can just feel the unedited, blazing inspiration of glorious outrage against the political system!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 26, 2016, 11:45:29 PM
We have the guy who lots of people hate because one, the media misquotes him, and two, he doesn't have anyone edit his speeches and says whatever he's thinking. Which, by the way, only helps him.

the media doesn't misquote him -- they don't have to.  his own commercials say ridiculous things like he's going to cut the head off isis and take their oil.  he's simply batshit crazy or ignorant.

and, no.  these are bad things.  rational people don't want someone in office, talking to our allies or enemies who starts wars with everyone he speaks to.  that's why the national review took out that massive hit piece on him -- he's hijacking the republican party by pandering to basest parts of the base.


Trump will completely change if he wins the nomination.

um.  probably not.  one of two things will happen.

a) he changes course to the middle -- that means he rolls back his core platform ideas to build a wall, ban muslims, take syria's oil, deport everyone -- all those impossible-to-execute-on promises.  then, he doesn't get elected because he's the biggest liar on the planet and anyone remotely waffling on voting for him doesn't.  drifting to the middle for general elections requires having put forth ideas that are less concrete so you can walk them back and still have them make sense.

b) he keeps on keeping on and gets 30% of the popular vote.


The saddest part? People who are for or against these politicians have no clue what they're talking about. How many people hate Trump because of how he's performed during the debates, instead of some news headline? How many people have actually watched the democratic debates and heard what these people have to say? Not many on either side.

it depends on what you consider not many.  the debates have drawn record numbers of people this year.  anywhere from 8-16 million apiece.

personally, i've watched the debates for decades -- including the three i've watched this season, two republicans and one democrat.  the republicans arguing was far more mudslinging hyperbole fit for reality tv than i could believe.  the first one i watched, open-mouthed.  the second, for popcorn consumption.


I can say this. Have I watched any of the democratic debates? Not past a few minutes, and what I heard was enough for me. When Sanders said global warming was the cause of ISIS, I backed out. I already knew I wasn't going for Clinton because of the whole dynasty thing. I will admit I should have watched more, but that's said and done.

couple things.

1) i don't understand this.  how can you turn the debate off after only a few moments?  was it too boring?  were there not enough calls to carpet bomb syria?  listening to and understanding the background and nuances of the other side is too hard?  are you not interested in hearing thoughts that don't comply to your world view?

2) at first, i also thought the climate-change-isis link was absurd.  then, i saw this sweet comic talking about it.  i'm not sure how your reader will do with it, but it sounds like your mom is really good at describing these sorts of things to you -- it's super interesting geopolitical information, even if you don't buy it for the tenuous explanation.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/05/syria-climate-years-living-dangerously-symbolia


With the Republican debates, I've watched around two. Based on what I've seen, I've formed an educated opinion on who I would like, and it makes sense to me.

i also find this interesting since the fact checkers had a field day with it.  i truly hope it wasn't an education from the candidates, but from looking up how crazy their statements were later.

i mean, they made ron paul look like an absolute pillar of sanity.


I don't claim to have sat down and done hours of political research. I don't claim to be completely educated on the politics of this country. But maybe, just maybe, if I took one day, just one day, out of the month to sit down and check things out, I could make an even more informed decision, thus bettering this country.

good on you for being more involved.  hopefully, you're bringing to bear full reason and not blind devotion.  look at data, not anecdote.  think, don't feel.  strong, well-reasoned debate is badass.  unlike most people, i love having my world view evolve because of new information.  makes me feel like i have a greater understanding of things -- from the more directions, the better.

finally, something i've learned over the years:  the world is complicated and full of nuanced gray -- not black or white.  simple solutions do not work because all the easy problems of our civilization have already been solved.  anyone who tries to sell you an answer starting with "can't you just..." or "all you have to do is..." doesn't understand the full extent of the problem space.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on January 27, 2016, 01:49:26 AM
We have the politician whose accused of... treason isn't it? We have the guy who lots of people hate because one, the media misquotes him, and two, he doesn't have anyone edit his speeches and says whatever he's thinking. Which, by the way, only helps him. Trump will completely change if he wins the nomination.

Ultament, maybe I should provide some examples as to why I think Trump is a poor candidate for political office in the United States, instead of just mentioning it. Keep in mind, no one is "mis-quoting" Trump in these ... these are his own words, unfiltered.

No one is smearing Trump or trying to make him look bad. He really is just an idiot, but he's an idiot who has a huge microphone and makes idiotic and/or flat out dangerous statements that are inspiring the most angry and hateful among Americans to lash out in all sorts of ways. Even Fox News, one of the most conservative outlets in America, which otherwise always marches lockstop with Republicans, has united against him.

Hell, even the National Review doesn't like the guy, and they united some of the most conservative people in the US to say why he shouldn't get the Republican nomination.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430126/donald-trump-conservatives-oppose-nomination (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430126/donald-trump-conservatives-oppose-nomination)

This is the man who wants to be the President of the United States.

Let's get started.


Trump doesn't understand foreign policy or much of anything, honestly, and encourages blind racism.

Trump kicks off his campaign with the ridiculous claim that the majority of Mexican immigrants are rapists, and then doubles down on it.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/election-2016-donald-trump-defends-calling-mexican-immigrants-rapists/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/election-2016-donald-trump-defends-calling-mexican-immigrants-rapists/)
http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/06/25/exp-presidential-candidate-donald-trump-immigration-intv-erin.cnn (http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/06/25/exp-presidential-candidate-donald-trump-immigration-intv-erin.cnn)

Trump continues to make idiotic speeches about "banning Muslims from entering the US", because he doesn't understand that won't do anything to stop terrorism, and then, as predicted by many, his ignorant statements are perfect for ISIS propaganda videos.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/02/middleeast/al-shabaab-video-trump/ (http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/02/middleeast/al-shabaab-video-trump/)

Trump lavishes praise on Vladimir Putin, despite the fact that Putin is alleged to kill journalists and political opponents.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/18/politics/donald-trump-praises-defends-vladimir-putin/ (http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/18/politics/donald-trump-praises-defends-vladimir-putin/)


Speaking of saying idiotic things, Trump makes ridiculous statements all the time.

Below are his exact words. No one is misquoting him.
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/politics/donald-trump-shoot-somebody-support/ (http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/politics/donald-trump-shoot-somebody-support/)

Trump apparently thinks he can just force companies to move all their manufacturing locally, despite the fact that that's not possible.
"We're going to get Apple to build their damn computers and things in this country instead of other countries."
http://gizmodo.com/trump-says-he-will-force-apple-to-manufacture-in-the-us-1753626111 (http://gizmodo.com/trump-says-he-will-force-apple-to-manufacture-in-the-us-1753626111)

Trump complains that American football has "gone soft" because of increasing awareness of concussions due to tackles and rules to limit them.
http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-football-has-gone-soft-america-413769 (http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-football-has-gone-soft-america-413769)

Trump has this idiotic belief that we'll build a wall and force Mexico to pay for it, even though that will never, ever happen.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-border-wall-immigration-plan-mexico-pay/


Trump endorses violence against protestors who attend his rallies.

After his supporters knock down and attack a peaceful protestor at one of his rallies, Trump says "Maybe he should have been roughed up."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/politics/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protester-confrontation/ (http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/politics/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protester-confrontation/)

Trump encouraging security to seize the coats of protestor and shove them out into freezing weather.
"Don't give him his coat! Keep his coat. Confiscate his coat. You know it's about 10 degrees below zero outside ... Keep his coat. Tell him we'll send it to him in a couple weeks."
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/08/donald-trump-burlington-vermont-bernie-sanders-home-turf (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/08/donald-trump-burlington-vermont-bernie-sanders-home-turf)

Trump encourages supporters to tear up protestor's signs and boot them from the rally.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2016/01/06/watch-donald-trump-supporters-tear-america-already-great-sign-lowell-rally/yECI0u6k6x8p4USCnlY99L/story.html (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2016/01/06/watch-donald-trump-supporters-tear-america-already-great-sign-lowell-rally/yECI0u6k6x8p4USCnlY99L/story.html)


Trump's idiotic statments inspire people to do idiotic things, and he doesn't seem to care.

Trump inspires supporters to blind racism against Muslims.
"You have a bomb, you have a bomb."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/politics/donald-trump-muslim-woman-protesting-ejected/ (http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/politics/donald-trump-muslim-woman-protesting-ejected/)

As mentioned elsewhere, Trump inspires blind racism against many, including African Americans.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-audience-member-yells-nazi-salute-protester-removed-las-vegas-n480056 (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-audience-member-yells-nazi-salute-protester-removed-las-vegas-n480056)

Trump inspires two men to beat up a homeless man.
Although he did say the beat was terrible, he also said "I will say, the people that are following me are very passionate. They love this country, they want this country to be great again."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/20/politics/donald-trump-immigration-boston-beating/ (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/20/politics/donald-trump-immigration-boston-beating/)

Trump's words encourage his supports to attack Muslims, oh and also Sikhs, who aren't Muslims, because his supporters can't tell the difference.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/world/sikh-man-forced-out-of-trump-rally-for-carrying-stop-hate-banner/story-P7BeegtCHlFTanx5l4XBvM.html (http://www.hindustantimes.com/world/sikh-man-forced-out-of-trump-rally-for-carrying-stop-hate-banner/story-P7BeegtCHlFTanx5l4XBvM.html)


A number of the United States' close allies think Trump is dangerous and promoting hate speech.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/18/europe/uk-parliament-debates-trump-ban/


Oh, and he's just generally an asshole.

Trump revokes medical care for a sick baby to punish his older brother in a family feud, despite still being filthy rich.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-revoke-cut-off-child-medical-bills-family-feud-a6795131.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-revoke-cut-off-child-medical-bills-family-feud-a6795131.html)


Normally, I try to keep my politics to myself because most of the time, all it does is inspire useless online arguments that won't change anyone's mind and just cause strife. However, Trump is enough of a problem that I'm willing to say "No, this man should not be President" and if you disagree, come at me. :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on January 27, 2016, 03:04:20 AM
First, let me make one thing clear. I don't think Trump should be president.
But... One of the definite examples of him being misquoted.
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."
I watched the video where he said this, because the headline caught me off guard. I wanted to see if that's what he actually said.
The media left out these three key words. "The polls say..."
That's not the first time it's happened either. While I can't provide numerous examples of it because I haven't watched every single one of these events(it just gives him more attention), the media has waged war on him. Does he make it easy for them? Sure. Like I said, he says whatever he thinks, and has no one edit his speeches. But just think on this. Why would the media, or the republican party, want someone who isn't a politician to enter their ranks?
They don't. It breaks their system. So, if you can spark up a few headlines that curve people's opinion as to what they should think, and keep flooding people with anything you can, no one will take the time to listen to what he has to say. That's why Ben Carson is also misquoted so much. They feed him questions at debates, and he corrects them on what he actually said. And he's not lying from what I can tell. But still. Make him look like the crazy Christian guy who has family values that don't fit into most modern TV shows, then you win again.
It's all about manipulation and making sure things are seen through a filter. That's why I will vote for someone who isn't a politician. Because that's exactly what the system doesn't want me to do. And, under no circumstances will I vote for anyone with a family member who has been in office before. Ever.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on January 27, 2016, 05:14:31 AM
First, let me make one thing clear. I don't think Trump should be president.

Well, that's a relief :)

But... One of the definite examples of him being misquoted.
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."
I watched the video where he said this, because the headline caught me off guard. I wanted to see if that's what he actually said.
The media left out these three key words. "The polls say..."

Well, note that category I put that under. He says idiotic things. Adding the words "The polls say..." doesn't make that statement any less stupid. Also, he still said those other idiotic things. Just because the media left out a few words in one of my examples doesn't invalidate the others examples. :0

Yes, presidents have speechwriters, but at some point, a president has to be able to study and understand policy, and coherently articulate points. Trump doesn't do that, and he hasn't shown me anywhere that he's capable of that. He is capable of figuring out what pisses people off, and using that to get votes, however.

What I've seen him do repeatedly is whip up the support of disaffected people by saying whatever he thinks will make them the most upset. Focus their anger about whatever upsets them. He absolutely knows that if he says "all immigrants are rapists" there's a subset of voters who are going to support him. If he says "all Muslims are terrorists" there's another subset who suddenly rally to his side. What Trump either doesn't understand (or more likely, doesn't care about) is that when you whip up blind hatred against any racial group, you are the one motivating people to commit acts of hate.

Hence, why those two idiots beat up a homeless man. And why his supporters are shouting "burn the n****r!" at a black man, and "you've got a bomb!" at a Muslim woman, at his rallies. Why they are knocking down peaceful protestors and assaulting them, which Trump then follows up with "Well, maybe he deserved it". Basically, Trump is instigating racial hatred to try to get himself more votes.

I don't care whether you are a political insider or the outsidery-ist political outsider man ever. Drumming up racist hatred to get yourself supporters is not okay.

That's not the first time it's happened either. While I can't provide numerous examples of it because I haven't watched every single one of these events(it just gives him more attention), the media has waged war on him. Does he make it easy for them? Sure. Like I said, he says whatever he thinks, and has no one edit his speeches. But just think on this. Why would the media, or the republican party, want someone who isn't a politician to enter their ranks?

An outsider is great. A race-baiting ignoramus is not the answer here, however.

They don't. It breaks their system. So, if you can spark up a few headlines that curve people's opinion as to what they should think, and keep flooding people with anything you can, no one will take the time to listen to what he has to say. That's why Ben Carson is also misquoted so much. They feed him questions at debates, and he corrects them on what he actually said. And he's not lying from what I can tell. But still. Make him look like the crazy Christian guy who has family values that don't fit into most modern TV shows, then you win again.

I'm not actually sure what my worries about Trump have to do with Ben Carson. Other a few mildly ridiculous statements, Carson hasn't really done anything that's struck me as any different than the standard politician. He's certainly not going the race-baiting route of Donald Trump.

It's all about manipulation and making sure things are seen through a filter. That's why I will vote for someone who isn't a politician. Because that's exactly what the system doesn't want me to do. And, under no circumstances will I vote for anyone with a family member who has been in office before. Ever.

That's a noble approach, and I think you should vote for whoever you think will do the job best. But in your post, you characterized Trump in a way that made me worry you weren't really aware of how he has run his campaign, or how he has been doing all he can to bring out the worst in Americans of all stripes in order to prop it up. He's not just "mischaracterized by the media" and he's not simply a target of "media warfare". He is genuinely doing things that are harmful to this country, regardless of your political affiliation. That's not a media filter, and that's not media manipulation. That's a fact, as I've illustrated with these links.

I thought it appropriate to point out why I think he's a terrible influence in US politics right now, rather than just saying "Well, I don't like Trump".
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 27, 2016, 10:44:41 PM
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."
I watched the video where he said this, because the headline caught me off guard. I wanted to see if that's what he actually said.
The media left out these three key words. "The polls say..."

sticking my nose in here to disagree.

the fully video:
http://www.snopes.com/donald-trump-fifth-avenue-comment/

"the polls say" is his interpretation of the polls.  it's the same thing as saying "i think" in your writing.  it's not some other person talking that he's quoting.  rephrased, the exact same meaning:  "my voters are so loyal that my interpretation of the polls shows i could shoot someone on fifth avenue and not lose any of my voters."

so, no.  he's not being misquoted in that instance.  not at all.

even if you don't take the literal quote, both the context and spirit of what he's bragging about is that he thinks his poll numbers are so high and his voters are so loyal that he could shoot someone on fifth avenue and not lose voters.  he thinks that.  he said that.  he's not parroting someone else's thoughts.

a misquote would be something along the lines of "trump thinks about shooting someone on fifth avenue to show he wouldn't lose voters."  that context is different because he's not actually contemplating shooting someone in his original remarks.  he's merely acting like a shitty human being.

because that's the thing about trump -- you don't need to misquote him.  bending his words is not necessary.  he's like chris christie on steroids.

once this is all said and done, all of these videos will make it into university political science curriculum forever.  under the heading "business is different than politics in that bad publicity is not good publicity."
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on January 28, 2016, 07:50:42 AM
Like every year we choose between the lesser of two evils. Have fun voting. I'll be staying home without a care in the world.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Henry Dale on January 28, 2016, 07:56:48 AM
Trump said in an interview that Brussels is hell on earth.
In the same comment he says last time he was in Brussels was 20 years ago and that he had a good time. He's never been to Brussels since.
What does he base himself on to make his initial claim then?  :o
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on January 28, 2016, 08:36:20 AM
Trump said in an interview that Brussels is hell on earth.
In the same comment he says last time he was in Brussels was 20 years ago and that he had a good time. He's never been to Brussels since.
What does he base himself on to make his initial claim then?  :o
I believe his primary source is where he pulls the vast majority of his statements from. His ass.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on January 28, 2016, 08:54:13 AM
Quote
Trump said in an interview that Brussels is hell on earth.
In the same comment he says last time he was in Brussels was 20 years ago and that he had a good time. He's never been to Brussels since.
What does he base himself on to make his initial claim then?

Well at least he is aware that Brussels exists and has an opinion which is more than 90% of Americans. He is wrong Heathrow is hell on earth. I suspect he is refering to the administerative centre of the EU. You know them nasty people who interfere whith him building in nature reserves and the like.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on January 28, 2016, 12:56:57 PM
Quote
Trump said in an interview that Brussels is hell on earth.
In the same comment he says last time he was in Brussels was 20 years ago and that he had a good time. He's never been to Brussels since.
What does he base himself on to make his initial claim then?

Well at least he is aware that Brussels exists and has an opinion which is more than 90% of Americans. He is wrong Heathrow is hell on earth. I suspect he is refering to the administerative centre of the EU. You know them nasty people who interfere whith him building in nature reserves and the like.

You are wrong in that JFK is hell on earth. 

Actually I'm wrong as well, all airports are hell on earth.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 28, 2016, 01:55:59 PM
Quote
Trump said in an interview that Brussels is hell on earth.
In the same comment he says last time he was in Brussels was 20 years ago and that he had a good time. He's never been to Brussels since.
What does he base himself on to make his initial claim then?

Well at least he is aware that Brussels exists and has an opinion which is more than 90% of Americans. He is wrong Heathrow is hell on earth. I suspect he is refering to the administerative centre of the EU. You know them nasty people who interfere whith him building in nature reserves and the like.

You are wrong in that JFK is hell on earth. 

Actually I'm wrong as well, all airports are hell on earth.

it's quite apparent none of you have been to cleveland, ohio.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on January 28, 2016, 02:23:40 PM
Quote
Trump said in an interview that Brussels is hell on earth.
In the same comment he says last time he was in Brussels was 20 years ago and that he had a good time. He's never been to Brussels since.
What does he base himself on to make his initial claim then?

Well at least he is aware that Brussels exists and has an opinion which is more than 90% of Americans. He is wrong Heathrow is hell on earth. I suspect he is refering to the administerative centre of the EU. You know them nasty people who interfere whith him building in nature reserves and the like.

You are wrong in that JFK is hell on earth. 

Actually I'm wrong as well, all airports are hell on earth.

it's quite apparent none of you have been to cleveland, ohio.

I have!  The Rock n Roll Hall of Fame and downtown were fairly nice.  Plus its close to Cedar Point which is a big bonus.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on January 29, 2016, 11:38:06 PM
omg.  this is amazing.

i do indeed love stephen colbert.

[youtube]WpKiP_gmDS8[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on February 02, 2016, 02:41:41 PM
I've been following the debates closely, on both sides, and keeping track of this election unlike any other. And I must say that I was shocked, in a very good way, to see how close Bernie is running against Clinton, following the Iowa results. I still have my doubts that he would make the nomination, Clinton has big money and influence on her said, but it surely was a refreshing surprise.

Also, Trump coming second in Iowa. This would only make me happier if in first place wasn't Trump v. 2.0 Lite.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 02, 2016, 03:14:10 PM
I've been following the debates closely, on both sides, and keeping track of this election unlike any other. And I must say that I was shocked, in a very good way, to see how close Bernie is running against Clinton, following the Iowa results. I still have my doubts that he would make the nomination, Clinton has big money and influence on her said, but it surely was a refreshing surprise.

Also, Trump coming second in Iowa. This would only make me happier if in first place wasn't Trump v. 2.0 Lite.

It takes a lot for me to vote Republican, but if the nominee were Marco Rubio, I'd at least give him a chance vs. Clinton. If the 'Pubs choose Casich (as unlikely as that might be), I'd give more than a look.

Meanwhile, Maryland isn't involved until 26 March. I'll be surprised if the Democratic nomination is still in any suspense by then.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 02, 2016, 03:24:18 PM
if you want to see who you'd side with on the actual issue, you could try this:
https://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential-quiz

like you, jmack, john kasich is my republican guy.  too bad he doesn't stand a chance.

/sigh
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on February 02, 2016, 03:36:40 PM
I've been following the debates closely, on both sides, and keeping track of this election unlike any other. And I must say that I was shocked, in a very good way, to see how close Bernie is running against Clinton, following the Iowa results. I still have my doubts that he would make the nomination, Clinton has big money and influence on her said, but it surely was a refreshing surprise.

Also, Trump coming second in Iowa. This would only make me happier if in first place wasn't Trump v. 2.0 Lite.

It takes a lot for me to vote Republican, but if the nominee were Marco Rubio, I'd at least give him a chance vs. Clinton. If the 'Pubs choose Casich (as unlikely as that might be), I'd give more than a look.

Meanwhile, Maryland isn't involved until 26 March. I'll be surprised if the Democratic nomination is still in any suspense by then.
I wouldn't. It's easy to forget, with full-on loonies like Trump and Cruz taking the spotlight, that Rubio is still a hardcore Tea Party-er. He's just significantly better at hiding his extremist views than those two. In some ways, you could argue that that makes him more dangerous since it makes him seem actually electable in comparison.

Kasich is the only real Republican candidate that I'd give any time of day to. The rest are nutters at best and highly dangerous at worst. That party needs a severe overhaul to shake the crazy out of it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on February 02, 2016, 05:01:50 PM
if you want to see who you'd side with on the actual issue, you could try this:
https://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential-quiz

like you, jmack, john kasich is my republican guy.  too bad he doesn't stand a chance.

/sigh

That survey was actually really interesting. I'm surprised I've never seen an exercise like this before. I particularly liked the growing and shrinking head progress bar at the end, which seems very appropriate to politics as a whole.

I ended up matching pretty much exactly where I expected to match (96%, no less!) which shows, I guess, at least I'm sufficiently aware of where the candidates I support line up with where I think the US should go. So hooray for me.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 02, 2016, 07:23:22 PM
if you want to see who you'd side with on the actual issue, you could try this:
https://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential-quiz

like you, jmack, john kasich is my republican guy.  too bad he doesn't stand a chance.

/sigh

Bernie and Hillary, neck & neck at 90%/89%
But Bush  :P and Kasich over 75%
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on February 02, 2016, 07:42:24 PM
if you want to see who you'd side with on the actual issue, you could try this:
https://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential-quiz (https://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential-quiz)

like you, jmack, john kasich is my republican guy.  too bad he doesn't stand a chance.

/sigh

Sanders and Clinton 95% and 94%, closest after that is Rand Paul with 25%.  ;D

I like the breakdown of different issues like the Populism vs Elitism stuff. That was fun!  :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on February 02, 2016, 07:48:43 PM
I side 99% with Bernie, 98% with Hillary. Next is 57% with John Kasich, with the last being 7% with Rick Santorum.

:)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on February 02, 2016, 07:59:50 PM
I side 99% with Bernie, 98% with Hillary. Next is 57% with John Kasich, with the last being 7% with Rick Santorum.

:)

Got the exact same percentages as you  :o
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on February 02, 2016, 08:28:40 PM
I didn't expand the other questions, that may have changed the result somewhat.

I got: 99% with Bernie, 93% with Hillary. Next is 41% with John Kasich, with the last being 7% with Ben Carson. Bush with 21% and Trump with 17% (still too much).
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on February 02, 2016, 09:16:54 PM
I didn't expand the other questions, that may have changed the result somewhat.

I got: 99% with Bernie, 93% with Hillary. Next is 41% with John Kasich, with the last being 7% with Ben Carson. Bush with 21% and Trump with 17% (still too much).

I got 99% with Bernie and Hillary. They were at 99 and 98 (with Bernie in the lead), but then I changed how much I weighted some of my answers (I had left them all at the default), and that lowered a number of the republicans, but also tied the two democrats. So:
99% Bernie, 99% Clinton, 51% Kasich, then the scores plummet, ending with Santorum at 3%
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on February 02, 2016, 09:33:11 PM
94% Hillary. 92% Bernie.

I think it's funny that I am only 25% eye to eye with Rand Paul, who represents my state. :-/
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on February 02, 2016, 09:42:23 PM
Oh boy. So no one kill me. I knew one of these already but...
79% Ben Carson, tied with Rand Paul.
I don't like Paul, but Carson I can get behind. I took this at the end of last semester for my government class. Apparently, my political views only line up with 13% of the population. I kind of like that. Sure, I'm the minority, but at least I'm positive I'm not being sucked into the political machine.
There are not too many people involved in the Fantasy community with my views from what I've seen. And the ones who are seem to keep their mouths shut out of fear.
Just in case anyone's curious what this website says...
79%
Ben Carson
Ben Carson  Republican
on foreign policy, social, immigration, environmental, and science issues.
79%
Rand Paul
Rand Paul  Republican
on economic, foreign policy, immigration, healthcare, environmental, and science issues.
  You  
Centrist
Your political beliefs would be considered Centrist on an ideological scale.
Privacy
vs
Security
30
You side moderately towards “Privacy”, meaning you believe the government should not undermine the rights and privacy of its citizens under the guise of national security. This theme is more important to you.
Unilateralism
vs
Multilateralism
34
You side moderately towards “Multilateralism”, meaning you believe policy decisions should be made collectively with support of everyone who may be affected by the outcome of the decision. This theme is somewhat important to you.
Globalization
vs
Protectionism
52
You side moderately towards “Globalization”, meaning you believe globalization is necessary in order to increase the economic strength, prosperity, and standard of living of the nation. This theme is somewhat important to you.
Pacifism
vs
Militarism
22
You side slightly towards “Pacifism”, meaning you more often believe we should use non-violent diplomatic discussion to resolve conflicts. This theme is somewhat important to you.
Populism
vs
Elitism
68
You side moderately towards “Populism”, meaning you believe decisions are best made when everyone has a say. This theme is somewhat important to you.
Laissez-faire
vs
Keynesian
26
You side slightly towards “Laissez-faire”, meaning you more often believe government intervention in economic markets leads to long term negative results. This theme is somewhat important to you.
Tough
vs
Tender
8
You are a centrist on Tough and Tender issues. This theme is somewhat important to you.

Your best fit is...
Young Outsider
along with 13% of the public.
This relatively young, largely independent group holds a mix of conservative and liberal views. And while more lean toward the Republican Party than the Democratic Party, Young Outsiders generally express unfavorable opinions of both major parties. They are largely skeptical of activist government, as a substantial majority views government as wasteful and inefficient. Yet many diverge from the two conservative typology groups – Steadfast Conservatives and Business Conservatives – in their strong support for the environment and many liberal social policies.

I'm not an environmentalist, I'm a conservationist. But the rest is true.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on February 02, 2016, 09:59:14 PM
There are not too many people involved in the Fantasy community with my views from what I've seen. And the ones who are seem to keep their mouths shut out of fear.

The joy of these forums is that people are allowed to hold and even express contrasting views, without it turning into another useless and ugly internet argument. So I hope that you never feel the need to hide them out of fear  :)

It's funny that so many people here are feeling the Bern. I'm not so keen on the high percentage that it gave me for Clinton, as she embodies all the things that I hate in a professional politican (and I especially hate politicians who change their views with whichever way the wind is blowing... Yes, Clinton, I remember what you thought about equal rights for LGBT people a few years ago, or how you supported the invasion of Iraq...), but at least the Iowa vote showed us that this hasn't been a race doomed from the start for Sanders, so I'll watch with eagerness what is to come.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on February 02, 2016, 10:29:06 PM
There are not too many people involved in the Fantasy community with my views from what I've seen. And the ones who are seem to keep their mouths shut out of fear.

The joy of these forums is that people are allowed to hold and even express contrasting views, without it turning into another useless and ugly internet argument. So I hope that you never feel the need to hide them out of fear  :)

Reasoned political debate is my ideal as well, but I've seen political debates turn ugly all too often to feel safe really digging into political discussions here (or anywhere, for that matter). Too many people have spent too much time polarizing people. I've found these F-F forums to be really fun and enjoyable (especially the writing contests, but also the discussions) so I'm always paranoid a heated political discussion will make me less comfortable just coming on here to chat. If I know I'm going to return to a rant about one of the many issues I'll never see eye to eye on with the other side, it dampens my enthusiasm.

For that reason, I do tend to largely keep politics to myself, which should show you just how much I despise Trump. The fact that I'd post a rant about him despite my preference to avoid political arguments should tell you all you need to know about his reprehensible campaign tactics (inciting racism and hatred) and general blowhardiness. If you're on the other side of the political aisle from me, I'll happily chat books and gaming and shows all day long with you while steering away from arguments neither of us will "win". But if you genuinely think Trump is a good candidate, I have to question if I should associate with you at all.

Which sounds terrible, I know, but at least I'm honest with myself. :0
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 02, 2016, 11:08:43 PM
to me, the overwhelming matching of bernie and hillary for our european friends on here makes sense.

those countries are more about equity than guns-n-god.  the geographical isolation (not to be confused with geopolitical isolation) of the united states has a lot to do with that.  when you *HAVE* to get along with your neighbors to keep a lid on the crazy, it tends to push that direction.

i feel you for not fitting in -- i hate unions, love guns, hate bigotry, love capitalism, hate big oil climate deniers, love government regulation of basic human services.  man, and you thought you had outsider problems.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on February 03, 2016, 03:08:26 PM
I must say, I'm a huge political junkie and I definitely enjoy the non-hostile discussion in this thread. On a previous forum that shall remain unnamed, political discussion quickly spiraled out of control and became personal. It was such a drag. This thread is refreshing.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on February 03, 2016, 03:31:38 PM
Meanwhile, I have been trying to get properly acquainted with the UK's House of Lords, but it seems too surreal to be something that exists in a modern democracy. I'm sure there's plenty of material there for fantastical stories and plots, it's just bizarre, starting with its 820 members.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on February 03, 2016, 04:27:12 PM
Meanwhile, I have been trying to get properly acquainted with the UK's House of Lords, but it seems too surreal to be something that exists in a modern democracy. I'm sure there's plenty of material there for fantastical stories and plots, it's just bizarre, starting with its 820 members.
I'm not really sure what they actually do...

I end up only being connected to local politics because that's the only one I can vote for. And following the big events.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 04, 2016, 02:24:23 AM
I must say, I'm a huge political junkie and I definitely enjoy the non-hostile discussion in this thread. On a previous forum that shall remain unnamed, political discussion quickly spiraled out of control and became personal. It was such a drag. This thread is refreshing.

It matters a lot to do us here. We even moved this thread out of others to be sure folks who don't enjoy the discussion don't have to be burdened.

So join in!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Eclipse on February 07, 2016, 03:45:42 PM
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/feb/05/bookshops-prices-down-10-for-open-carry-customers-brave-new-books-austin#comment-68197193
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 07, 2016, 04:24:44 PM
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/feb/05/bookshops-prices-down-10-for-open-carry-customers-brave-new-books-austin#comment-68197193

ha!  that america-lovin', (probably) immigrant-hating guy in the photo is wearing a kilt.  i love how irony is completely lost on the far right.


in other tragic news -- people don't know what to do when their walmart closes down.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/05/what-happens-to-a-tiny-town-when-walmart-disappears/

(note:  not from the onion)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 07, 2016, 06:34:35 PM
Not only a kilt but Black Watch tartan. Lets pretend to be something we are not.

For thought:

[youtube]Jebt9OnHh6A[/youtube]

Walmarts business model is to undercut any local shops prices until they are out of business. So there is nothing left if the Wallmart goes. You need to work out what you are going to do when you can't drive to a mall and pick up cheap Chinese goods anymore.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on February 09, 2016, 04:56:19 PM
So today New Hampshire votes. Predictions welcome. :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on February 09, 2016, 05:09:56 PM
I think Rubio won't be as close to the top as he was in Iowa, due to his recent faux-pax in repeating the same sentences over and over again. It will be very hard to beat Trump here, so I think he will come out first and Cruz right behind.

On the Democratic side, Sanders may beat Clinton on this one, but it may be a very close call once more.

I'll be watching with interest on this side of the pond :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 09, 2016, 05:12:10 PM
I think trump comes in first, but not a huge win. I think there is a surprise 2nd, with Cruz and Rubio in the pack.

Bernie wins, but not big because of Hillary's ground game. She just needs to not get blown out completely.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 09, 2016, 07:09:45 PM
my official predictions:

trump:  28%
rubio:  22%
kasich: 13%

bernie:  55%
hillary:  45%
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 09, 2016, 07:27:26 PM
Lots of thought going into this train wreck, but at the end of the day big business gets re-elected.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on February 09, 2016, 08:59:56 PM
my official predictions:

trump:  28%
rubio:  22%
kasich: 13%

bernie:  55%
hillary:  45%

I'm thinking the same thing, yeah.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 09, 2016, 10:13:02 PM
I'm thinking the same thing, yeah.

great minds think alike and all that.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on February 10, 2016, 10:42:26 AM
So much for that being close-run!  :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on February 10, 2016, 02:09:51 PM
A yuuuuuuuge win by Bernie last night! :D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on February 10, 2016, 02:13:30 PM
Poor Carson. I know the chance of him winning is slim, but I'm still getting behind him. Out of everyone, he's the one I trust the most.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 10, 2016, 02:30:48 PM
Poor Carson. I know the chance of him winning is slim, but I'm still getting behind him. Out of everyone, he's the one I trust the most.

I have to say my positive impression of Kasich isn't a very educated one, but you might give him a look.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: DireWolfSnow on February 10, 2016, 02:48:38 PM
I really, really like Ben Carson as a person. He's humble, polite, intelligent, and is probably the most honest candidate out of the bunch. I would like to see more from him in the future.

However, Kaisch is probably the most viable candidate overall. He has a good record of working with democratic candidates as well as a history of being able to provide for the social welfare and keep a balanced budget.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 10, 2016, 03:03:56 PM
I really, really like Ben Carson as a person. He's humble, polite, intelligent, and is probably the most honest candidate out of the bunch.

i keep hearing this and totally agree -- he's very polite, very honest, and very intelligent in his field of expertise.

that being said, he is nowhere near capable of standing at a podium and commanding the world.  he doesn't have the charisma to lead with soft power, nor the force of personality to lead with hard.  not to mention his extreme religious devotion coupled with a dunning-kruger attitude gives him massive political blind spots.

but, yeah, he's a nice guy.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 10, 2016, 04:44:35 PM
Meanwhile in the UK http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35536278 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35536278)

 Kafka being read as an instruction manual.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 10, 2016, 05:14:10 PM
Meanwhile in the UK http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35536278 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35536278)

 Kafka being read as an instruction manual.

Well, that's charming.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on February 16, 2016, 08:16:52 AM
The presidential race has shown that the GOP is still focusing on old men when they should be focusing on the youth. Conservatives need a new party to gravitate towards young men as they have little in common with the old guard.

There's nothing wrong with being conservative in certain areas, like economics.

I still prefer the middle of the road as opposed to taking one side over the other, as neither seem to be able to provide solutions that are workable in the long run.

There is no perfect solution that will solve all our problems, it's always going to be a matter of making something better at the cost of making something else worse. The best we can hope for is things are made better while simultaneously trying to minimize how much other things become worse.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on February 16, 2016, 08:22:09 AM
The Democrats would have been better off with someone like Biden as a candidate, assuming he could distance himself enough from the Obama administration.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on February 16, 2016, 08:25:04 AM
I really, really like Ben Carson as a person. He's humble, polite, intelligent, and is probably the most honest candidate out of the bunch.

i keep hearing this and totally agree -- he's very polite, very honest, and very intelligent in his field of expertise.

that being said, he is nowhere near capable of standing at a podium and commanding the world.  he doesn't have the charisma to lead with soft power, nor the force of personality to lead with hard.  not to mention his extreme religious devotion coupled with a dunning-kruger attitude gives him massive political blind spots.

but, yeah, he's a nice guy.

Like a lot of these guys and gals, they are really good at one or two things and think because of this they are capable of tackling areas that are outside their area of expertise.

This is the fatal flaw of intellectuals (not saying Carson necessarily falls into this category).
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 17, 2016, 07:34:41 PM
The Democrats would have been better off with someone like Biden as a candidate, assuming he could distance himself enough from the Obama administration.

i dunno if distancing themselves from obama is a necessary thing.  his legacy is probably going to be pretty amazing.  despite the fact-deniers.

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/01/obamas-legacy-great-man-good-president-bad
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on February 18, 2016, 03:20:39 PM
Mr. Burns? Trump? Are they the same guy?

Literally Just 21 Mr Burns Quotes On Pictures Of Donald Trump
http://www.buzzfeed.com/tomphillips/woah-woah-theres-a-new-mexico?utm_term=.wnWBV59ez#.ppZn197NA
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 18, 2016, 05:56:41 PM
Mr. Burns? Trump? Are they the same guy?

Literally Just 21 Mr Burns Quotes On Pictures Of Donald Trump
http://www.buzzfeed.com/tomphillips/woah-woah-theres-a-new-mexico?utm_term=.wnWBV59ez#.ppZn197NA

fits him like a speedo, that does.
Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on February 18, 2016, 06:06:34 PM
I'm sure the other way round exists too. No idea what is more funny/scary...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on February 22, 2016, 12:46:07 AM
Well, Trump won South Carolina.

(https://houseofgeekery.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/jackie-chan-whut.jpg)

Thanks, South Carolina.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 22, 2016, 12:52:46 AM
WTF America

http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml (http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml)

Is this for real?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 22, 2016, 01:14:25 AM
WTF America

http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml (http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml)

Is this for real?

It's potentially the source for the next financial collapse.
It's also the result of well-intentioned policies not well thought out.
Make it free or make it cost. But don't make it both, if you get what I mean.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on February 22, 2016, 03:49:09 AM
Getting my daughter ready for bed tonight:

Wife: Say Democrat
Daughter: Democrat (says it very cute)
Wife: Say liberal
Daughter: Libal
Me: Say Republican
Daughter: No!
Me: Say conservative
Daughter: No! (starts laughing)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Elfy on February 22, 2016, 05:07:41 AM
Getting my daughter ready for bed tonight:

Wife: Say Democrat
Daughter: Democrat (says it very cute)
Wife: Say liberal
Daughter: Libal
Me: Say Republican
Daughter: No!
Me: Say conservative
Daughter: No! (starts laughing)
What I get from that, Hedin is that the words democrat and liberal are easier for a young child to say than the words republican and conservative are.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on February 22, 2016, 10:51:46 AM
The moment a 106-old african-american steps into the White House to greet the President. This video is a joy to watch  :)

http://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2016/feb/22/obamas-dance-with-energetic-106-year-old-guest-at-white-house-video (http://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2016/feb/22/obamas-dance-with-energetic-106-year-old-guest-at-white-house-video)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on February 22, 2016, 01:03:38 PM
Getting my daughter ready for bed tonight:

Wife: Say Democrat
Daughter: Democrat (says it very cute)
Wife: Say liberal
Daughter: Libal
Me: Say Republican
Daughter: No!
Me: Say conservative
Daughter: No! (starts laughing)
What I get from that, Hedin is that the words democrat and liberal are easier for a young child to say than the words republican and conservative are.

Actually its more like I'll do whatever mom asks me to do but not dad.  I feel like I should change my name to No Daddy most of the time.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on February 22, 2016, 03:15:36 PM
Here's the latest from the Republication frontrunner.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/trump-hails-torture-mass-killings-pigs-blood-ammo-sc (http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/trump-hails-torture-mass-killings-pigs-blood-ammo-sc)

Some highlights from Mr. Trump's recent speech:

Quote
The standout topic, however, was terrorism and national security. Trump repeated – favorably – an apparent myth about how General John Pershing summarily executed dozens of Muslim prisoners in the Philippines with tainted ammunition during a guerilla war against the occupying United States.

“He took fifty bullets, and he dipped them in pig’s blood,” Trump said. “And he had his men load his rifles and he lined up the fifty people, and they shot 49 of those people. And the fiftieth person he said ‘You go back to your people and you tell them what happened.’ And for 25 years there wasn’t a problem, okay?”

The story appears to be a hoax spread via e-mail forwards, according to rumor tracker Snopes.com, with no evidence it occurred.

The moral of the tale, according to Trump: “We better start getting tough and we better start getting vigilant, and we better start using our heads or we’re not gonna have a country, folks.”

You can find that at 7:51 on the linked recording.

Also, here he is on waterboarding!

Quote
Trump was unimpressed with waterboarding, a banned interrogation tactic that he has pledged to bring back against suspected terrorists, and supplement with far worse forms of abuse.

“Is it torture or not? It’s so borderline,” he said. “It’s like minimal, minimal, minimal torture.”

In a previous speech, Trump called his opponent Senator Ted Cruz, whose father was tortured as a young man in Cuba, a “pu**y” for not sharing his zeal for the practice.

You can find that lovely nugget at 6:16 on the linked recording.

And here's a lovely quote from one of the many people Trump has frightened into bonkers land:

Quote
Trump supporter Eleanor Crume, 72, told MSNBC afterwards that she agreed with Trump’s stance on waterboarding because terrorists should not be “pampered.”

“We need someone who can lead the country because people are scared to death,” she said. “It’s only a matter of time before terrorists come and start chopping Christian heads off in the United States.”

Also, for anyone who thinks the media is "misquoting" Trump, here's a direct recording of his recent rally with the lines in question.

https://soundcloud.com/gawker/trump-at-january-19-charleston-rally (https://soundcloud.com/gawker/trump-at-january-19-charleston-rally)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on February 22, 2016, 04:21:45 PM
I really don't know how I feel about torture.
On one hand, I think it's a good idea. Since the prisoners know it won't stop unless they give the correct answer, and will be punished for the wrong ones, it's effective. We would've never found a lot of the terrorists we have without it. Yes, Obama tried stopping it in 2009, but officially, the CIA was able to act on a lot of information gained from it.
On the other hand, it scares the hell out of me. I don't trust the government of course. I find it hard to believe that we killed Bin Ladin, or however you spell his name. In fact, I have trouble believing 9/11 was even a terrorist plot. So the fact that they could turn on us, label anyone as a terrorist, and torture the hell out of us frightens me.
I know this shouldn't be my logic. "Everyone has rights. Humans shouldn't be doing this and that to each other." Okay sure. But it's happening. Us stopping torture doesn't prevent the terrorists from torturing us. "But we should be better. We have the moral high ground." Do we? Really? No. That's just wishful thinking. We do terrible things too. Everybody does. It just depends on what you consider is worse. Am I condoning the actions of terrorists? No. What they've done is wrong and disgusting. But we're not excluded from that.
So I just sit back and watch the people and see what happens.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on February 22, 2016, 04:26:28 PM
WTF America

http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml (http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml)

Is this for real?

Yes. Expenses for one year of college can cost about the same as many luxury cars. $40K-$50K is not unusual for private college and I know the public ones by me have gotten extremely competitive and are above the average in state tuition of closer to $25K/year. (note these estimates are total cost, so include tuition, fees, room and board, etc)

So, that is per year, so imagine the average family trying to find a way to pay for 4 years of that. Per kid. It's one of the reasons I did solid research on job feasibility for potential majors (only including ones I thought I would enjoy) before I picked one. It made paying off my loans a heck of a lot easier if I was able to actually use my degree to get a job, which is not the case for many majors.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on February 22, 2016, 04:28:04 PM
On one hand, I think it's a good idea. Since the prisoners know it won't stop unless they give the correct answer, and will be punished for the wrong ones, it's effective.
Do you not see the issue with that? If you don't stop hurting someone until they tell you what you want to hear, then they will eventually tell you what you want to hear. Even if it is not true. How can anyone claim that's an effective intelligence-gathering strategy?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on February 22, 2016, 04:28:35 PM
I really don't know how I feel about torture.
On one hand, I think it's a good idea.
I have trouble believing 9/11 was even a terrorist plot.
???

(I think it's time for me to leave this conversation)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on February 22, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
WTF America

http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml (http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml)

Is this for real?

Yes. Expenses for one year of college can cost about the same as many luxury cars. $40K-$50K is not unusual for private college and I know the public ones by me have gotten extremely competitive and are above the average in state tuition of closer to $25K/year. (note these estimates are total cost, so include tuition, fees, room and board, etc)

So, that is per year, so imagine the average family trying to find a way to pay for 4 years of that. Per kid. It's one of the reasons I did solid research on job feasibility for potential majors (only including ones I thought I would enjoy) before I picked one. It made paying off my loans a heck of a lot easier if I was able to actually use my degree to get a job, which is not the case for many majors.

Student loan debt is really crippling recent grads.  Wage growth hasn't gone up enough for newer grads to keep up with it and it has some bad downstream effects on the economy as those people don't have the disposal income to buy goods let alone really get into home ownership.  I got lucky with my parents and they paid for the tuition while I got loans for my room & board plus living expenses so I wasn't hit too bad coming out (I also missed the large tuition hikes that came after I graduated).  We are currently putting a decent amount of our income that I would love to make extra payments on our mortgage or do other stuff with in a college fund for our daughter so hopefully she (and her sister down the line) won't have crippling debt out of college.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on February 22, 2016, 04:37:52 PM
So I just sit back and watch the people and see what happens.

I wish the innocent ones getting tortured could be as comfortable as you.

Yeah, I'm out. It was nice to have a politics thread and keep it civil, but at least for now, I can't, so I'll avoid it for a while.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on February 22, 2016, 05:34:19 PM
I really don't know how I feel about torture.
On one hand, I think it's a good idea. Since the prisoners know it won't stop unless they give the correct answer, and will be punished for the wrong ones, it's effective. We would've never found a lot of the terrorists we have without it.
That's not true in the slightest. In fact, multiple studies and inquiries have shown that the amount of reliable information we've obtained solely through torture is incredibly low to non-existant. When you torture a man to the point where he'll say anything, he will say anything regardless of whether it's true or not. As a method for finding reliable information, Torture. Does. Not. Work. The only thing torture is any good for is obtaining forced confessions. Hence why we should not be using it.

Quote

On the other hand, it scares the hell out of me. I don't trust the government of course.

I don't trust the government either, but that has more do with its incompetence than any kind of malice. I can't remember where I heard this, but the perfect description of the government is, rather than one single brain controlling many different hands, in reality it's hundreds of different brains all trying to control one single hand. Sometimes they get it to do stuff but most of the time they're just fighting among themselves.

Quote
I find it hard to believe that we killed Bin Ladin, or however you spell his name.
I can prove without a doubt that Bin Laden is dead with six simple words. Imagine if he turned up alive. The sheer embarrassment of the US government having been caught lying about killing America's No 1 enemy would be utterly devastating. As such, if the US government makes a statement saying that they have killed Osama Bin Laden, it is only because they are 100% certain Bin Laden is dead and will never turn up to deny them. Now, whether his death went down exactly as they say it, that might be up to interpretation, but the guy is dead without a doubt.

Quote
In fact, I have trouble believing 9/11 was even a terrorist plot.
It was. See the above points about government competence.

Quote
I know this shouldn't be my logic. "Everyone has rights. Humans shouldn't be doing this and that to each other." Okay sure. But it's happening. Us stopping torture doesn't prevent the terrorists from torturing us. "But we should be better. We have the moral high ground." Do we? Really? No. That's just wishful thinking. We do terrible things too. Everybody does. It just depends on what you consider is worse. Am I condoning the actions of terrorists? No. What they've done is wrong and disgusting. But we're not excluded from that.
So I just sit back and watch the people and see what happens.
The hell kind of logic is that? Just because we occasionally do terrible things somehow justifies us doing even more terrible things? Especially since, as we already established, torture doesn't work.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on February 22, 2016, 05:41:40 PM
WTF America

http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml (http://www.finaid.org/loans/studentloandebtclock.phtml)

Is this for real?

Yes. Expenses for one year of college can cost about the same as many luxury cars. $40K-$50K is not unusual for private college and I know the public ones by me have gotten extremely competitive and are above the average in state tuition of closer to $25K/year. (note these estimates are total cost, so include tuition, fees, room and board, etc)

So, that is per year, so imagine the average family trying to find a way to pay for 4 years of that. Per kid. It's one of the reasons I did solid research on job feasibility for potential majors (only including ones I thought I would enjoy) before I picked one. It made paying off my loans a heck of a lot easier if I was able to actually use my degree to get a job, which is not the case for many majors.

I graduated college in '07 and have had to defer my loans until 2 years ago when I finally was able to make payments. I still can't make the full payment and have to do one of the payment plans which basically only covers the interest. I will be paying on my loans until the day I die.

In other news, I majored in History. There is absolutely nothing I have been able to find that puts it to use, unless I want to go BACK to school and get a masters to teach, then do an unpaid internship for a year. Yeah, because that's possible.  :-\ (even so, what do teachers make these days? About nothing.) Its a shame really, because I think studying history taught me a great deal about myself and the world as a whole.

I wish I had your foresight, Arry. I wish someone had prepared me to find a major in highschool, which would have helped me choose the right college, which then would have put me on the path to a career. Maybe I am just blinded in my age, since its been a while since I was in school, but I don't recall a large effort going into preparing me for life outside of standardized testing.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 22, 2016, 06:05:35 PM
I knew student loan debt was high in the states I had no idea it was at absurd proportions.
If I believed the educational standard was not declining or the job opportunities justified the expense. I could comprend this. I don't believe that to be the case.
The UK was taken down this path and we are seeing an erosion in education and everything related to education monetised

FWIW Holland will educate foriegn nationals for free and in English at three of their universities. There are plans to expand this scheme. You find living costs, books etc. Demand massively outstrips supply for places but this has to be worth considering.
I suspect other nations in Europe may do likewise soon.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Elfy on February 22, 2016, 08:53:58 PM
On one hand, I think it's a good idea. Since the prisoners know it won't stop unless they give the correct answer, and will be punished for the wrong ones, it's effective.
Do you not see the issue with that? If you don't stop hurting someone until they tell you what you want to hear, then they will eventually tell you what you want to hear. Even if it is not true. How can anyone claim that's an effective intelligence-gathering strategy?
Yeah, I agree with this. There's an episode of Burn Notice where Michael Westen monologues against torture and he compares it to shopping with a flamethrower, it's messy and doesn't get the required results.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on February 22, 2016, 08:56:04 PM
I really don't know how I feel about torture.
On one hand, I think it's a good idea. Since the prisoners know it won't stop unless they give the correct answer, and will be punished for the wrong ones, it's effective. We would've never found a lot of the terrorists we have without it.
That's not true in the slightest. In fact, multiple studies and inquiries have shown that the amount of reliable information we've obtained solely through torture is incredibly low to non-existant. When you torture a man to the point where he'll say anything, he will say anything regardless of whether it's true or not. As a method for finding reliable information, Torture. Does. Not. Work. The only thing torture is any good for is obtaining forced confessions. Hence why we should not be using it.

I don't necessarily want to pile on here, but yes, this exactly.

Despite what the average episode of 24 would have you believe, torture is not effective. If you're still unsure about that, I'd ask you to try is a thought experiment.

Imagine the government decides that you, @ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103) (who we all know is not a terrorist, and is in fact a cool guy) is a terrorist. Men break into your home, throw a black bag over your head, and abduct you in the night. They hold you without trial, and they hurt you every single day for weeks. Months.

You are not allowed to contact your family, or speak to a lawyer, or talk to anyone other than your interrogators. You are kept in solitary confinement. Your only interaction with anyone is when they hurt you, repeatedly, and ask the same questions each time. "Are you a terrorist?"

If you say no, your interrogators will continue to hurt you. You will not go free, no matter how many times you tell them you aren't a terrorist, because they have already decided you are. And so it goes, for as long as it takes.

Are you a terrorist? Nope. But if someone was to subject you to what I just described, you would, sooner or later, tell them you were a terrorist. Might take a week. Might take a month. Might take a year. But eventually, you would say "Yes, I'm a terrorist". You would lie to make the pain STOP, and then your interrogators would say "Ha! I knew he was a terrorist all along."

That's why torture doesn't work.

I know this conversation is a tough one, which is why I'm glad it's confined to this thread, where people know what to expect. But it's a conversation that needs to be had, and like with my harping on Trump's dangerous, racist statements, if I can make just one person rethink their position, or at least consider doing so, I feel I have a responsibility to try.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 22, 2016, 09:49:45 PM
Who gets to determine if someone is a terrorist and do you trust them? Will you trust the people in 20 years time who make that decision?
I am always amazed that the most barbaric tortures are come up with by the supposedly free and enlightened cultures. Those supporting torture tend to hold the same fundementalist beliefs as those they would practise it on.

I am of the opinion that if you swim with sharks expect to get bit and have no intention of inviting sharks in the pool with me.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on February 22, 2016, 10:10:24 PM
I'll just give a broad response here, because picking apart quotes is too much energy for this.
I doubt I'll sway anyone here about 9/11, but there's just too many things odd about it for me to believe it was done without any inside help from the government. Maybe everything I've heard is wrong? What do I know? I'm young. But from my understand, there's a petition that has a significant amount of engineers(at least 2000 I think) saying the Twin Towers could not have fallen just with planes hitting them. Then there's the creepy image you get when you fold the dollar bill a certain way. Then there's the excuse to use 9/11 to obtain oil. Both the CIA and FBI knew about the attack, yet refused to talk to each other. The directors told the agents not to worry about it. Hell, creepily enough, The Simpsons even predicted it.
I don't have exact links to all this, but feel free to look it up. Regardless, I doubt I'll change anyone's mind. And 9/11 wouldn't be the first time it happened. There's evidence out there showing how we knew Pearl Harbor was coming, yet refused to stop it so America would get involved in WWII.
So we go over there and shoot Mr. Terrorist leader a decade later. Good job guys! Oh wait, we got a call. We have to dump his body in the ocean, so we can be respectful. Please. You just walked into his house, shot his family, pretty much went into the country without permission... And you want to respect burial customs? I think your past that now. And how convenient that now we can't have someone do an autopsy and all that to identify the body.
As far as torture goes. First, I respect the Burn Notice reference. Very very true. Yes, torture can and has given forced confessions to make the pain stop. I also will admit to not knowing the ratio to information gathered VS. prisoners who gave nothing and died. I remember watching Zero Dark 30 a year or so ago. It was a fascinating movie about how exactly we found Bin Laden. From what I remember, half of the useful information we got was from torturing people. And when Obama stopped it(or officially did) in 2009, the CIA looked at each other and wondered how they were supposed to move forward.
So I guess it comes down to statistics. Information gained/lost. How important the information was.  How often we effectively acted on that information. Things like that.
If we could never act effectively, and the amount and importance of information gained didn't exceed the time we put into it, then it's not worth it. Under no circumstances should a confession be taken while someone's being tortured. You're right. They'll just admit to it. But if it's specific information that we can verify and act on, why not?
Again, I'm young, and maybe I'm completely wrong. But I can't find the answers without talking to people. I understand what I said earlier offended, and possibly alienated, others. But this thread is here to face and discuss tough issues. I certainly don't agree with everything said here. But I won't ever walk away from it. If I'm not willing to hear the other side of the story and gain a new perspective, then why would I be on this thread in the first place? Hell, why would I be reading anything? That's like putting down The First Law because I don't agree with the side of life it shows. Same goes with The Broken Empire. It's fascinating to hear from people who have different beliefs than I. It's amazing having the opportunity to hear from people all over the world with different experiences in life. If that's something you can't handle, that's fine. Walk away if you must. But whatever you do, don't discriminate against someone because they have a different perspective on life.
Do I do this at times? Yes, and I've been called out for it, right on this very thread. Even though I wanted to laugh at Berney Sanders for his comment that climate change is responsible for ISIS, I shouldn't have turned off the democratic debate. I probably still wouldn't vote for him, but at least I would have a greater understanding of what he stands for so I could have a more educated discussion on the topic. My mistake. I think we all do that at times, and it's wrong.
So if you have a different opinion about something(which I know we all do) please share. Who knows? You may change someone's mind. Even if it makes you passionate, there are ways to discuss without screaming at the top of your lungs and using extreme profanity. if something comes off wrong, then just delete and rewrite. That's the beauty of this thread. It allows us to compose our responses and make sure the message we're trying to send comes across as clearly as possible.
Bottom line. I refuse to walk away from a topic that's sensitive, or dislike someone based on something major like their political view, or minor like book tastes. I hope you'll do the same.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on February 22, 2016, 10:34:30 PM
Again, I'm young, and maybe I'm completely wrong. But I can't find the answers without talking to people. I understand what I said earlier offended, and possibly alienated, others. But this thread is here to face and discuss tough issues. I certainly don't agree with everything said here. But I won't ever walk away from it. If I'm not willing to hear the other side of the story and gain a new perspective, then why would I be on this thread in the first place?

Dude, kudos for listening. That's why I'm engaging you on this. I'm glad you're at least taking the time to consider some of what we're talking about in here. And yeah, I was young once too (okay, that makes me sound super old ... I'm 38 :P) but by that, I mean I didn't have all the information I have now. And I got that information by chatting with people. So again, thanks for keeping an open mind. I'll try to hit a couple of things you brought up and explain them in ways that make sense.

I doubt I'll sway anyone here about 9/11, but there's just too many things odd about it for me to believe it was done without any inside help from the government. Maybe everything I've heard is wrong? What do I know? I'm young. But from my understand, there's a petition that has a significant amount of engineers(at least 2000 I think) saying the Twin Towers could not have fallen just with planes hitting them. Then there's the creepy image you get when you fold the dollar bill a certain way. Then there's the excuse to use 9/11 to obtain oil. Both the CIA and FBI knew about the attack, yet refused to talk to each other. The directors told the agents not to worry about it. Hell, creepily enough, The Simpsons even predicted it.
I don't have exact links to all this, but feel free to look it up. Regardless, I doubt I'll change anyone's mind.

What you're referring to is a widely debunked conspiracy theory that's been floating around the Internet for some time (much of what you mention was incorrectly put together in a mock documentary called Loose Change). As you've suggested, I'd encourage you to seek out information beyond the channels you're familiar with to verify that the claims made by that documentary are bogus. You mentioned you don't trust the government ... if I could point to a single thing that I hope might sway you, it's that the government is TERRIBLE at keeping secrets. If the government was involved in 9/11, it would have taken hundreds of people conspiring to pull that off. Someone would have talked by now. It's simply untrue.

Now, the standard response by conspiracy theorists is to knock the messager. Oh, you have a fact that doesn't fit my conspiracy narrative? Well, you're in the on the conspiracy! Consider any conspiracy, such as Bugs Bunny secretly running for president. Present me with any facts you like, from any source you like. All I have to do is say "The person you just mentioned is working for Bugs Bunny!" and I've invalidated your fact to ensure my narrative isn't damaged. Ultimately, the theory that the US government caused 9/11 is just that, a conspiracy theory, so again, I'd encourage you to attempt to verify the spurious claims made by Loose Change (and all those who quote from it) with an open mind.

So we go over there and shoot Mr. Terrorist leader a decade later. Good job guys! Oh wait, we got a call. We have to dump his body in the ocean, so we can be respectful. Please. You just walked into his house, shot his family, pretty much went into the country without permission... And you want to respect burial customs? I think your past that now. And how convenient that now we can't have someone do an autopsy and all that to identify the body.

Although this was pitched as a gesture of "respect", it was also a strategic move. Bin Laden was a martyr and hero to terrorists the world over. The problem we encountered after killing him was that no matter where we buried him, whether on his soil, our soil, or anywhere else in the world, the location would become known, and it would become a mecca for terrorists. They would go to Bin Laden's grave to pay tribute, giving us a whole lot of very unattractive options. Guard the grave against suicide bombers 24/7? Allow terrorists to gather freely and make "Death to America" videos? Allow Bin Laden's followers to dig him up?

Ultimately, the reason we dumped him in the sea was to ensure there was no place in the world where his many followers could gather to pay tribute to him as a martyr. He's dead. He's been dead for some time now. If he was alive, ISIS or Al-Queda or any of the number of splinter groups would have said so. It would be the ultimate way for them to mock the US. They haven't made that claim, because they know he's dead too.

Anyway, hopefully that makes it a bit more clear why they dumped Bin Laden's body in the sea.

Yes, torture can and has given forced confessions to make the pain stop. I also will admit to not knowing the ratio to information gathered VS. prisoners who gave nothing and died. I remember watching Zero Dark 30 a year or so ago. It was a fascinating movie about how exactly we found Bin Laden. From what I remember, half of the useful information we got was from torturing people. And when Obama stopped it(or officially did) in 2009, the CIA looked at each other and wondered how they were supposed to move forward.

I'd be careful about equating dramatizations of events to historical fact. Zero Dark Thirty is a work of fiction based on historical events, not a documentary. For comparison, I'd point you to the Wikipedia page maintained for the movie, here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Dark_Thirty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Dark_Thirty)

The pertinent part is this:

Quote
Historical accuracy
Further information: Search for Osama bin Laden and Death of Osama bin Laden

Zero Dark Thirty has received criticism for historical inaccuracy. Former Assistant Secretary of Defense Graham T. Allison has opined that the film is inaccurate in three important regards: the overstatement of the positive role of enhanced interrogation methods, the understatement of the role of the Obama administration, and the portrayal of the efforts as being driven by one agent battling against the CIA "system".[59]

In December 2014 Jane Mayer of The New Yorker wrote that "Maya" was modeled in part after CIA officer Alfreda Frances Bikowsky.[60]

On May 21, 2015, journalist Seymour Hersh reported that the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) had kept bin Laden under house arrest at Abbottabad since 2006, and that Pakistani Army chief Pervez Kayani and ISI director Ahmad Shuja Pasha aided the U.S. mission to kill, not capture bin Laden.[61][62] Hersh's U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources stated that the U.S. had learned of bin Laden's location through an ISI walk-in seeking the $25 million reward and not through tracking a courier; this had been previously reported by R.J. Hillhouse and was afterward confirmed by NBC News.[61][63][64] The White House denied Hersh's report.[65][66]

If you actually jump to the page, you can read the citations for the historical inaccuracies, such as the role of torture in extracting Bin Laden's location.

So I guess it comes down to statistics. Information gained/lost. How important the information was.  How often we effectively acted on that information. Things like that.
If we could never act effectively, and the amount and importance of information gained didn't exceed the time we put into it, then it's not worth it. Under no circumstances should a confession be taken while someone's being tortured. You're right. They'll just admit to it. But if it's specific information that we can verify and act on, why not?

Regarding torture, I would make the point that even if you were to accept that, on some rare occasion, it would produce actionable intelligence, the fact that all torture produces intelligence (which is almost certainly bogus) means anything accurate you did gain by it would become lost in the noise. You can't base your intelligence gathering on torturing people any more than you could base it on crystal balls or guesses. This is one of the biggest misunderstandings about how torture worked (perpetuated by shows like 24 and movies like Zero Dark Thirty).

If you're interested, I can actually recommend some books on the psychological effects of torture and all the reasons it's unreliable for extracting information. I don't have them handy, but I can look them up once I'm no longer at work.

And again, thanks for listening. No one has all the answers (I certainly don't!) but ultimately, there is enough consensus in certain areas that you can feel reasonably confident you understand how things work.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on February 22, 2016, 11:24:11 PM
Even though I wanted to laugh at Berney Sanders for his comment that climate change is responsible for ISIS, I shouldn't have turned off the democratic debate. I probably still wouldn't vote for him, but at least I would have a greater understanding of what he stands for so I could have a more educated discussion on the topic. My mistake. I think we all do that at times, and it's wrong.

Oh, I actually meant to respond to this too, as it does require a bit of explanation. There's actually two Youtube clips from my favorite science educators that sum this up rather well.

First, Neil Degrasse Tyson explains climate change. The upshot of this is that climate change does not mean winter ceases to exist. It means the average temperature of both hot and cold weather are rising over time, which is exactly what we've proven is happening. So, last winter, you had a high of 96 and a low of 8. This winter, you have a high of 98 and a low of 10. Cold still occurs, but the overall average has risen.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBdxDFpDp_k[/youtube]

Second, Bernie Sanders is correct that climate change is a contributing factor in regards to the rise of ISIS and other extremist groups. In a nutshell, many of the countries from which ISIS and other extremist groups recruit still have a strong focus on agriculture. It produces a large number of jobs and keeps people, especially young people, employed.

Because of the rise in global temperature over time (climate change) many people who used to be involved in agriculture for their livelihood no longer have jobs. Their crops no longer grow because it is too hot, or don't grow sufficiently to support them. This has produced a huge vacuum in jobs available to people (especially young people) and, because their traditional avenues of work are no longer available, when ISIS or another group comes in and offers them a salary to wage jihad, suddenly, that's an option.

If you give a young person a choice between life working a farm, or fighting in a war and avoiding drone strikes and other terrors, they will almost certainly choose to work on the farm. But take the ability to work on a farm away (climate change!) and now you've left them no option. You can starve, or you can go to work for ISIS. So climate change DOES contribute to the rise of extremist groups by giving them a much wider (and desperate) pool of recruits.

Bill Nye does an excellent job of explaining this here:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0kgIHxkMS8[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 23, 2016, 12:45:57 AM
So we go over there and shoot Mr. Terrorist leader a decade later. Good job guys! Oh wait, we got a call. We have to dump his body in the ocean, so we can be respectful. Please. You just walked into his house, shot his family, pretty much went into the country without permission... And you want to respect burial customs? I think your past that now. And how convenient that now we can't have someone do an autopsy and all that to identify the body.

Although this was pitched as a gesture of "respect", it was also a strategic move. Bin Laden was a martyr and hero to terrorists the world over. The problem we encountered after killing him was that no matter where we buried him, whether on his soil, our soil, or anywhere else in the world, the location would become known, and it would become a mecca for terrorists. They would go to Bin Laden's grave to pay tribute, giving us a whole lot of very unattractive options. Guard the grave against suicide bombers 24/7? Allow terrorists to gather freely and make "Death to America" videos? Allow Bin Laden's followers to dig him up?

Ultimately, the reason we dumped him in the sea was to ensure there was no place in the world where his many followers could gather to pay tribute to him as a martyr. He's dead. He's been dead for some time now. If he was alive, ISIS or Al-Queda or any of the number of splinter groups would have said so. It would be the ultimate way for them to mock the US. They haven't made that claim, because they know he's dead too.

Anyway, hopefully that makes it a bit more clear why they dumped Bin Laden's body in the sea.

yup.

so don't forget about the nation now responsible for his corpse.  the nation being blackmailed to get it back.  the nation under siege for allow him to be interred.  the nation disrespecting his worldly body.

that nation doesn't exist since he's in international water.

he's shark food, man.  it was a brilliant move and a giant f-u to terrorists.  i loved it.

best of all?  now there's precedent.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on February 23, 2016, 04:10:17 AM
Even though I wanted to laugh at Berney Sanders for his comment that climate change is responsible for ISIS, I shouldn't have turned off the democratic debate. I probably still wouldn't vote for him, but at least I would have a greater understanding of what he stands for so I could have a more educated discussion on the topic. My mistake. I think we all do that at times, and it's wrong.

Oh, I actually meant to respond to this too, as it does require a bit of explanation. There's actually two Youtube clips from my favorite science educators that sum this up rather well.

First, Neil Degrasse Tyson explains climate change. The upshot of this is that climate change does not mean winter ceases to exist. It means the average temperature of both hot and cold weather are rising over time, which is exactly what we've proven is happening. So, last winter, you had a high of 96 and a low of 8. This winter, you have a high of 98 and a low of 10. Cold still occurs, but the overall average has risen.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBdxDFpDp_k[/youtube]

Second, Bernie Sanders is correct that climate change is a contributing factor in regards to the rise of ISIS and other extremist groups. In a nutshell, many of the countries from which ISIS and other extremist groups recruit still have a strong focus on agriculture. It produces a large number of jobs and keeps people, especially young people, employed.

Because of the rise in global temperature over time (climate change) many people who used to be involved in agriculture for their livelihood no longer have jobs. Their crops no longer grow because it is too hot, or don't grow sufficiently to support them. This has produced a huge vacuum in jobs available to people (especially young people) and, because their traditional avenues of work are no longer available, when ISIS or another group comes in and offers them a salary to wage jihad, suddenly, that's an option.

If you give a young person a choice between life working a farm, or fighting in a war and avoiding drone strikes and other terrors, they will almost certainly choose to work on the farm. But take the ability to work on a farm away (climate change!) and now you've left them no option. You can starve, or you can go to work for ISIS. So climate change DOES contribute to the rise of extremist groups by giving them a much wider (and desperate) pool of recruits.

Bill Nye does an excellent job of explaining this here:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0kgIHxkMS8[/youtube]
I think that's an interesting theory, but out of everything you've mentioned, it's the least I'm willing to buy into.
First, I'll admit to falling on the side that doubts climate change as a whole. As in, we're causing climate change. The climate's always changing. It's Earth. That's what it does. I know someone will come along and throw statistics and research against this theory, but there's an equal number opposing that viewpoint, so it's not worth the effort.
I haven't heard any farmers turning around and saying, "Man, ever since we got technology, farming sucks. The weather keeps changing on me. I don't know what to do. It's not like my ancestors had to deal with weather changes. Everything just stayed the same, and it was beautiful."
Maybe I'm just ignorant.
Also, when it comes to politics, I've realized I'm the guy in the room that everyone just stares at because he has four arms, 6 legs, and two heads. Most of my views will hit brick walls and fall on deaf ears. But I'll tell my side anyways.
As for the others above, it has given me something to think about. I won't say I've changed my mind completely, but it's given me a new perspective. I've heard all the 9/11 arguments before, and none of them are enough to convince me that it's false. I've never even watched the documentary referenced. There's good points on both sides of the discussion. I'm just on the one that believes our government is willing to do whatever is necessary to gain more control of the people.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 23, 2016, 04:54:19 AM
but there's an equal number opposing that viewpoint

no.  actually, there's not.  the research is skewed 100-to-1 in the "we're screwing up the planet" direction.  the "1" being bought and paid for propaganda.

the loud, political views, however, are indeed equally split.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on February 23, 2016, 06:25:29 AM

I think that's an interesting theory, but out of everything you've mentioned, it's the least I'm willing to buy into.
First, I'll admit to falling on the side that doubts climate change as a whole. As in, we're causing climate change. The climate's always changing. It's Earth. That's what it does.
Yes, except that that process tends to be a slow one that happens over millions of years. Not decades. The only exception is if a major event happens to shift the climate, like a meteor strike or a super volcano (like Yellowstone) erupting. And, in this case, the major event is humanity and our decades of pumping chemicals into the air and generally fucking up the enviroment.

Quote
I know someone will come along and throw statistics and research against this theory, but there's an equal number opposing that viewpoint, so it's not worth the effort.
Like m3mnoch said, it's not anywhere near to equal numbers of scientists who don't believe in man-made climate change. I don't even know where you heard that because it's factually untrue. The vast majority of scientists knowledgable in that field agree climate change is real and man-made and most of those opposed have links to lobbyist groups that would suffer if restrictions were placed to help combat climate change. Aka, it's in their best interest for everyone to believe climate change was false.

Quote

I haven't heard any farmers turning around and saying, "Man, ever since we got technology, farming sucks. The weather keeps changing on me. I don't know what to do. It's not like my ancestors had to deal with weather changes. Everything just stayed the same, and it was beautiful."
That's exactly the same kind of logic people used a few years back when they claimed a massive snowstorm proved that 'global warming' was false. And it's equally untrue because it shows a massive misunderstanding of how climate change works. Just because you can't visibly witness climate change with your own two eyes does not mean it does not exist. Climate change works slow and has small effects that grow within time.

Quote
Also, when it comes to politics, I've realized I'm the guy in the room that everyone just stares at because he has four arms, 6 legs, and two heads. Most of my views will hit brick walls and fall on deaf ears. But I'll tell my side anyways.
To be honest, the odd looks you get are less a case of your views being anathemia to everyone and more that a lot of what you're saying is just factually untrue or painfully misinformed. 
 
Quote
As for the others above, it has given me something to think about. I won't say I've changed my mind completely, but it's given me a new perspective. I've heard all the 9/11 arguments before, and none of them are enough to convince me that it's false. I've never even watched the documentary referenced.

I suspect if you still believe 9/11 was staged then you probably haven't 'heard all the 9/11 arguments before'.

Personally, even ignoring the mountains of physical evidence that 9/11 was not hoaxed, one of the logical arguments that makes the most sense to me is 'If 9/11 was staged with explosives then why the planes?' There are a million and one things that could go wrong with a plane hijacking, let alone 4. If the explosives were already planted, then would it not make significantly more sense just to blow up the towers with the explosives anyway and claim Al Queda did it? You'd get the same result either way and much less in the way of messy details.

Quote
There's good points on both sides of the discussion.

Not really. Maybe there are points that sound reasonable, but the evidence is significantly stacked against the 'truthers'.

Quote
I'm just on the one that believes our government is willing to do whatever is necessary to gain more control of the people.
Again, you're referring to the government as if it's this singular entity. In reality, it's thousands of arguing brains trying to control one hand. This election cycle more than anything has proved that. The US government can't even pass a sensible gun control bill, never mind create a massive conspiracy like 9/11 would require.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 23, 2016, 11:57:44 AM
I want to say something here in support of @ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103)'s suspicions about government. Let's remember that our government experimented or committed eugenics on citizens in several prolonged cases: Tuskegee/syphillis, CIA/psychedlic drugs, North Carolina and sterilization of poor, disabled and African-American. The greatest killers of humanity in the last 100 years have been governments killing their own citizens: Germany/Jews, USSR/Ukraine, Cambodia, etc.

I am not saying that there was a conspiracy around 9/11. I personally find none of the arguments for government complicity to be persuasive.

I am saying we should not be too facile in saying "It's government; they don't know what the f* they're doing and it would leak out anyway." There are certainly some interesting conspiracy discussions around the sinking of the Lusitania, for example.

Meanwhile, putting aside actual political discussion, I've just spent a very diverting 30 minutes looking up conspiracy theories online. Coventry, Lusitania, Pearl Harbor... Mostly, folks debunk these. The one site I found (in a tiny, tiny bit of looking) that supported many of these conspiracy theories also had an entire page dedicated to "Mein Kampf" excerpts. I shit you not.

Still, conspiracies do happen. An interesting reference to the Congressional testimony of a Kuwaiti girl in the lead-up to Gulf War I, in which she described Iraqi troops tipping babies out of incubators. Turns out (see the NY Times article) that she was actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador, operating under a fictitious name, and the congressman responsible for arranging her testimony knew it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 23, 2016, 03:08:18 PM
personally, i'm just going to say something in support of @ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103) in general -- i LOVE that he's got different viewpoints and can talk about them.  diversity is so very awesome.  i think learning about how and what folks not like me think is fascinating.

second, i totally agree on the suspicious government in the past thing.

however, it's just not a thing anymore.  i view it like how unions were incredibly necessary in the 19th century, but are useless now in the age of social media.  how cops could get away with murder in the 80s, but are constantly under surveillance now.  how egregious government secrets are impossible to keep in this post "iraq invasion" and "edward snowden" world.

makes me think about the guy who used math to disprove specific conspiracies.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35411684

also, in not even that much of a tangent, it reminds me of one of my favorite subreddits: /r/justiceporn
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 23, 2016, 04:09:33 PM
The BBC article is quite cool.
Yes, I do think that the ability to successfully and secretly conspire is hugely limited in the modern, computerized world.

Meanwhile, "conspiracy" is slippery thing.

Take the second Gulf War.

In my opinion, and I do think supported by facts, 9/11 was perpetrated by terrorists with no aid from the U.S. government. The conspiracy theory is that the U.S. helped kill its own citizens - or turned a blind eye - in order to have an excuse to after Saddam and his oil.

Here is where I think the conspiracy theory does overlap reality. I personally believe that GW Bush and Chaney were eager for a fight. Eager to take down Saddam, and eager to create their new world order. In that context, I believe they actively worked to exaggerate (and maybe create) evidence to support their invasion of Iraq. 9/11 gave them their excuse.

This, to me, is a conspiracy masquerading as policy.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on February 24, 2016, 12:50:43 PM
I'm still confused, so can someone still explain who exactly is voting for all these candidates, and what is the main difference to the 'proper election'?
I mean, couldn't the democrats be voting for Trump, so that then in the final one no one likes him and the democrat candidate gets chosen??
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on February 24, 2016, 01:24:08 PM
Each state has a little different rules with that but with my state (Indiana) that could certainly happen as you don't have to declare whether you're siding with one party of another.  If you do vote in the primary you have to pick if you want to vote in the Democrat or Republican party primary but that's all.  So yes if I voted in the primary (I don't, ours isn't until May and everything is decided by then) I could technically cast a Trump vote but the cost would be that I couldn't actually vote for my preferred candidate.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on February 24, 2016, 01:24:49 PM
I'm still confused, so can someone still explain who exactly is voting for all these candidates, and what is the main difference to the 'proper election'?
I mean, couldn't the democrats be voting for Trump, so that then in the final one no one likes him and the democrat candidate gets chosen??

This is the primary election to determine who will run for each party. (It will narrow down to 1 Republican candidate and 1 Democrat candidate to run against each other. It gives people the chance to say who they want to represent their party and interests in the election)

If you are a registered Democrat, you can only vote in the Democratic primary, if you are Republican you can only vote on the Republican candidates. The rules are actually different per state, so if there could a state that does it differently. In North Carolina this is the way it is. When I was younger if you were registered Unaffiliated you were not allowed to vote in the primary at all. They have changed that now so that you can pick one primary or the other, but you may not vote for both. Again, different states may have different rules.

So, the only way a Democrat could vote for a Republican (at least in NC) would be to change their voter registration to be affiliated with the Republican party or Unaffiliated, and they would then also be waiving their right to vote for their actual party in the primary.

Sad, but this is actually how the American people are voting. There are actually people that want him in office.

EDIT: Sorry, was posting about the same time as Hedin, and our responses are similar :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on February 24, 2016, 01:29:46 PM
Yours was more detailed.   ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on February 24, 2016, 01:54:46 PM
Thanks!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on February 24, 2016, 02:15:11 PM
Trump wins Nevada.

While I disagree with basically everything Donald Trump stands for, I understand why this is his third win in a row. Americans are tired of the way things work (or don't) in Washington. We're tired of the gridlock, tired of nothing getting done. So, I get it, we want an outsider in the White House this time around. But I think with the nomination (if) of Donald Trump for the Republicans, that pretty much hands the election to Democrats this November.

I must say, if you're a political nerd like me, this presidential season has been fun to watch.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 24, 2016, 02:34:59 PM
this tweet storm of punditry on why trump won't actually be president is pretty grand.  it'll give you back faith in the american people as a whole, if not the gop base.

https://storify.com/DemFromCT/jeet-heer-on-donald-trump-s-non-chances-to-win-the
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on February 24, 2016, 02:53:33 PM


Americans are tired of the way things work (or don't) in Washington. We're tired of the gridlock, tired of nothing getting done. So, I get it, we want an outsider in the White House this time around.
I think m3mnoch posted a few pages back how much got done by Obama and it was an impressive list.
People just like to complain.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on February 24, 2016, 03:18:13 PM
*carefully steps back in after a few days of staying away*

Meanwhile in the UK, the news is all about the referendum on Brexit / Bremain, and a UKIP supporter just released this beauty:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBi-KXc0CRk[/youtube]

As for Trump, imagining him as Commander in Chief of the US is a nightmarish prospect for the whole world.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on February 24, 2016, 03:24:23 PM
I think m3mnoch posted a few pages back how much got done by Obama and it was an impressive list.
People just like to complain.

No, I understand. I personally voted for Obama twice (I support Bernie in this election) and am aware of his (many) accomplishments. But for those Americans still hurting in this economy, it doesn't feel like anything is getting done. And honestly, with a Republican House and Senate, right now not much is getting done.

And I don't think people just like to complain for the most part. Personally, my complaints about healthcare being extremely expensive (high co-pays, deductables and being underinsured) and low wages isn't me complaining because I enjoy complaining. They're legit complaints. While I agree the ACA in general is a good thing and should exist, it hasn't helped me financially. I'm paying WAY more than I've ever paid for healthcare and I have very high co-pays (it used to cost me $50 to visit the ER, now it's $250. Prescriptions used to cost me $5 a piece, now they're $25. A specialist visit used to cost $15, now it's $60. I had to get a CAT scan done recently that cost me $500), deductibles and I'm underinsured. So, I think saying people just like to complain isn't a very fair analysis.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on February 24, 2016, 03:34:00 PM
[As for Trump, imagining him as Commander in Chief of the US is a nightmarish prospect for the whole world.

Yes, I think this is why I'm nervous about this election year, even though much of the punditry is assuring me Trump would get crushed in the general election. That same punditry was previously telling me he'd never be a frontrunner for the Republication nomination, and look where he is now.

I guess I just don't have as much faith in common sense or sanity as I used to. Keep in mind, I live in a country where a significant portion of the population currently believes the government is poisoning us with "chemtrails", that vaccinating your children causes autism, and that climate change is a hoax. Americans have an increasingly tenuous relationship with facts and many now see being educated as a negative, so when people tell me "Naw, there's no way Trump could be elected President", as much as I want to believe it, it still seems like a possibility.

This, as Saraband says, is terrifying. I feel like we're moving steadily toward the world represented in Idiocracy, and that's not the world I want to leave for my little girl and grandchildren.

EDIT: On reflection, this post may a bit more doom and gloom than I intended. I do appreciate the reassurance from various quarters that Trump won't be elected president. I just worry that people dismissing the viability of his candidacy is part of what's gotten him this far in the first place.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on February 24, 2016, 03:48:34 PM
it used to cost me $50 to visit the ER, now it's $250. Prescriptions used to cost me $5 a piece, now they're $25. A specialist visit used to cost $15, now it's $60. I had to get a CAT scan done recently that cost me $500
Gosh!!!
And you pay to go into ER? Anyone, not just those that are wasting their time?
What if you don't have money, do they let you die?


Saraband, gosh - that would be funny if it wasn't serious :-\
The ignorance (on both sides) is just unbelievable!
This week I saw an interview on Channel 4 news with this farmer and Jon asked him why he was voting out, wouldn't he lose all the european subsidies and then their position would be worse, competing with the other farmers. His reply: oh, the government won't let us fall, they'll continue to pay us subsidies.
Yes, with whose money? ::)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on February 24, 2016, 04:00:13 PM
Gosh!!!
And you pay to go into ER? Anyone, not just those that are wasting their time?
What if you don't have money, do they let you die?

Yes, you have to pay to visit the ER. If you don't have money, they'll still treat you (they have to by law), but that doesn't mean I don't have to pay it back.

It's very expensive. So my struggles have been to either pay rent and buy food, or to see the doctor. I can't afford to do all three, unfortunately. And that brings me back to stagnant wages. I've been working IT for a law firm for 12 years now and in those 12 years, I haven't seen any significant pay increase. But the cost of living all around me has gone up.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 24, 2016, 04:03:21 PM
And for those in the UK this is why you should be fighting the outsourcing of the health service to American medical companies. See which company manages your GP now you may be surprised.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on February 24, 2016, 04:27:41 PM
I must say, if you're a political nerd like me, this presidential season has been fun to watch.

It's been fascinating.  I'm going to be interested to see if Trump gets the nomination how it would affect all of the other elections.  Right now Republicans have Congress and have control in a majority of the states, will there be enough anti-Trump voters out there that will sway the control of those areas?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 24, 2016, 05:03:47 PM
Trump street art in Bristol

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Donald-Trump-compared-Hitler-new-street-art/story-28801904-detail/story.html (http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Donald-Trump-compared-Hitler-new-street-art/story-28801904-detail/story.html)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Justan Henner on February 24, 2016, 05:12:47 PM
Trump street art in Bristol

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Donald-Trump-compared-Hitler-new-street-art/story-28801904-detail/story.html (http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Donald-Trump-compared-Hitler-new-street-art/story-28801904-detail/story.html)

It's always fun when the left and Glenn Beck start agreeing on things.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 24, 2016, 06:30:56 PM
Pegasus on the left? Or were you talking about Glen Beck  ;D

American street artist living in London trying too hard to monetize everything he does. Banksy he aint.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Justan Henner on February 24, 2016, 06:39:02 PM
Pegasus on the left? Or were you talking about Glen Beck  ;D

American street artist living in London trying too hard to monetize everything he does. Banksy he aint.

Ah. No idea who the street artist is, but it's a theme I've seen building for a few days/weeks now in a couple left-leaning websites. I was more commenting on that, this just happen to spark the recollection.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 24, 2016, 06:49:51 PM
I think the serious left is aware of Godwins Law. I am sure Trumps supporters would claim victory the moment he was compared to Hitler in serious debate.
Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on February 24, 2016, 08:28:47 PM
Sorry, Beardking. It sounded more generalized and condescending as it was meant. Of course Obama didn't right every wrong and a lot of people hoped for as much change as he promised - which they didn't get.

I still believe that even the best leader, who manages it to make everyone's life significantly better, will hear complaints.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on February 24, 2016, 09:28:43 PM
Sorry, Beardking. It sounded more generalized and condescending as it was meant. Of course Obama didn't right every wrong and a lot of people hoped for as much change as he promised - which they didn't get.

I still believe that even the best leader, who manages it to make everyone's life significantly better, will hear complaints.

No worries. :)

And you're absolutely right that even the best leader would hear complaints. Such is life.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Justan Henner on February 24, 2016, 10:48:48 PM

I wish someone had prepared me to find a major in highschool, which would have helped me choose the right college, which then would have put me on the path to a career. Maybe I am just blinded in my age, since its been a while since I was in school, but I don't recall a large effort going into preparing me for life outside of standardized testing.


Sorry to go back in topics a bit, but I thought I'd address this, because I had a fairly different experience.

It's possible that it's a phenomenon that began just as I got into high school, or perhaps its due to the culture in the area I attended school, but as someone who graduated college in 2013, I feel like this warning of "choose a profitable major" was one that was constantly spoken of, at least at the three schools I attended (high school, community college, and at my university, though less so at the university).

There was always that supposedly opposing theme of: "pursue your dreams, find a career you really love, don't settle for anything less!" and it was a pretty powerful theme, which seemed to envelope the majority of schooling, but I feel like that was more something you'd hear from liberal arts teachers, whereas the college/high school counselors were constantly suggesting that we find something worthy of the large investment. At my high school, the standard advice from the counselors was always "if you don't already know what you want to do with your life, go to community college instead of a 4 year. Don't spend the money unless you already have a plan."

I remember I had one teacher in high school that had worked in mechanical engineering most of her career, who was always giving us suggestions on related fields that were relatively cheap to get into (two year degrees, trade schooling, and so forth) that made a decent living, and even offered to help many of her students find jobs at places she had worked for, or with contacts she had made in the industry. It did seem, however, that it was always the teachers in STEM fields that gave this sort of advice, and at the high school I attended these weren't very popular classes short of the required minimum of basic chemistry, physics, and algebra. I think maybe that's how many of my friends say they never heard this advice, and it's kind of a shame (though I think a few of them are simply in denial).

But I have to admit, I'm always baffled when a friend reveals they have 100k in debt, a four year degree in Critical Analysis of Cinema, and could not foresee their inability to find work in their field.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on February 25, 2016, 12:53:45 AM

I wish someone had prepared me to find a major in highschool, which would have helped me choose the right college, which then would have put me on the path to a career. Maybe I am just blinded in my age, since its been a while since I was in school, but I don't recall a large effort going into preparing me for life outside of standardized testing.


Sorry to go back in topics a bit, but I thought I'd address this, because I had a fairly different experience.

It's possible that it's a phenomenon that began just as I got into high school, or perhaps its due to the culture in the area I attended school, but as someone who graduated college in 2013, I feel like this warning of "choose a profitable major" was one that was constantly spoken of, at least at the three schools I attended (high school, community college, and at my university, though less so at the university).

There was always that supposedly opposing theme of: "pursue your dreams, find a career you really love, don't settle for anything less!" and it was a pretty powerful theme, which seemed to envelope the majority of schooling, but I feel like that was more something you'd hear from liberal arts teachers, whereas the college/high school counselors were constantly suggesting that we find something worthy of the large investment. At my high school, the standard advice from the counselors was always "if you don't already know what you want to do with your life, go to community college instead of a 4 year. Don't spend the money unless you already have a plan."

I remember I had one teacher in high school that had worked in mechanical engineering most of her career, who was always giving us suggestions on related fields that were relatively cheap to get into (two year degrees, trade schooling, and so forth) that made a decent living, and even offered to help many of her students find jobs at places she had worked for, or with contacts she had made in the industry. It did seem, however, that it was always the teachers in STEM fields that gave this sort of advice, and at the high school I attended these weren't very popular classes short of the required minimum of basic chemistry, physics, and algebra. I think maybe that's how many of my friends say they never heard this advice, and it's kind of a shame (though I think a few of them are simply in denial).

But I have to admit, I'm always baffled when a friend reveals they have 100k in debt, a four year degree in Critical Analysis of Cinema, and could not foresee their inability to find work in their field.

My research was completely self driven,. I didn't have anyone in high school or college directing me. I am just kinda anal about certain things and was determined to become financially independent. Also, being a math and statistics geek at the time, yeah, it kinda made sense that I would look into the stats for the options. It is just pretty much how my brain likes to work.

This said, I would never advocate someone selecting a career based solely on "profitability". Yes, I did choose a major/career that has proven to be profitable, but it was something I new I was interested in and enjoyed. There were few things I hated more during my time in college than getting stuck on a group project with people you could tell chose the major based on how much money they thought they could make. They had no interest in the material, they had no aptitude for it. They really just kinda sucked at it. I still run across people like that in workforce, but it is not as bad as it was in college (I think some were weeded out before graduation, I think others were weeded out during layoffs).

What I do advocate is looking at things that you find interesting and then research what kind of career you can get in that field and what it takes to get there (and what percentage of graduates are able to find a job). And if there is truly nothing that has demand, look and see what kind of jobs you might be interested in that do have a demand.

I dunno. This is all so much easier for me to say given that I was interested in math and science and programming. When I graduated, the Engineering curriculum required pretty much zero English, foreign language, history, etc. etc. and as appalling as that might sound, at the time, I found it appealing because it meant that I could fill up on the classes I enjoyed. Hindsight, I think if I had better teachers for history, I should have enjoyed that more. I never disliked English, but when I was in college, I would much rather spend my time in a computer lab than writing a paper.

TL;DR I am a complete dork and always have been.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 25, 2016, 01:41:42 AM
I have been very lucky. I majored in Theater and English at a local state school that was inexpensive enough for my folks to cover the freight. (Both brothers were sucking up dollars and borrowing money for a very good liberal arts college. My dad was sooo happy I went state school.)

I learned I was a better director than actor.
Then I learned I was a better theater historian than director.
Still, I tried to do theater professionally after school. I did four months of dinner theater at night and children's theater in the day. Then the dinner theater realized I really couldn't dance (I could and can sing) and could not be taught.

So I learned I was a better business analyst than any of that.
And it's mostly fun.
And I can still do singing and theater and stuff on the side.
Lucky, lucky, lucky.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Justan Henner on February 25, 2016, 03:59:01 AM

This said, I would never advocate someone selecting a career based solely on "profitability". Yes, I did choose a major/career that has proven to be profitable, but it was something I new I was interested in and enjoyed. There were few things I hated more during my time in college than getting stuck on a group project with people you could tell chose the major based on how much money they thought they could make. They had no interest in the material, they had no aptitude for it. They really just kinda sucked at it. I still run across people like that in workforce, but it is not as bad as it was in college (I think some were weeded out before graduation, I think others were weeded out during layoffs).


No, me neither, however I will say, I always felt certain teachers put emphasis on it to the point of implying it was impossible to find a career that is both well paying and fulfilling. I also think there are just some skills that are a better time investment than a monetary one, especially given the availability of free education online. As someone with a degree in Mathematics, I will readily admit that a large portion of my understanding of the field comes from the internet, from places like Khan Academy and wikipedia, not from my professors. And, truth be told, for the major I studied in, my community college was a better school than the "top tier" university I attended, though I think that might've been different had I picked a major requiring a lab. Most of the transfer students I spoke to at the 4 year had the same opinion, though whether that is a problem with the university I attended, or a testament to the quality of California's community colleges, I couldn't tell you.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 29, 2016, 06:57:04 PM
spoiler to save folks who get riled up by ignorant people talking about politics from getting riled up.


myself, however, i find great entertainment in wading through the comment section in places like brietbart.  the stark ridiculousness of some americans is a downright wonder to behold.  i long ago gave up trying to convince strangers from harming themselves by voting against their self interest.  i've moved to "holding their beer while darwinism takes its course".

that being said, OMG!  this is my FAVORITE NEW THING!!
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 29, 2016, 07:07:51 PM
spoiler to save folks who get riled up by ignorant people talking about politics from getting riled up.


myself, however, i find great entertainment in wading through the comment section in places like brietbart.  the stark ridiculousness of some americans is a downright wonder to behold.  i long ago gave up trying to convince strangers from harming themselves by voting against their self interest.  i've moved to "holding their beer while darwinism takes its course".

that being said, OMG!  this is my FAVORITE NEW THING!!
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/


I think I'd lose my lunch
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 29, 2016, 07:14:51 PM
heh.  for sure.  can't blame you.  it's not for the weak of heart or people not as strong in their faith in the majority.

people who shout "we are the silent majority!" -- no.  no, you're not.  you're the exact opposite of both silent AND majority.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on February 29, 2016, 07:45:18 PM
Meanwhile, I keep wanting to post a few tidbits from Warren Buffett's letter to investors. There are some very interesting quotes from "the Sage of Omaha." Just haven't made the time.

One of the tidbits is his view of global warming. "If there's a 1% chance it's true, we must act, because the consequences are so dire." Which I'm okay with, sort of, because I believe there's problems there. (Understatements r us)

But, Dick Chaney made the same argument. See the book "The One Percent Doctrine." If there's a 1% chance that terrorists can deeply wound our country, we must act as though it is a certainty. Which he then used to justify all manner of things.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on February 29, 2016, 08:48:11 PM
Meanwhile, I keep wanting to post a few tidbits from Warren Buffett's letter to investors. There are some very interesting quotes from "the Sage of Omaha." Just haven't made the time.

One of the tidbits is his view of global warming. "If there's a 1% chance it's true, we must act, because the consequences are so dire." Which I'm okay with, sort of, because I believe there's problems there. (Understatements r us)

But, Dick Chaney made the same argument. See the book "The One Percent Doctrine." If there's a 1% chance that terrorists can deeply wound our country, we must act as though it is a certainty. Which he then used to justify all manner of things.

the difference:

1% trump:  by taking action, the only consequence is that someone else not as bad can take office.

1% terrorists:  by taking action, we give up parts of our freedom.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on February 29, 2016, 10:25:32 PM
This is interesting. I'm sure a lot of you have seen it by now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnpO_RTSNmQ
I doubt it'll change any of the Trump supporters minds, if they even click on the video, but still.
As long as the independent guy doesn't win who wants to regulate soda, I'll be alright. :P
Seriously though, I know I'm in the minority on this forum, but Trump VS. Sanders or Clinton doesn't look good from where I sit. We're going to war soon whether we like it or not. I'm just not sure if we'll use overkill and make them hate us even more, or not do enough and get attacked at home. It's going to be one of the two.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on February 29, 2016, 10:47:07 PM
This is interesting. I'm sure a lot of you have seen it by now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnpO_RTSNmQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnpO_RTSNmQ)
I doubt it'll change any of the Trump supporters minds, if they even click on the video, but still.
As long as the independent guy doesn't win who wants to regulate soda, I'll be alright. :P
Seriously though, I know I'm in the minority on this forum, but Trump VS. Sanders or Clinton doesn't look good from where I sit. We're going to war soon whether we like it or not. I'm just not sure if we'll use overkill and make them hate us even more, or not do enough and get attacked at home. It's going to be one of the two.

Donald Trump:
Quote
I know words - I have the best words.

 ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on February 29, 2016, 11:44:46 PM
Quote
But, Dick Chaney made the same argument. See the book "The One Percent Doctrine." If there's a 1% chance that terrorists can deeply wound our country, we must act as though it is a certainty. Which he then used to justify all manner of things.

What about the 99% chance that corporations buying lawmakers will deeply wound your country or doesnt that count?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on March 01, 2016, 02:26:33 PM
This is interesting. I'm sure a lot of you have seen it by now.

Ha, yup, I tend to catch Jon Oliver's bits a few days after airing, it's nice that HBO is so liberal about posting what is essentially their "premium" content on Youtube. Oliver was always a great part of The Daily Show, but since getting his own show he's done a really good job of breaking down complex topics in ways that are both easy to explain and actually funny (though that's as much a credit to his writing team as anyone).

If you want to be equally angry and amused, watch his videos on predatory Payday loans.

Seriously though, I know I'm in the minority on this forum, but Trump VS. Sanders or Clinton doesn't look good from where I sit. We're going to war soon whether we like it or not. I'm just not sure if we'll use overkill and make them hate us even more, or not do enough and get attacked at home. It's going to be one of the two.

That makes me feel bad every time you say that. :) I don't want you to feel excluded or "in the minority"! I enjoy most of your posts and had fun participating in the F-F RPG with you, as well as talking about other geek stuff. I realize there have been a few assertions you've made that have been corrected my multiple people, but I think that's in the spirit of trying to correct bad info, and not an effort to attack you over politics.

I think the majority of folks on this forum are cool with any number of political stances, ranging from left-wing to right-wing. On most of those, there's absolutely room for healthy debate. Foreign policy, economic policy, drug policy ... these are all topics on which reasonable people can disagree, and there are rational arguments to be made for many viewpoints.

I think what (might) be making you feel like you're in a minority is finding out that you've gotten bad information (or misinformation) about science. The posts I've read from you suggest that you're a decent critical thinker, and the fact that you are open to learning new things (and accept that you don't know it all) puts you ahead of many people on both sides of many arguments. But if I can paraphrase a quote from Mr. Degrasse Tyson, "science remains true whether you believe in it or not."

When we were talking about climate change earlier, you mentioned that "you aren't convinced" ... and anti-science statements like that are hard to argue, as you can't really debate settled scientific facts. There simply isn't anything to debate. It's like trying to make the case that gravity doesn't exist. There's no point.

The fact that you've gotten bad information about issues like climate change isn't your fault, nor is it something that should make you feel excluded or looked down upon. All anyone has to work with is the facts they've been presented with. But, now that you have some new facts to examine and absorb, there's nothing stopping you from doing research on your own and learning more about the reality of man-made climate change and why we have to start taking steps to mitigate it, even now.

If I had to point to one problem in the United States, specifically, that I wish we could eliminate, it would be the "politicizing" of scientific facts. For example, our military (including the Pentagon) is aware that climate change is occurring and is going to be a factor in our national security (as mentioned by Bernie Sanders, last time we discussed this).

http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2014/05/debate-goes-military-prepares-climate-change/83968/ (http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2014/05/debate-goes-military-prepares-climate-change/83968/)
Note: This is one sample of dozens of posts confirming this is the case. Google "navy asks to prepare for climate change" for more.

Yet despite the military's acceptance of climate change (funny bit of trivia - the Navy, knowing there are anti-science politicians in Congress, was even careful not to say WHY it was occurring in hopes of circumventing the science-deniers!) is not enough for some people. The Republican controlled House of Representatives actually forbid the Pentagon from preparing for climate change due to willful ignorance and science denial.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2014/05/23/House-bans-Pentagon-from-preparing-for-climate-change/5391400882186/ (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2014/05/23/House-bans-Pentagon-from-preparing-for-climate-change/5391400882186/)
Note: Again, this is just one source. Google "house forbids military from preparing for climate change" for a number of supporting sources.

This is a problem, and some of the people who forbid the military from preparing for climate change are influencing the same people who've been telling you it's a hoax. The debate in America should be "How do we slow and eventually stop climate change?" I'm sure both right-wing and left-wing folks would have plenty of ideas on that, and there's a healthy debate to be had about what we should do. But instead, certain groups on the right, supported by oil interests, have made the debate "Does climate change exist?" because it prevents them from actually having to debate what to do about it.

You've mentioned a couple of conspiracy theories in the past, but "climate change" being a hoax is a stretch even by conspiracy standards. Basically, if you are correct (and climate change is a hoax), it is a hoax perpetrated by 97% of the world's scientific community, 50% of people in the United States (about), and basically every other developed country in the world, designed to fool 50% of the American population.

So to restate - half the US and the entire world have teamed up to "punk" 50% of the United States.

The alternative, of course, is that 50% of the United States has been willfully mislead by interests who would lose profits if we accept that climate change is occurring, and that the other 50% of the US (and the rest of the entire world, and 97% of scientists) is correct that climate change is occurring. Oh, and that 3% of scientists who say "we aren't sure?" The majority are funded by oil companies.

There's nothing shameful or wrong about getting bad or incomplete information about a topic. But once you have all the facts, it's up to you to decide which case you believe is more likely. And I think once you start examining the misinformation you've been given and re-examine what you've been told about science, you'll find that you are much less "in the minority" on these forums than you think. :)

EDIT: Here's a bonus link regarding science denial, just in case you weren't disheartened enough.

Employees in Florida are currently trying to prepare for climate change while being forbidden by their Republican governor from using the words "climate change".

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/0309/Can-Florida-prepare-for-climate-change-without-saying-the-words-video (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/0309/Can-Florida-prepare-for-climate-change-without-saying-the-words-video)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on March 01, 2016, 02:26:58 PM
Democrats and Republicans arguing with each other is the political equivalent of the Special Olympics.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 01, 2016, 03:53:26 PM
oh, look!  i have more trump fun this morning!

a tweet storm waxing philosophical on the rise of the trumpinator:
https://storify.com/crofer/hilzoy-how-the-republicans-got-donald-trump
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on March 02, 2016, 11:54:08 AM
Time to beat up on some other country than Merca.  ;)

http://www.dw.com/en/study-german-wage-gap-between-men-and-women-among-europes-biggest/a-19086382 (http://www.dw.com/en/study-german-wage-gap-between-men-and-women-among-europes-biggest/a-19086382)

WOMEN
Study: German wage gap between men and women among Europe's biggest
German women earn on average 21.6 percent less than men, according to government data. Only two countries in Europe recorded wage gaps between women and men that are higher than Germany's.

[shhh]U.S. Wage gap is 23%[shh]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 02, 2016, 12:37:35 PM
Quote
Time to beat up on some other country than Merca.  ;)

http://www.dw.com/en/study-german-wage-gap-between-men-and-women-among-europes-biggest/a-19086382

WOMEN
Study: German wage gap between men and women among Europe's biggest
German women earn on average 21.6 percent less than men, according to government data. Only two countries in Europe recorded wage gaps between women and men that are higher than Germany's.

Ok the opportunities not to be in work while being paid are somwhat higher than in the USA for starters but this non article is little more than reporting that the left wrote a report to attack the centre right government. It has not compared like for like and has not taken working patterns into account.

German workers get a better deal than UK ones but here women have a working life 5 years less than men despite a longer average lifespan. Contribute below 35% of National Insurance yields, yet more money is spent on both healthcare (with good reson) and pension payments.

In the UK women under 40 have a higher disposable income than men and women over 40 have a much higher disposable income than men. I would question the validity of pay gap equality it is a popular straw man person.

In my working life I have never come across any evidence that I was paid more for doing the same work as a woman. Yet despite being illegal here it is raised to the point of a mantra that must be believed despite the stunning lack of evidence to support it. Usually now the arguement is framed in terms of women cannot break through the glass ceiling, well nor can most men.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on March 02, 2016, 12:39:38 PM
Yes, it says that if they count part-time work, the gap is 'only' 7%.

I've also never encountered this in my working life, but it might be because I've always worked for multinational companies who tend to be more open and straight-forward in their pay schemes than little companies, where potentially that can happen.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on March 02, 2016, 12:46:16 PM
Time to beat up on some other country than Merca.  ;)

http://www.dw.com/en/study-german-wage-gap-between-men-and-women-among-europes-biggest/a-19086382 (http://www.dw.com/en/study-german-wage-gap-between-men-and-women-among-europes-biggest/a-19086382)

WOMEN
Study: German wage gap between men and women among Europe's biggest
German women earn on average 21.6 percent less than men, according to government data. Only two countries in Europe recorded wage gaps between women and men that are higher than Germany's.

[shhh]U.S. Wage gap is 23%[shh]

Allow a sane feminist to educate you on this wage gap nonsense. It's been so thoroughly debunked that I don't understand why progressives regressives continue to harp on it. Maybe it's just willful ignorance.

[youtube]58arQIr882w[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 02, 2016, 04:12:00 PM
OMG!!!

[youtube]v75wCTMZoSY[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 02, 2016, 05:33:44 PM
OMG is a fair decription.

How about a new party selection method all potential candidates are put in a dark room together with one small knife. Or give them a knife each if you don't want to find out who is just lucky.
After three days the winner is let out.
They wouldn't need to be any more vicious or backstabbing but you would know that potential candidates were dedicated and had a strength of character to put themselves in harms way as well as others.

Then you could get on with electing who has the most cash spent on them.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on March 02, 2016, 07:41:36 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/uiwzdwD.png)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on March 06, 2016, 07:37:33 PM
George Takai is (again) brilliant:

(http://i.imgur.com/s8kOWXK.png)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on March 07, 2016, 06:40:59 PM
Don't let the title fool you, this is quite relevant to the political discussions around here. Well, maybe not relevant, but related.



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDgy37kPOZ4&list=FLjm4UoVGMfBua9lJ4CHlaXA[/youtube]

Personally I feel like the white circles around Trumps eyes and mouth are not make up but proof he is a blood sucking heartless vampire or a brain munching mindless zombie. But you know, that's just my opinion. 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on March 07, 2016, 09:13:51 PM
OMG!! This is incredible. ^
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 07, 2016, 09:19:06 PM
hands down, this has been my favorite video of the last few days.

warning - mildly nsfw with language.  ...after all, it *is* from collegehumor.com.
http://www.collegehumor.com/video/7036147/donald-trump-show-us-your-penis
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on March 08, 2016, 03:09:03 PM
Quoted from the King's Paws, as I didn't want to drag that thread into a political discussion.

Haha. Well, thanks to socialized dentistry, as a French, I got to afford a dentist when I had a bad tooth. Social security is such a human basic to me that I struggle to understand how the average murican can rationalize arguments against it.

The push against socialized medicine in the US comes down to two uniquely American ideas, I think. Our need to feel superior to other countries, and the common belief that anyone who doesn't have a job is a "moocher" regardless of the reasons they may not have one - being laid off, being mentally ill, being replaced by robots, etc. Doesn't matter. If you don't have a job? You're a lazy bum, and *I'm* not helping you.

Much of the rhetoric in our politics involves around the US being "the greatest country in the world!" and, because that requires us to believe other countries must be inferior - and most of those countries have socialized medicine - obviously socialized medicine is inferior. Because other countries must be inferior to the US, many assume that any socialized medical care must ALWAYS be substandard and difficult to get. That's why our common knowledge insists everyone has to wait years for surgeries, all the doctors and dentists are terrible, etc, despite many other countries having great systems.

Basically, to acknowledge healthcare as a right would require acknowledging that the US isn't the best at doing something, and that's an idea many US citizens reject on principle. That's how they can rationalize that for profit insurance is, naturally, the best idea (it's uniquely American!) despite the fact that the last thing you want the people handling your medical care thinking about is if they can make a profit off you.

Also, there's an unfortunate element of "I've got mine, so screw you", especially if you are fortunate enough to have a job (and employer paid insurance) when you fall ill or have an accident. From that perspective, why *shouldn't* you go bankrupt if you get sick, since you were lazy enough to not have a job when you fell ill or were in a car accident? I certainly don't want to pay for YOUR laziness.

What most people don't realize is, in fact, every insured person in the US DOES pay for the uninsured. Part of the reason our rates are so high is because we're paying for all the emergency room visits from uninsured people. But, try explaining that to the average low-information voter. They don't see the cost at all - instead, they strongly believe that any push toward socialized medicine means we'd simply be "stealing" money from their paycheck to pay for moochers. They don't understand that's exactly what's already happening.

Here's a perfect example of the American disconnect between health care as a right. The original story seems to no longer be hosted, and I acknowledge Gawker is a very liberal site, but the facts are pretty much as presented.

http://gawker.com/man-who-would-rather-go-blind-than-get-obamacare-now-go-1704019495 (http://gawker.com/man-who-would-rather-go-blind-than-get-obamacare-now-go-1704019495)

EDIT: Just in the interest of being clear, I should also add that "ObamaCare" (as we've labeled the Affordable Care Act") has a large number of problems, least of which is it isn't as affordable as we'd hoped. There's also a lot of resistance to it from states and just a number of problems with the way it had to be changed and watered down to pass our divided Congress. So it's not an ideal solution by any means, and I'm not claiming it is.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nora on March 09, 2016, 12:32:59 AM
Another large part of it, I reckon, is the post-cold war blue fear of the word 'socialised'. Anything related to socialism sounds like communism to americans.

To us French, there is the middle ground, then on each sides the right (liberal) and far right (extremists), and the left (socialist) and the far left (extremists : communists, working parties).
Communism ? Socialism.
From our french point of view, the most socialist of your politician is Far-right. It's really like different worlds....
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 09, 2016, 01:09:04 AM
A great description @tebakutis (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=31262) however the rest of the world cannot figure out how you have 1/3 of the worlds economy and 3rd world infant mortality rates. It can only be a selective form of madness. Nobody could con all of you this long surely.

setting up the NHS here was not without issues things hopefully will improve and issues get resolved. The socialism arguement is great. You build roads, have police and a standing military a federal government and all these are overlooked, but healthcare...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on March 09, 2016, 01:22:55 AM
The irony is that conservatives in the U.S. worship at the altar of real word impacts. "That [progressive idea] might sound good, but it won't work in the real world because..."  "Because" here is almost always about incentives. If government is involved, the incentives are thought to be skewed. The Market is God.

So, if government pays for healthcare, doctors won't be incented to give good care, since they're guaranteed an income. Patients won't be incented to shop or limit their health care lurchases, since they lose nothing by not being frugal. Meanwhile, the government will decide what services to provide, and this will be "rationing". So much worse than people's personal wealth determining what services they get, right?

Now... As to @Rostum (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40251)'s comment that we have 3rd world infant mortality rates. I have to object. We have second world infant mortality rates. Just saying.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on March 09, 2016, 02:02:55 AM
Maybe it's because I'm heartless or something. To me, I would rather my wealth determine what care I get than anything else. The incentives argument makes a lot of sense. Why would a doctor try harder if he knows he's going to get paid just as much as the next guy? Same goes for factory workers and the like. And also, why shouldn't we give more care to the people with more money? Family wealth is different of course, but most of the time the person's earned what they're getting through hard work. If I know I'm going to be taken care of no matter what, why should i care what job I get? I'm covered.
It's like this. If someone told me today, "Hey Justin. No matter what, we're going to let you graduate at the end of this semester and give you a great GPA, but we still want you to work hard." I would skip school except on days I wanted to see some select friends and test days. I wouldn't care if I failed every single class, because I get the same diploma as everyone else, and the same GPA.
Similarly, if I was told that, "Hey Justin. Don't worry if you become poor in life. You're taken care of either way. We'll house you, heal you, and take care of whatever you need." My response right now would be, "Great, I'm just going to graduate and sit at home."
Case and point, blind people across America. Sure, lots of them don't work because they've been told by sighted people that they can't do anything for themselves, but lots of the ones that know better sit at home anyway because there's no reason to do anything. Their parents take care of them at home, their insurance is fully covered, they even get 700 dollars a month, which I see them spend on audio games and microphones. This hurts the people like me, who try to get a job but are rejected because of the other 70 percent of our population. The people like me who could never dream of sitting at home, depending on and trusting someone enough to take care of me for the rest of my life. Why am I different from the other blindies? Because my family has a rule. At 18, get out of the house and do something with yourself. If you need to stay somewhere for a couple months, that's fine. But if you're still here at the end of three months, and we haven't seen you looking for a job, you're out.
So yes, it's heartless. I've heard the other points. "Other humans matter to." "How much you make shouldn't determine if you survive." But why not? Someone has to be at the bottom of the food chain. We all have the opportunity to move up in the world. Yes, it's harder for some, including myself. But the opportunity is still there. I want to make more money then the guy that has my same job. I want to do better than he does.
Now of course, I'm saying this in a community filled with Europeans in socialist countries, and Americans who lean farther left. The purpose of this isn't to argue and try to change any of your minds. I'm just trying to give another perspective. Honestly, I wish there were someone else around who had my same beliefs. I'm not as dedicated to putting the energy into this discussion as lots of others here. That's just where I come from.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on March 09, 2016, 02:12:47 AM
@ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103), it's funny. I started out writing my earlier post not planning to be way negative on incentives. I actually believe in them in many places that left leaning folks don't.

Take college. I agree. If there is too strong a safety net and if college is free, then where are the incentives? In my view, the government did it of college in the U.S. creates the high prices for college. Ironic.

But what I do think we should do is to look at outcomes. If single payer healthcare results in better and less expensive healthcare (and I don't have the facts, I'm just raising the if) then it should be heavily considered.

Finally I think you're right about income buying more and utter being okay. Just not as simple emthing that trumps in every single case. Better clothes? Sure. Better food? Yup. Cars, homes, etc. yes. But might there be some things where we say "wealth can buy better, but everyone gets some solid basis level of service.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 09, 2016, 03:47:36 AM
Two Nations seperated by a common language.

Quote
Now... As to @Rostum (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40251)'s comment that we have 3rd world infant mortality rates. I have to object. We have second world infant mortality rates. Just saying.

Ok @Jmack (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=37094) we discount Detroit and I will concede.



Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on March 09, 2016, 10:45:58 AM
@ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103), to me, this sounds as if you see humans as lazy, egoistic beings who never want to do more than they have to and always look for personal gain first. Seeing such a negative view of humankind in someone as young as you saddens me.

Of course, there are lazy and egoistic people who don't bother to look for a job because they get welfare, no point arguing this.
But I think that the points you made hurt more people who aren't like this than it rightly punishes those who are.

Like you, I'm usually not dedicated enough to put energy into discussions like this, but the things you wrote are so diametrical to my own view that I couldn't resist. ;)
And don't take me wrong, I'm with @tebakutis (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=31262) in appreciating that you post your points here and that you are willingly to discuss them with us. I hardly have the chance to talk to somebody with your beliefs.

Quote
Why would a doctor try harder if he knows he's going to get paid just as much as the next guy?
Because he became a doctor to actually help people? Wouldn't you try as hard as you can to save a life no matter the pay?

Quote
Family wealth is different of course, but most of the time the person's earned what they're getting through hard work.
Nope. Most rich people are rich because they inherited their wealth. They didn't do anything besides being accidentally born into a rich family. One could argue that they did even less than 'normal' workers.

Quote
If I know I'm going to be taken care of no matter what, why should i care what job I get? I'm covered.
Because being covered isn't enough? You want to go on vacation, have a car,  support a family, ...

Quote
To me, I would rather my wealth determine what care I get than anything else.
Quote
"How much you make shouldn't determine if you survive." But why not? Someone has to be at the bottom of the food chain.
You don't take into account those who suffer the most from this without being able to change something: Children. If you are born into a poor family, you don't get as much support, education and healthcare as you should. So to change your sentence above a bit: "How much your father makes should determine if you survive." Does that sound fair to you?

About the "bottom of the food chain": Sure, it's not possible (or even a good idea) that everybody earns/has the same. BUT it is possible to raise the bar. The bottom of the food chain could still be "having the minimum you need to live in dignity". Would that be so bad?

Quote
We all have the opportunity to move up in the world. Yes, it's harder for some, including myself. But the opportunity is still there.
The dishwasher millionaire is an outdated myth. That may have been possible in the 50ies or 60ies but not nowadays. It is a fairy tale spread by rich people to keep the poor in check. Give them hope and they won't revolt.

Quote
Because my family has a rule. At 18, get out of the house and do something with yourself. If you need to stay somewhere for a couple months, that's fine. But if you're still here at the end of three months, and we haven't seen you looking for a job, you're out.
That's great, because it helps you get self-reliant and independent. A friend's half-brother just turned 18 and he gets everything he wants and that's really bad because he gets no preparation at all for the world outside his home. He's totally spoiled and is only half-heartedly looking for a job or education. There will be a rude awakening someday for him and I hope it won't break him.

Quote
Now of course, I'm saying this in a community filled with Europeans in socialist countries, and Americans who lean farther left. The purpose of this isn't to argue and try to change any of your minds. I'm just trying to give another perspective. Honestly, I wish there were someone else around who had my same beliefs. I'm not as dedicated to putting the energy into this discussion as lots of others here. That's just where I come from.
The funny thing is that a lot of European countries (Germany included) have conservative/right wing governments but even those are still more left than most Americans would tolerate.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 09, 2016, 12:09:30 PM
Thank you xiagan.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on March 09, 2016, 12:46:23 PM
Another point to make is the extreme cost of healthcare. It is actually the leading cause for bankruptcies in the US. You can be a hard working contributing member of society and think you are doing fairly well. But if you don't have medical insurance, or even if you have insurance but have limited coverage (potentially high co-pays), and are hit with a catastrophic illness or injury, you are screwed. More people file for bankruptcy because of medical bills than because of job loss (almost twice as many). These are not lazy people they are just under insured.

(http://www.comparecards.com/uploads/blog/2013/01/Bankruptcy-Causes.png)


(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UvkSkHGAw7o/VI8VcZ0zddI/AAAAAAAAGng/jmldV0wH5MY/s1600/composition%2Bof%2Btradelines.JPG)

Because my family has a rule. At 18, get out of the house and do something with yourself. If you need to stay somewhere for a couple months, that's fine. But if you're still here at the end of three months, and we haven't seen you looking for a job, you're out.
At age 18, you are unlikely to be able to pay high medical bills. What would your parents do in this case right after you move out? Do you think if something bad happened and you couldn't pay your medical bills your parents would think "Hey, someone has to be at the bottom of the food chain. Guess you should have worked harder!" I can't imagine that would be the case when it is someone you know.

I think part of the problem here is assuming that everyone impacted by high medical costs is at fault in some way. They are not all lazy or milking the system. Before my parents were old enough to qualify for Medicaid, they were paying more for their medical insurance than they were for their mortgage. They were lucky they were able to do that, and honestly it was not easy, I think they had to take money out of their retirement to be able to pay for it. And this is just the insurance payments, not actual medical bills which have potential to be way higher. Not everyone is going to have that option. Having coverage shouldn't cost more than having a roof over your head.

And another issue that comes up is people who don't have insurance or have really high co-pays are less likely to get early or preventative treatment which can result in overall higher medical costs. Sometimes it may be because they choose not to, but other times it can be because it is harder to get treatment with out it. It's sad, but making health care less accessible because of the cost involved really does impact real people, not just statistics on a page. Being faced with losing your house or medical treatment is a decision I would not wish on anyone.

Pretty much, I just don't feel that one person should be more deserving of life saving medical treatment than another, but unfortunately when people are faced with the financial burden of medical costs it is not a level playing field.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nora on March 09, 2016, 01:13:18 PM
Quote
We all have the opportunity to move up in the world. Yes, it's harder for some, including myself. But the opportunity is still there.
The dishwasher millionaire is an outdated myth. That may have been possible in the 50ies or 60ies but not nowadays. It is a fairy tale spread by rich people to keep the poor in check. Give them hope and they won't revolt.

Sadly this is extremely true. Do you think that this world has room for anyone to become a millionaire? Or just 'move up in the world'? There is no room for this, and the system itself doesn't allow it.
Baby boomers carry the idea around because they grew up in it, but we're smack in the middle of a great ring of recession.
In France when the crisis hit, we even coined an expression : 'la peur du déclassement social' : meaning the fear of losing social status, and more particularly to see your children do more poorly than you.
Things in most families went like this : great grand dad was a farmer between the two wars. Grand dad was a salesman selling cigars or whatnot. Got money to put all his kids through education, so your parents are teachers or lawyers, and now they expect you to be a doctor, another teacher, or an engineer, anything white collared really.
The idea that your kids might end up a brick layer, a waiter, or a struggling graphic designer was everyone's horror. Now people are mostly worried about their kid being unemployed and struggling with a monthly state allowance... I made money selling illustrations on that topic for the press, trust my word!

There are also a few sturdy blocks to keep people down. You have a great business idea and you're ready to work your life out to make it work? Doesn't mean you'll find a bank to lend you money. Doesn't mean you won't hire someone who won't run away with the till, or competitors that won't leave you by the roadside, ect (the list of hurdles to any form of success is long and mighty).
Let's not kid ourselves. Not everyone who tries long and hard and would jump at the first opportunity makes it. Actually some of the people who work the hardest make the least and work in stress and struggle to make ends meet.

What you can't get through pure work is a lot of luck, networking, happy chance moments, ect.
But not everybody can have those. And we're not all equal anyway, no PC discourse can prevent that. We don't all have the same bag of smarts, social skills, education, higher education, financial cushion, or even goals, ect.

We don't all have the opportunity to move up because we can't all do it, don't all want it, and also because, as xiagan points out, without poor people and middle classes, the rich wouldn't exist. A large mass of people who can't escape their misery and loans is necessary in order to create riches in a capitalistic world.

The key is to find your happiness otherwise.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 09, 2016, 04:51:30 PM
Being forced to perform to a level because of the fear of what happens if you don't is not a good motivator.

@Arry (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=8809) that is a horrific chart. The concept of kicking a person while they are down is generally frowned upon.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on March 09, 2016, 05:39:46 PM

@ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103), to me, this sounds as if you see humans as lazy, egoistic beings who never want to do more than they have to and always look for personal gain first. Seeing such a negative view of humankind in someone as young as you saddens me.

Of course, there are lazy and egoistic people who don't bother to look for a job because they get welfare, no point arguing this.
But I think that the points you made hurt more people who aren't like this than it rightly punishes those who are.

Like you, I'm usually not dedicated enough to put energy into discussions like this, but the things you wrote are so diametrical to my own view that I couldn't resist. ;)
And don't take me wrong, I'm with @tebakutis (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=31262) in appreciating that you post your points here and that you are willingly to discuss them with us. I hardly have the chance to talk to somebody with your beliefs.

Quote
Why would a doctor try harder if he knows he's going to get paid just as much as the next guy?
Because he became a doctor to actually help people? Wouldn't you try as hard as you can to save a life no matter the pay?

Quote
Family wealth is different of course, but most of the time the person's earned what they're getting through hard work.
Nope. Most rich people are rich because they inherited their wealth. They didn't do anything besides being accidentally born into a rich family. One could argue that they did even less than 'normal' workers.

Quote
If I know I'm going to be taken care of no matter what, why should i care what job I get? I'm covered.
Because being covered isn't enough? You want to go on vacation, have a car,  support a family, ...

Quote
To me, I would rather my wealth determine what care I get than anything else.
Quote
"How much you make shouldn't determine if you survive." But why not? Someone has to be at the bottom of the food chain.
You don't take into account those who suffer the most from this without being able to change something: Children. If you are born into a poor family, you don't get as much support, education and healthcare as you should. So to change your sentence above a bit: "How much your father makes should determine if you survive." Does that sound fair to you?

About the "bottom of the food chain": Sure, it's not possible (or even a good idea) that everybody earns/has the same. BUT it is possible to raise the bar. The bottom of the food chain could still be "having the minimum you need to live in dignity". Would that be so bad?

Quote
We all have the opportunity to move up in the world. Yes, it's harder for some, including myself. But the opportunity is still there.
The dishwasher millionaire is an outdated myth. That may have been possible in the 50ies or 60ies but not nowadays. It is a fairy tale spread by rich people to keep the poor in check. Give them hope and they won't revolt.

Quote
Because my family has a rule. At 18, get out of the house and do something with yourself. If you need to stay somewhere for a couple months, that's fine. But if you're still here at the end of three months, and we haven't seen you looking for a job, you're out.
That's great, because it helps you get self-reliant and independent. A friend's half-brother just turned 18 and he gets everything he wants and that's really bad because he gets no preparation at all for the world outside his home. He's totally spoiled and is only half-heartedly looking for a job or education. There will be a rude awakening someday for him and I hope it won't break him.

Quote
Now of course, I'm saying this in a community filled with Europeans in socialist countries, and Americans who lean farther left. The purpose of this isn't to argue and try to change any of your minds. I'm just trying to give another perspective. Honestly, I wish there were someone else around who had my same beliefs. I'm not as dedicated to putting the energy into this discussion as lots of others here. That's just where I come from.
The funny thing is that a lot of European countries (Germany included) have conservative/right wing governments but even those are still more left than most Americans would tolerate.
Yeah, I think the key difference here is how I see humanity VS. how you see it like you stated above. I view the human race as pathetic, selfish beings who only do good things because it's been drilled into their head that it's wrong. If they can find an excuse to do something that's not technically wrong from their standards, then they do it. Of course, there will always be exceptions to the rule. Some doctors become doctors because they actually care. You can see it in the way they act, and the lengths they go to for you. I've met one or two doctors. The rest of them I view in the same light as politicians. Sure, they started out as someone wanting to help, but then the money poured in and they lost their way. When it comes down to it, we're all just selfish people. We're all just cogs in a machine. Some people get to do what they want, but others are willing to put themselves through hell just to survive. And then they look for any way possible to get ahead in life, as long as it doesn't compromise their morals too much.
Above, you said the word "fair." Does it seem fair? No. Is life fair? Definitely not. That's a lesson I learned ever since I was a little kid. Just because something's fair does not mean it will happen. There's no way to prevent it. Life is harsh, throwing every obstacle it can in an attempt to break you. And when you become stronger, the obstacles get bigger. It's just a cycle.
But a dose of optomism. It's been stated that most people can't become successful or rich through hard work. It's just luck. I don't know who said this, but it's one of my favorite quotes. "Luck is the crossroads between hard work and opportunity." Work at something long enough, and actively seek opportunities, and you'll get there. That's what I choose to believe. I cannot accept the fact that achieving what you want is impossible. I don't want to be rich. I don't see the point of it all. But if I wanted to make a million dollars a year, the only thing stopping me from getting there is myself. I think lots of people say they've tried everything, but really they've just given up. No one's ever tried everything. There's always something else you can do to achieve your goal. Society and the government will do whatever it takes to keep you down in the gutter. They don't want a regular person among the elite. But we all have the capability of being there if we really wanted to. It's just most of us don't desire it enough to try. I know I don't.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on March 09, 2016, 06:32:35 PM
I view the human race as pathetic, selfish beings who only do good things because it's been drilled into their head that it's wrong.
Oh wow. In my personal opinion, this is a very sad way of seeing life, and I'd think this just causes problems for you, in your interaction with people.
Then again, each to their own.

I believe people are innately good in general. Of course, this has caused me a few problems in the past, but even when I suffered the ultimate betrayal, after a couple of years I was back to my old self. And I feel this belief has helped make my life a good one.

And sorry if I'm confusing things, but I thought you were christian? I thought christians believed the best of people, at least that's how I was raised.

And just 2 specific cases:
* Talking with an american colleague of mine about my mental health problems, she told me that it seems to be genetic in her family, but she always treated hers through 'natural means'. However she was really worried about her 7-year old daughter, who's got the same issues but my colleague's solutions weren't working, and she will have to go to a doctor, and get proper medication. She was wondering how expensive that was going to be, since her work health insurance doesn't cover mental health. And we're talking about someone at my level, mid/high management in a big multinational company.

* I'm very sorry to say this, but when you say
Quote
Work at something long enough, and actively seek opportunities, and you'll get there. (...)But if I wanted to make a million dollars a year, the only thing stopping me from getting there is myself. I think lots of people say they've tried everything, but really they've just given up. No one's ever tried everything.
I think you're being offensive to Nora.
I'm not sure if you've read her posts about her situation, but she works really hard just to pay rent and food, and trying to find her place in the world. Yet that is not enough, and she's in a hard place.
Yes, I bet she wasn't "tried everything": I bet she hasn't tried dealing, or selling herself, or stealing, or other stuff. Would you want her to?
I'm not sure if you said that just because you're so young, but soon life will show you reality, and I hope you don't suffer too much.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on March 09, 2016, 07:15:16 PM
And sorry if I'm confusing things, but I thought you were christian? I thought christians believed the best of people, at least that's how I was raised.

* I'm very sorry to say this, but when you say
Quote
Work at something long enough, and actively seek opportunities, and you'll get there. (...)But if I wanted to make a million dollars a year, the only thing stopping me from getting there is myself. I think lots of people say they've tried everything, but really they've just given up. No one's ever tried everything.
I think you're being offensive to Nora.
I'm not sure if you've read her posts about her situation, but she works really hard just to pay rent and food, and trying to find her place in the world. Yet that is not enough, and she's in a hard place.
Yes, I bet she wasn't "tried everything": I bet she hasn't tried dealing, or selling herself, or stealing, or other stuff. Would you want her to?
I'm not sure if you said that just because you're so young, but soon life will show you reality, and I hope you don't suffer too much.
First I'll respond to the Christian thing. As a Christian, I try to be the best person I can be. Yes, I ultimately fail because no one is perfect, but it's the effort that matters. That doesn't mean I see everyone around me as good people. Life has shown me on countless occasions how terrible people are, including myself at times. There's no ignoring it. Not for me.
Second, I'm not trying to offend anyone here. In Nora's case, I have no idea what her life goals are, so I'm not in a position to say anything. Even if I did know her goals, I'm not her and I don't live with her situation, so there's no place for me to judge whether she's tried everything. If someone's life goal is to become filthy rich, their are multiple ways to do it, some of which will compromise your morals. When it comes to wealth, that's just apart of it. But let's say my goal is to become a published author. If I get stuck somewhere, I have to sit down and think, "Have I really tried everything? Have I done the research, listened to advice, etc?" There's always something new to try. For some, it's just to keep writing because they haven't fully developed their craft. For others, it's continuing to seek publishers. And for others, it's self-publishing and doing all the work necessary to market yourself. And those are only the options coming to the top of my head. There's so many different things that can be done, it's impossible to name them all. Everyone has different goals in life.
I hoep that makes a little more sense.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on March 09, 2016, 07:22:48 PM
Yeah, I think the key difference here is how I see humanity VS. how you see it like you stated above. I view the human race as pathetic, selfish beings who only do good things because it's been drilled into their head that it's wrong. If they can find an excuse to do something that's not technically wrong from their standards, then they do it.
Now I'm curious. Are your family, friends and acquaintances like this? Or are you in the lucky circumstance that most people you know closer are exceptions from how humanity generally is?

Quote
Above, you said the word "fair." Does it seem fair? No. Is life fair? Definitely not. That's a lesson I learned ever since I was a little kid. Just because something's fair does not mean it will happen. There's no way to prevent it. Life is harsh, throwing every obstacle it can in an attempt to break you. And when you become stronger, the obstacles get bigger. It's just a cycle.
Yep. Life is not fair and never will be and the sooner one learns this, the better they can prepare for it.
But we as humanity should strive as much as possible to make it more fair.
Baden-Powell (founder of the world scouting movement) said that one should "Leave this world a little better than you found it". I fully agree with this.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on March 09, 2016, 07:24:43 PM
Maybe it's because I'm heartless or something. To me, I would rather my wealth determine what care I get than anything else. The incentives argument makes a lot of sense. Why would a doctor try harder if he knows he's going to get paid just as much as the next guy? Same goes for factory workers and the like.

I think you're viewing the ability to get medical care as a luxury (as it is in the US), rather than a right (as it is in many other countries) which is where this disconnect is coming from. Healthcare isn't a luxury. It's a necessity.

Consider the following arguments equivalent to your idea that wealth level should gate healthcare and see if it changes your viewpoint.

- You shouldn't be able to vote in elections unless you make a certain amount of money. The more money you make, the more times you should be able to vote.
- You shouldn't be entitled to have the fire department come to your home and extinguish a fire unless you make a certain amount of money. Moreover, the number of rooms in your house the fire department will save are limited by your income.
- If you are accused of a crime, you shouldn't be able to have a lawyer represent you in court unless you make a particular amount of money. If you make below a certain income level, no lawyer for you.
- If you lose your job, and then you get hit by a drunk driver and are badly injured on the way home, an ambulance will not be called. You're the one who lost your job. Lazy people don't get ambulances.

I'm certain you can see how ridiculous these arguments are. I'd be confident saying that you don't agree with any of these, in regards to gating them by wealth. So why is the ability to receive healthcare any different?

In our current system, you can work 30 years as a dutiful member of society and make a decent nest egg, only to get laid off when your job is outsourced to China. You lose your employer paid insurance. Soon after, you get a rare form of cancer that costs almost a million dollars to treat over multiple years. You don't have that money, and you declare bankruptcy. Eventually, you lose your home and end up on the street. (The chart Arry posted shows how common this is).

Is this fair? Is a person who works 30 years and then loses their job right before they get sick lazy and entitled, or simply unlucky? Because in our current system, no matter why you lose your job, the penalty is "no healthcare for you."

Now, there are absolutely arguments for living within your means - at least in regards to non-critical needs. You shouldn't buy a super expensive BMW if you can't afford it (a Saturn is fine) and you shouldn't buy a multi-milliion dollar house unless you can pay the mortgage (you'll probably want a smaller home or a cheaper area). There are plenty of advantages and luxuries that wealthy people can enjoy that those who aren't wealthy cannot, but those don't dictate survival.

Being able to see a doctor when you get sick is not a luxury that should be gated by wealth, any more than the ludicrous examples (voting, access to public services, access to an ambulance) I posted above.

It's like this. If someone told me today, "Hey Justin. No matter what, we're going to let you graduate at the end of this semester and give you a great GPA, but we still want you to work hard." I would skip school except on days I wanted to see some select friends and test days. I wouldn't care if I failed every single class, because I get the same diploma as everyone else, and the same GPA.
Similarly, if I was told that, "Hey Justin. Don't worry if you become poor in life. You're taken care of either way. We'll house you, heal you, and take care of whatever you need." My response right now would be, "Great, I'm just going to graduate and sit at home."

Again, you're confusing luxuries and basic services, and you're ignoring the fact that doctors, like all other professionals, are employees whose performance is constantly evaluated. The argument that doctors will not do their job if they're "guaranteed" to get paid doesn't hold up, because it isn't true. Consider:

- Police officers get paid the same regardless of it they respond when you call 911 or not. Do you believe police officers won't respond?
- Firefighters get paid the same regardless of if they put the fire out at your house. How many cases are you aware of where firefighters just relaxed in their station as people burned?

If police officers or firefighters refuse to do their jobs, they are fired. The same would be true of doctors in a socialized system of medicine. Just because someone's salary is paid for by taxes doesn't mean they have a free pass to not do their job. Performance evaluations and the ability to hire and fire at will ensure that.

I hope this was helpful!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 09, 2016, 07:51:13 PM
personally, i don't understand why i have to payout so much of my taxpayer income to help people who are lazy or unable to work at a high level.  we should be justly compensated on our willingness to earn wealth.  anyone else is just not working hard enough.  the government is taking my money.  i should see the benefits.

i don't understand why i have to pay more taxes than someone else who can take huge tax deductions just because they have disabled dependents.  they didn't do anything to earn that.  and, why do i have to pay extra taxes on top of that for government enabled disability benefits?  they're just another form of entitlement that yet again hasn't been earned.  those people aren't able to contribute as much to society and the tax base as i do, so they shouldn't get as much of the benefit.  maybe it sounds harsh, but i think it just sucks to be them.

in fact, disabled persons need to get out of my way because in order for me to make more wealth, i need to maximize worker productivity -- and supporting them is a burden.  they're not as fast and require too many costly, physical considerations.  getting an able-bodied person in the position instead will increase the chances of my company doing well which directly impacts my ability to earn wealth.  why should i foot the bill for them?  it's a zero-sum game, so in order for me to win, someone has to lose.

i think we just need to leave the chaff behind so the rest of us can get ahead.

...

now, obviously, i don't believe any of that crap.

i like people.  i want happiness and fulfillment for everyone.  just like, if i were a single person without kids, i would still happily pay taxes to support public schools in order to not have to live in a nation of idiots -- i would happily transfer all the extra money used in emergency room care (many of my relatives use this as their "free health care option") to work more on preventative care.  that way, i'm not living in a nation of sickness and plague.

it's the rising tide lifts all boats thing.  if you've looked critically at the world long enough, you start to understand that it's not black and white -- it's gray.  lots of deep, sticky gray.

problems that are truly black and white are really, really easy to solve.  unfortunately, first-world countries rarely encounter those kinds of issues anymore.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on March 09, 2016, 08:22:32 PM
Maybe it's because I'm heartless or something. To me, I would rather my wealth determine what care I get than anything else. The incentives argument makes a lot of sense. Why would a doctor try harder if he knows he's going to get paid just as much as the next guy? Same goes for factory workers and the like.

I think you're viewing the ability to get medical care as a luxury (as it is in the US), rather than a right (as it is in many other countries) which is where this disconnect is coming from. Healthcare isn't a luxury. It's a necessity.

Consider the following arguments equivalent to your idea that wealth level should gate healthcare and see if it changes your viewpoint.

- You shouldn't be able to vote in elections unless you make a certain amount of money. The more money you make, the more times you should be able to vote.
- You shouldn't be entitled to have the fire department come to your home and extinguish a fire unless you make a certain amount of money. Moreover, the number of rooms in your house the fire department will save are limited by your income.
- If you are accused of a crime, you shouldn't be able to have a lawyer represent you in court unless you make a particular amount of money. If you make below a certain income level, no lawyer for you.
- If you lose your job, and then you get hit by a drunk driver and are badly injured on the way home, an ambulance will not be called. You're the one who lost your job. Lazy people don't get ambulances.

I'm certain you can see how ridiculous these arguments are. I'd be confident saying that you don't agree with any of these, in regards to gating them by wealth. So why is the ability to receive healthcare any different?

In our current system, you can work 30 years as a dutiful member of society and make a decent nest egg, only to get laid off when your job is outsourced to China. You lose your employer paid insurance. Soon after, you get a rare form of cancer that costs almost a million dollars to treat over multiple years. You don't have that money, and you declare bankruptcy. Eventually, you lose your home and end up on the street. (The chart Arry posted shows how common this is).

Is this fair? Is a person who works 30 years and then loses their job right before they get sick lazy and entitled, or simply unlucky? Because in our current system, no matter why you lose your job, the penalty is "no healthcare for you."

Now, there are absolutely arguments for living within your means - at least in regards to non-critical needs. You shouldn't buy a super expensive BMW if you can't afford it (a Saturn is fine) and you shouldn't buy a multi-milliion dollar house unless you can pay the mortgage (you'll probably want a smaller home or a cheaper area). There are plenty of advantages and luxuries that wealthy people can enjoy that those who aren't wealthy cannot, but those don't dictate survival.

Being able to see a doctor when you get sick is not a luxury that should be gated by wealth, any more than the ludicrous examples (voting, access to public services, access to an ambulance) I posted above.

It's like this. If someone told me today, "Hey Justin. No matter what, we're going to let you graduate at the end of this semester and give you a great GPA, but we still want you to work hard." I would skip school except on days I wanted to see some select friends and test days. I wouldn't care if I failed every single class, because I get the same diploma as everyone else, and the same GPA.
Similarly, if I was told that, "Hey Justin. Don't worry if you become poor in life. You're taken care of either way. We'll house you, heal you, and take care of whatever you need." My response right now would be, "Great, I'm just going to graduate and sit at home."

Again, you're confusing luxuries and basic services, and you're ignoring the fact that doctors, like all other professionals, are employees whose performance is constantly evaluated. The argument that doctors will not do their job if they're "guaranteed" to get paid doesn't hold up, because it isn't true. Consider:

- Police officers get paid the same regardless of it they respond when you call 911 or not. Do you believe police officers won't respond?
- Firefighters get paid the same regardless of if they put the fire out at your house. How many cases are you aware of where firefighters just relaxed in their station as people burned?

If police officers or firefighters refuse to do their jobs, they are fired. The same would be true of doctors in a socialized system of medicine. Just because someone's salary is paid for by taxes doesn't mean they have a free pass to not do their job. Performance evaluations and the ability to hire and fire at will ensure that.

I hope this was helpful!
I now point to teachers. The measures that were supposed to make sure they don't suck are standardized testing. And look how well that's turned out.
Take a look at John Olliver's Standardized Testing episode. It explains everything there.
When it comes to teachers, all they do is teach to the test. It doesn't matter if they're good or not. they just have to find a study guide within two weeks of the test, make their students take it, and then pretty much everyone passes making the teacher look like they're doing their job well. From my own experience, most of them are not. There are few teachers who can actually teach well.
So based on how this system went, the evaluations for doctors idea doesn't look promising. As far as cops and firefighters go, they get fired because they're not doing their job. There's plenty of cops out there who only do the minimum required, because they don't care. And then there's places where cop's get incentives for arresting more people and closing the most cases, so they work extremely hard. Sometimes they work too hard, and arrest people for stupid things. As for fighting fires, their "minimum" is pretty high. Put the fire out, rescue people inside, etc. That's a lot of work. They really don't have a choice, and if you're in that job, you're most likely passionate about stopping fires and saving people. That's a lot of hard work.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on March 09, 2016, 08:30:51 PM
As for fighting fires, their "minimum" is pretty high. Put the fire out, rescue people inside, etc. That's a lot of work. They really don't have a choice, and if you're in that job, you're most likely passionate about stopping fires and saving people. That's a lot of hard work.

I'm still not clear on this element, though. Why do you think this is true of firefighters (if you're in that job, you're most likely passionate about stopping fires and saving people) and not doctors?

Ideally, I'd like to better understand your thought process, but I'm unclear how the claim that doctors would work less hard in a socialized system (even if it was true) justifies allowing hard-working people to lose their jobs, get sick, and end up going bankrupt.

Essentially, I still don't have a good understanding of why you're convinced that the right to receive decent medical care should be gated by wealth. There are a number of reasons people may not have healthcare in the current US system that have nothing to do with being "lazy".
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 09, 2016, 09:07:56 PM
As for fighting fires, their "minimum" is pretty high. Put the fire out, rescue people inside, etc. That's a lot of work. They really don't have a choice, and if you're in that job, you're most likely passionate about stopping fires and saving people. That's a lot of hard work.

I'm still not clear on this element, though. Why do you think this is true of firefighters (if you're in that job, you're most likely passionate about stopping fires and saving people) and not doctors?

Ideally, I'd like to better understand your thought process, but I'm unclear how the claim that doctors would work less hard in a socialized system (even if it was true) justifies allowing hard-working people to lose their jobs, get sick, and end up going bankrupt.

Essentially, I still don't have a good understanding of why you're convinced that the right to receive decent medical care should be gated by wealth. There are a number of reasons people may not have healthcare in the current US system that have nothing to do with being "lazy".

duh.  because firefighters are heroes.

seriously tho, emergency room doctors handily disprove that notion. about half the emergency room visits in the u.s. are uninsured people who can't pay according to the cdc.  http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/emergency_room_use_january-june_2011.pdf
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 10, 2016, 01:27:15 AM
Quote
personally, i don't understand why i have to payout so much of my taxpayer income to help people who are lazy or unable to work at a high level.  we should be justly compensated on our willingness to earn wealth.  anyone else is just not working hard enough.  the government is taking my money.  i should see the benefits.

But you don't pay much tax.

Go to Scandinavia and pay out 50%+  of your earnings in tax but you get great services for it.
Go to most of Europe and you are paying close to 50% by the time you add all the direct and indirect taxes.

I would be delighted for the opportunity to earn at present. Sadly doing what I do the work has gone or is going east and I am competing with guys who are looking one or two levels below their qualifications and I am having to do likewise. Probability is I wind up starting again.

Now with nearly 26 years working without a break, contributing I would consider I what I have paid over the years should cut me a little slack.
You may have noticed your tax revenues have been spent on important things like bailing out private banks and ensuring the super rich stay that way. So you can see the benifits you just wont get them.

I feel any society should be judged on how it treats the lowest and most vunrable members, but thats just my opinion.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on March 10, 2016, 01:47:27 AM
(note that you quoted something that was supposed to be a wind-up, see further down that post...)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on March 10, 2016, 08:35:29 AM
It's shocking to watch the latest Republican debates side by side with the Democratic ones.

"I've got small hands but a huge d**k" vs discussions on student debt, Affordable Care against Single Payer, immigration reform and institutionalized racism.

I can't help but think that Sanders and Clinton have had a lot of practice at debating actual policies in these last few months and that, whoever the Republican nominee is, will get decimated in the upcoming head-to-head debates. Or maybe not, as this presidential election is not short on surprises and unpredictable turns.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 10, 2016, 11:49:46 AM
Quote
(note that you quoted something that was supposed to be a wind-up, see further down that post...)

I thought at the time it was out of character. This is the problem with not sleeping you miss the obvious a take a less than objective view of what you see.

Thanks Bea and sorry Chris.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 10, 2016, 02:40:29 PM
Quote
(note that you quoted something that was supposed to be a wind-up, see further down that post...)

I thought at the time it was out of character. This is the problem with not sleeping you miss the obvious a take a less than objective view of what you see.

Thanks Bea and sorry Chris.

*pishaw*  no apologies necessary -- i took zero offense, man.  it was a non-standard post.  elephants in the room and all that.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lady Ty on March 10, 2016, 11:55:54 PM
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JCeKWhozylk/VmnUY7T_AEI/AAAAAAACCKo/yw6ega7znd8/w640-h400-p-k/15%2B-%2B1)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nighteyes on March 12, 2016, 07:50:18 PM
Been catching up on American politics. While you can't trust the Underwoods, I am not convinced by Conway.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 15, 2016, 02:16:39 PM
i've seen a couple versions.  this one is pretty good.

"these are not people"

[youtube]en_s2QnAgBE[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 15, 2016, 03:10:14 PM
Thats a worrying fit.

[youtube]AxfbcSqwzRQ[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on March 15, 2016, 07:54:49 PM
The internet came into being so that, one day, we could all appreciate this wonderful gif.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/l2JJMpbEDAwO2RbYk/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lady Ty on March 15, 2016, 11:00:08 PM
^^^ ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Can'tstop watching  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on March 16, 2016, 12:21:50 AM
Trump won Florida. This election has nothing to do with me as I'm not from there, but:

AMERICA WHAT ARE YOU DOING.

"Ted Cruz's Pastor says all gays should be executed before introducing him"

THERE IS NO HOPE RUN AWAY #!@@?!



Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on March 16, 2016, 02:07:20 AM
Much as I dislike all the major candidates for an equal number of reasons (Gary Johnson 2016!), Kasich needs to drop out so it can be Cruz v. Trump to the end, because Cruz is obviously the lesser of the two evils and actually has a shot at beating the #TrumpTrain.

The more and more I watch this election cycle, the more I'm beginning to hate winner-take-all systems through a single-member district representation.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on March 16, 2016, 07:54:19 AM
It's shocking to watch the latest Republican debates side by side with the Democratic ones.

"I've got small hands but a huge d**k" vs discussions on student debt, Affordable Care against Single Payer, immigration reform and institutionalized racism.

I can't help but think that Sanders and Clinton have had a lot of practice at debating actual policies in these last few months and that, whoever the Republican nominee is, will get decimated in the upcoming head-to-head debates. Or maybe not, as this presidential election is not short on surprises and unpredictable turns.

Well Clinton has been a self-serving, career politician for a long time. It shouldn't be surprising that she is well coached at the debates to the point where she comes off as robotic.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 16, 2016, 09:06:48 AM
Quote
Much as I dislike all the major candidates for an equal number of reasons (Gary Johnson 2016!), Kasich needs to drop out so it can be Cruz v. Trump to the end, because Cruz is obviously the lesser of the two evils and actually has a shot at beating the #TrumpTrain.

And this is the fundamental flaw with democracy sooner of later you are voting for the least worst or voting against someone rather than for someone else. Parties bring the whole serving two masters arguement to the table. Party interests are no necessarily the same as those of the people the politiciams are supposed to be representing and suddenly you find yourself choosing between two or more loathesome individuals not worth wasting your vote on, who are so far from anyone you would want to elect and in our free and fair world you are told the people have spoken.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on March 16, 2016, 10:04:08 AM
If memory Serves, when Shrub Jr. was in office, Kasich had his own show on Fox News and basically came across as a run of the mill neo-con. He's a piece of garbage.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on March 16, 2016, 12:45:07 PM
Much as I dislike all the major candidates for an equal number of reasons (Gary Johnson 2016!), Kasich needs to drop out so it can be Cruz v. Trump to the end, because Cruz is obviously the lesser of the two evils and actually has a shot at beating the #TrumpTrain.

The more and more I watch this election cycle, the more I'm beginning to hate winner-take-all systems through a single-member district representation.
In what way is Cruz the lesser of two evils? He's just as fuck headed and disturbing as Trump, his pastor literally called for the execution of gay people. Cruz is just as for throwing out muslims and anyone foreign as Trump is. He is not lesser, they are the same in two different haircuts.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on March 16, 2016, 01:11:40 PM
It's a sad day for us Bernie supporters. Does he still have a chance? Sure, but it's very improbable.

When it comes to the general election and it's Hillary vs. Trump, I of course have to vote Hillary. IMO, Trump as president would be a total disaster.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on March 16, 2016, 01:39:35 PM
Much as I dislike all the major candidates for an equal number of reasons (Gary Johnson 2016!), Kasich needs to drop out so it can be Cruz v. Trump to the end, because Cruz is obviously the lesser of the two evils and actually has a shot at beating the #TrumpTrain.

The more and more I watch this election cycle, the more I'm beginning to hate winner-take-all systems through a single-member district representation.
In what way is Cruz the lesser of two evils? He's just as fuck headed and disturbing as Trump, his pastor literally called for the execution of gay people. Cruz is just as for throwing out muslims and anyone foreign as Trump is. He is not lesser, they are the same in two different haircuts.

Honestly, Cruz scares me as much as Trump, but for different reasons, because while Trump is a shameless opportunist who I can see (if elected) possibly moderating his catastrophic positions if someone throws enough logic his way, Cruz is a true believer. Someone who truly believes our world is going to end when he's Raptured (leaving all of us non-Evangelicals to suffer and die) is not the best leader to to solve our problems or prepare for the future. Why fix anything when the world's going to end in a few decades?

Cruz also (on the record) opposes civil rights for LGBT people and is an active science denier, claiming (as many of the more extreme members of the Republican party do) that climate change is a hoax. He's clearly said that he believes the US government should make law based on the literal words of the Bible and Christian principles (in particular, his brand of Christianity) which isn't exactly "separation of church and state". So yeah, not my ideal candidate by any means.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on March 16, 2016, 01:51:05 PM
^ that is *so* scary :o
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 16, 2016, 02:45:36 PM
The whole election has become some grotesque parody of what it is supposed to be. I imagine an Xfactor type competition replacing it at some point in the near future.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on March 16, 2016, 03:27:59 PM
Much as I dislike all the major candidates for an equal number of reasons (Gary Johnson 2016!), Kasich needs to drop out so it can be Cruz v. Trump to the end, because Cruz is obviously the lesser of the two evils and actually has a shot at beating the #TrumpTrain.

The more and more I watch this election cycle, the more I'm beginning to hate winner-take-all systems through a single-member district representation.
In what way is Cruz the lesser of two evils? He's just as fuck headed and disturbing as Trump, his pastor literally called for the execution of gay people. Cruz is just as for throwing out muslims and anyone foreign as Trump is. He is not lesser, they are the same in two different haircuts.

Honestly, Cruz scares me as much as Trump, but for different reasons, because while Trump is a shameless opportunist who I can see (if elected) possibly moderating his catastrophic positions if someone throws enough logic his way, Cruz is a true believer. Someone who truly believes our world is going to end when he's Raptured (leaving all of us non-Evangelicals to suffer and die) is not the best leader to to solve our problems or prepare for the future. Why fix anything when the world's going to end in a few decades?

Cruz also (on the record) opposes civil rights for LGBT people and is an active science denier, claiming (as many of the more extreme members of the Republican party do) that climate change is a hoax. He's clearly said that he believes the US government should make law based on the literal words of the Bible and Christian principles (in particular, his brand of Christianity) which isn't exactly "separation of church and state". So yeah, not my ideal candidate by any means.

Yep, yep, yep. And what bothers me now is in polls, Sanders looks to have a much better chance of beating either in the election than Clinton. But looks like Clinton will likely take the nomination. Granted, this early one, these numbers can change drastically still. But, the larger a gap I see, the better I feel. I feel like with Trump running, he's stealing some focus from Cruz's shortcomings.  Sorry if that offends anyone, but I agree with the other points made here about Cruz.

(for those interested, you can play around with different head-to-head comparisons and see the current results here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 16, 2016, 03:33:28 PM
because, obviously, trump means democracy sucks.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/china-uses-trump-make-case-against-democracy

it'll basically be a replay of 1964:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1964

or even '68:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1968
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on March 16, 2016, 03:38:11 PM
because, obviously, trump means democracy sucks.
*sigh*

If he is elected, he surely won't be an example of why its good.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on March 16, 2016, 04:10:50 PM
Trust me, I hate Cruz for all the reasons outlined above. But Trump is a narcissistic asshole that flip-flops just as much as Hillary. At least Cruz is a principled asshole, and I can respect that compared to the rest.

Still doesn't mean I'm going to vote for him if it comes down to it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nighteyes on March 16, 2016, 05:05:35 PM
Well Dubya was supposed to be so dumb and right wing that nuclear armaggeddon was supposed to happen. Then Obama was going to change the world. Well neither happened so I am beginning to wonder if it doesn't really matter who the president is, and that life will continue much the same.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on March 16, 2016, 08:54:04 PM

Honestly, Cruz scares me as much as Trump, but for different reasons, because while Trump is a shameless opportunist who I can see (if elected) possibly moderating his catastrophic positions if someone throws enough logic his way, Cruz is a true believer. Someone who truly believes our world is going to end when he's Raptured (leaving all of us non-Evangelicals to suffer and die) is not the best leader to to solve our problems or prepare for the future. Why fix anything when the world's going to end in a few decades?
So basically you're saying why should we elect any Christian? Because that's what the majority of the religion believes.
I can't cite examples so I could easily be wrong. But we've had plenty of true Christian presidents in the past who haven't jeopardized the lines between church and state, and have done their best to make changes to the country despite the impending rapture. And even if you don't believe the world will end in the way the Bible outlines, it has to end at some point. Humans won't make it millions of years. Does that change that we still try to do our best to prolong our existence? Not from where I stand.
Could be wrong here as well, but don't the majority of beliefs say that the world will end? Christianity, Islam, Judaism. And the big one outside of religion. Science. Although some argue that it might as well be one.
Whether it be a few decades or a few centuries, it doesn't matter. The world will end. Most people believe that.
Also, I think the government knows it's nearing it's end. America is slowly dying. We probably have a century or two left before we utterly fail and collapse. Judging by what I've seen, most laws made recently haven't fixed the problem, they've just delayed the inevitable. So no politician should be voted into office, because they clearly know that the country will fall and aren't willing to fix it.
If we went by this logic, we couldn't elect anyone.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on March 16, 2016, 09:17:52 PM
Honestly, Cruz scares me as much as Trump, but for different reasons, because while Trump is a shameless opportunist who I can see (if elected) possibly moderating his catastrophic positions if someone throws enough logic his way, Cruz is a true believer. Someone who truly believes our world is going to end when he's Raptured (leaving all of us non-Evangelicals to suffer and die) is not the best leader to to solve our problems or prepare for the future. Why fix anything when the world's going to end in a few decades?
So basically you're saying why should we elect any Christian? Because that's what the majority of the religion believes.
I can't cite examples so I could easily be wrong. But we've had plenty of true Christian presidents in the past who haven't jeopardized the lines between church and state, and have done their best to make changes to the country despite the impending rapture. And even if you don't believe the world will end in the way the Bible outlines, it has to end at some point. Humans won't make it millions of years. Does that change that we still try to do our best to prolong our existence? Not from where I stand.
Could be wrong here as well, but don't the majority of beliefs say that the world will end? Christianity, Islam, Judaism. And the big one outside of religion. Science. Although some argue that it might as well be one.
Whether it be a few decades or a few centuries, it doesn't matter. The world will end. Most people believe that.
Also, I think the government knows it's nearing it's end. America is slowly dying. We probably have a century or two left before we utterly fail and collapse. Judging by what I've seen, most laws made recently haven't fixed the problem, they've just delayed the inevitable. So no politician should be voted into office, because they clearly know that the country will fall and aren't willing to fix it.
If we went by this logic, we couldn't elect anyone.


There's quite a big difference between the logic in tebakutis's post and the logic you use at the end of your post! Very impressive straw man construction.  :P

Most civilisations throughout history collapsed. Most were fundamentally more stable than our society - they actually lived within their means, an alien concept to the modern world - and they survived for a lot longer than ours has. But that doesn't mean modern civilisation will inevitably collapse.

Not all societies throughout history collapsed. Many, confronted with challenges that threatened to wipe them out, changed their ways and survived. We can analyse the past and learn from our mistakes, extrapolate the trends and aim towards a better world for the future.

There's a world of difference between someone who thinks that our current situation is fundamentally unstable and someone who believes that the whole world will end in a couple of decades.

The main thing that stops us from living within our means today? Cultural resistance to change. People assuming that they know best, that the way things have always been done is the way things should be done, even when all the evidence in the world points towards them being wrong.


Also, as an outsider looking in, I've always been under the distinct impression that your country has a very real problem when it comes to separation of church and state, so it surprises me that you say that's not the case!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on March 16, 2016, 09:32:38 PM

Honestly, Cruz scares me as much as Trump, but for different reasons, because while Trump is a shameless opportunist who I can see (if elected) possibly moderating his catastrophic positions if someone throws enough logic his way, Cruz is a true believer. Someone who truly believes our world is going to end when he's Raptured (leaving all of us non-Evangelicals to suffer and die) is not the best leader to to solve our problems or prepare for the future. Why fix anything when the world's going to end in a few decades?
So basically you're saying why should we elect any Christian? Because that's what the majority of the religion believes.

No, that's not my intent, and if it came across that way, I apologize. Evangelical Christians are one of many, many branches of Christianity, and, like all religions, they are welcome to worship as they wish - up until the point their personal religious beliefs cause harm to other people (this is true of any religion). Evangelicals are one of the few that believe that the world will *literally* end in the near future, complete with the Rapture, the rise of the Antichrist, and a number of other events (see the Left Behind books and movies for a good fictionalization of these beliefs).

The difference between Evangelicals and other branches (Catholics, Methodists, and so on) is that the majority of non-Evangelical Christians they don't share the literal belief that the world will end and, in some cases, are anxiously waiting for it to happen. My parents are Methodist, for example, and do not believe the world will literally end in the next 50 years. Some Christians believe every word in the Bible is literal truth, but that's not true of a number of them.

From a subjective viewpoint, I'm simply not comfortable with a person who firmly believes the world will soon end making decisions about where we want to move forward as a country for the next 5, 10, and 50 years.

Also, me saying "We can never elect a Christian" would be a rather short-sighted thing to say, since I believe every single president we've elected (yes, even Obama, despite the right-wing Facebook posts) is, in fact, a Christian. Every president I've voted for has been Christian. :)

The US has never, to my knowledge, elected an evangelical Christian, though I believe Reagan was close. If you're curious, here's a breakdown of the various branches of Christianity to which each president has belonged.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/12/almost-all-u-s-presidents-have-been-christians/ (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/12/almost-all-u-s-presidents-have-been-christians/)

And I could be wrong on that - if there's an evangelical president I'm forgetting, I'd be curious who it was.

I can't cite examples so I could easily be wrong. But we've had plenty of true Christian presidents in the past who haven't jeopardized the lines between church and state, and have done their best to make changes to the country despite the impending rapture.

I agree with you 100%. My issue with Cruz is HE HAS SPECIFICALLY SAID he wants to base our government on Christian religious beliefs. :)  If he hadn't come out and said EXACTLY THAT, I wouldn't worry about him doing it.

http://www.religionnews.com/2016/01/31/cruz-religion-evangelical-religious-liberty/ (http://www.religionnews.com/2016/01/31/cruz-religion-evangelical-religious-liberty/)

And even if you don't believe the world will end in the way the Bible outlines, it has to end at some point. Humans won't make it millions of years. Does that change that we still try to do our best to prolong our existence? Not from where I stand.

I wish many conservatives (especially those who continue to deny climate change, and actively oppose any efforts to curb it) believed what you just said. Cruz has been very vocal in his science denial. He's not a President that would take any action to curb climate change - in fact, he denies it exists and would actively work to STOP us from doing anything about it. Recall the articles I posted about the Navy and Pentagon's specific requests to prepare for climate change, and the Republican senate forbidding them from doing so. Cruz is one of the senators who blocked that action.

Could be wrong here as well, but don't the majority of beliefs say that the world will end? Christianity, Islam, Judaism. And the big one outside of religion. Science. Although some argue that it might as well be one.
Whether it be a few decades or a few centuries, it doesn't matter. The world will end. Most people believe that.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that, but I agree it's debatable. Ultimately, going back to what I said earlier, I believe in freedom of religion, up and until the point your religious beliefs cause other people harm. Actively blocking us from halting a process that is going to radically change our planet (when my granddaughter is in her 30s, much of Florida may be underwater) is causing harm. If your religious or personal beliefs mean that you are going to actively attempt to harm our country (as in my example of opposing any work to slow climate change) that is a problem.

Also, I think the government knows it's nearing it's end. America is slowly dying. We probably have a century or two left before we utterly fail and collapse. Judging by what I've seen, most laws made recently haven't fixed the problem, they've just delayed the inevitable. So no politician should be voted into office, because they clearly know that the country will fall and aren't willing to fix it.

If we went by this logic, we couldn't elect anyone.

I wouldn't agree with this. The "America is slowly dying" is part of the Tea Party (and, to a less extent, right-wing) narrative of the past 7 years, certainly, but much of that has been in the service of trying to get people to vote a Republican into office. Ultimately, there are candidates (such as both Hillary and Bernie) who have directly said they want to take action on climate change, continue to support civil rights for LGBT people, continue the economic policies that have allowed us to recover from the past 8 years (guess what ... the economy HAS turned around) and, in general, have shown themselves to be intelligent and rational, even if I don't agree with all their views.

Also, Hillary and Bernie Sanders are both "Christian" and I would vote for either of them. Because they (unlike Cruz) have NOT told me that they are going to allow their religion to shape our government.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on March 16, 2016, 10:00:43 PM
Also, I think the government knows it's nearing it's end. America is slowly dying. We probably have a century or two left before we utterly fail and collapse. Judging by what I've seen, most laws made recently haven't fixed the problem, they've just delayed the inevitable. So no politician should be voted into office, because they clearly know that the country will fall and aren't willing to fix it.

If we went by this logic, we couldn't elect anyone.

I wouldn't agree with this. The "America is slowly dying" is part of the Tea Party (and, to a less extent, right-wing) narrative of the past 7 years, certainly, but much of that has been in the service of trying to get people to vote a Republican into office. Ultimately, there are candidates (such as both Hillary and Bernie) who have directly said they want to take action on climate change, continue to support civil rights for LGBT people, continue the economic policies that have allowed us to recover from the past 8 years (guess what ... the economy HAS turned around) and, in general, have shown themselves to be intelligent and rational, even if I don't agree with all their views.

Also, Hillary and Bernie Sanders are both "Christian" and I would vote for either of them. Because they (unlike Cruz) have NOT told me that they are going to allow their religion to shape our government.
The arguments I've heard for this that make me believe we're ultimately doomed.
Big one: Our debt. Eighteen trillion? I read an article from an economist a while back that said no matter what we do there's no paying it off. How can we last when when we have no money, and no way of paying off what we owe?
Big Two: Forget politics. Society. With everything I've seen in my limited existence, I have no idea how we'll move forward with a society this stupid. It scares the hell out of me that my generation is expected to run this country. Most of us can't even count change back at the cash register without looking at the computer screen. Most people in my math class can't do a simple multiplication problem without their calculator. Most of the population doesn't even read an entire book a year. Most people aren't aware of what's happening in the world without the mainstream media telling them what to think. And so on and so forth. It's sad, it's depressing, and it is what will doom us.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on March 16, 2016, 10:29:35 PM
The arguments I've heard for this that make me believe we're ultimately doomed.
Big one: Our debt. Eighteen trillion? I read an article from an economist a while back that said no matter what we do there's no paying it off. How can we last when when we have no money, and no way of paying off what we owe?
National debt is one of those issues that everyone freaks out about when, in actuality, it's really nothing to worry about. Pretty much every country in the world has debt and, except in very rare occasions, it barely ever gets called in. And America in particular has no need to worry since nobody wants to call in the debt because almost every country in the world has some stake in the American economy and would lose money were it to collapse. Plus, a lot of countries owe debt to America so they don't want to start a cycle of debt calling.

Big Two: Forget politics. Society. With everything I've seen in my limited existence, I have no idea how we'll move forward with a society this stupid. It scares the hell out of me that my generation is expected to run this country. Most of us can't even count change back at the cash register without looking at the computer screen. Most people in my math class can't do a simple multiplication problem without their calculator. Most of the population doesn't even read an entire book a year. Most people aren't aware of what's happening in the world without the mainstream media telling them what to think. And so on and so forth. It's sad, it's depressing, and it is what will doom us.
200 years ago the vast majority of the population probably couldn't read at all, count (to any impressive degree) and the only way of learning about news was through a few newpapers or anything they heard on the grapevine. Believe me, modern day society, even with all its flaws, is a million times smarter and has access to more resources than compared to practically all of human history. We will be fine.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on March 16, 2016, 11:05:46 PM
Btw if Trump wins the election I will be spamming this thread with this gif.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/kZD8cN1MycfKw/giphy.gif)

As it is quite applicable.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 16, 2016, 11:24:33 PM
The arguments I've heard for this that make me believe we're ultimately doomed.
Big one: Our debt. Eighteen trillion? I read an article from an economist a while back that said no matter what we do there's no paying it off. How can we last when when we have no money, and no way of paying off what we owe?
National debt is one of those issues that everyone freaks out about when, in actuality, it's really nothing to worry about. Pretty much every country in the world has debt and, except in very rare occasions, it barely ever gets called in. And America in particular has no need to worry since nobody wants to call in the debt because almost every country in the world has some stake in the American economy and would lose money were it to collapse. Plus, a lot of countries owe debt to America so they don't want to start a cycle of debt calling.

this is absolutely a thing.

what annoys me even more is the comparisons to "your credit card".  that drives me crazy.
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/01/14/why-public-debt-is-not-like-credit-card-debt/
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on March 16, 2016, 11:34:58 PM
So basically, we can just keep spending money we don't have, no matter the cost?
Sounds like a solid solution. We'll just borrow money to fix all of our economic problems. Why try to minimize the debt? Most likely it'll never be called in.
Sounds very short-term.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on March 16, 2016, 11:57:29 PM
So basically, we can just keep spending money we don't have, no matter the cost?
Sounds like a solid solution. We'll just borrow money to fix all of our economic problems. Why try to minimize the debt? Most likely it'll never be called in.
Sounds very short-term.
Of course not. That's like saying just because eating one bar of chocolate a month won't seriously affect your health, you should eat and drink nothing but pure chocolate for the rest of your life.

If you do nothing but borrow money from other countries then eventually you'll owe so much that your debtors will have more to gain from calling in said debt than they will to lose from the American economy collapsing. Of course, that's even if you reach that step. In real life, if you keep borrowing and borrowing with no signs of even attempting to pay back then eventually other countries/banks will simply refuse to lend you money under the knowledge you definitely won't even try to pay it back. And then you'll be screwed when a problem arises where you really do need to borrow money. So no sane politician will ever do that.

However to reach that point, with an economy as powerful as America's, you'll probably have to have borrowed enough money to make $18 trillion look like peanuts. So the US is in no real danger of any of that happening for a very long time if ever.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nora on March 17, 2016, 03:54:12 AM
Here you go, a librarian with an opinion.

(http://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aYeMqwO_700b_v1.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on March 17, 2016, 08:51:30 AM
Here you go, a librarian with an opinion.

(http://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aYeMqwO_700b_v1.jpg)

 ::)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: night_wrtr on March 17, 2016, 10:04:26 AM
(https://media1.giphy.com/media/3o8doYRSVzXu3l000g/200w.gif)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Justan Henner on March 17, 2016, 01:11:47 PM
Here you go, a librarian with an opinion.

(http://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aYeMqwO_700b_v1.jpg)

Lol. I think the librarian was probably 100% serious given the Hitler book is written by Bill O'Reilly.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on March 17, 2016, 01:34:00 PM
Also, Hillary and Bernie Sanders are both "Christian" and I would vote for either of them. Because they (unlike Cruz) have NOT told me that they are going to allow their religion to shape our government.

FYI: Bernie is a non-religious Jewish man. :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on March 17, 2016, 01:53:30 PM
Also, Hillary and Bernie Sanders are both "Christian" and I would vote for either of them. Because they (unlike Cruz) have NOT told me that they are going to allow their religion to shape our government.

FYI: Bernie is a non-religious Jewish man. :)

Research fail on my part. Thanks. :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on March 24, 2016, 10:48:54 AM
I'll be glad when this three ring circus is over with.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 24, 2016, 07:31:15 PM
Quote
I'll be glad when this three ring circus is over with.

It will all be over soon then a select few will get much richer and the rest of you will be a step closer to living in serfdom. Unless the unlikely happens then you will be a step closer to living in a theocracy,
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on March 24, 2016, 08:06:19 PM
So apparently my one year anniversary will be on Inauguration Day. Lovely.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on March 24, 2016, 08:54:43 PM
So apparently my one year anniversary will be on Inauguration Day. Lovely.
Oooh I have to ask: anniversary of what?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Eclipse on March 24, 2016, 09:12:07 PM
Going out with his G/F maybe
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on March 24, 2016, 10:20:56 PM
Going out with his G/F maybe

Yep. Official date haha.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on March 25, 2016, 08:22:00 AM
Going out with his G/F maybe

Yep. Official date haha.
Oooooh, nice ;D
(just *when* is inauguration day? asking on behalf of non-americans)

Edit: I googled it - Jan 20. Wow, so it's really recent, hurrah for Chilly and lots of good luck - she better deserve you ;)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on March 25, 2016, 01:15:28 PM
Quote
I'll be glad when this three ring circus is over with.

It will all be over soon then a select few will get much richer and the rest of you will be a step closer to living in serfdom. Unless the unlikely happens then you will be a step closer to living in a theocracy,

So business as usual?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on March 25, 2016, 01:20:21 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/T6qkYfw.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 25, 2016, 01:25:14 PM
that ^^^ is quite possibly the most amazing thing i've seen in a while.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on March 25, 2016, 01:28:11 PM
that ^^^ is quite possibly the most amazing thing i've seen in a while.

Hopefully they'd all be killed off before the end of the series.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 25, 2016, 01:30:08 PM
Possibly the fantasising of the politicians is the most dangerous thing to come out of the campaign. It masks the very real faults and short comings of all the candidates and draws peoples attention away from whats going on in the background and where the money is coming from.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: CryptofCthulhu on March 25, 2016, 01:34:04 PM
Possibly the fantasising of the politicians is the most dangerous thing to come out of the campaign. It masks the very real faults and short comings of all the candidates and draws peoples attention away from whats going on in the background and where the money is coming from.

Agreed. And because what you said is happening means the media is doing a hell of a job, like they always do.

Drum up emotions and your job is half done. Us vs Them every single time. Divide and conquer.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 25, 2016, 02:18:12 PM
if it makes you guys feel better, i saw this today:
http://www.nationalmemo.com/nominating-trump-would-be-an-electoral-bloodbath-weekly-standard/

* disclaimer:  national memo is a HARD CORE liberal mouthpiece - if that makes you squirm, i don't recommend clicking beyond that one page.  however, the weekly standard folks they're quoting lean right, so the transcript is from a conservative's point of view.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 25, 2016, 06:30:22 PM
Quote
national memo is a HARD CORE liberal mouthpiece

So about Mid Rightwing in European terms.

Sounds like pretty much the way I would expect it to go. I think long term you may see some good out of a really disasterous candidate getting elected. Niether party seems to actually represent anyone but a small circle of very rich people and businesses. I dont see that changing until enough people understand the choice you are given should not be the only choices. If hilary gets the nomination and wins it is a dangerous precident if trump gets the nomination the republicans lose big time, but there is enough suspicion that an unelectable candidate gamed the system to bring in change.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 25, 2016, 10:58:08 PM
am i a terrible person because all i can think of is: "it's not going to prevent him from hobbling to the polls and voting for donald trump!"

http://mashable.com/2016/03/25/lawn-mower-explosives/
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on March 26, 2016, 01:29:50 PM
He seems to fit the demagraphic.

I must admit I can understand the attraction in such enterprises. However should you deign to ignore the instructions or not comprehend blast radius you probably shouldnt be allowed to play around with low explosives or high powered rifles. I suspect he may have used a bit more that the half pound specified.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on March 27, 2016, 03:43:39 AM
This may be as good a method of political prediction as any.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on March 28, 2016, 02:17:55 PM
Excellent weekend for our friend Birdie Sanders. :)

He won big in Alaska, Hawaii and Washington state.

[youtube]vhezYYiTUm0[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Saraband on March 30, 2016, 05:23:09 PM
This may be as good a method of political prediction as any.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s)

"The poor will be bombed into prosperity"  ;D

Can't believe I just watched the whole video  :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on March 30, 2016, 05:41:20 PM
This may be as good a method of political prediction as any.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s)

"The poor will be bombed into prosperity"  ;D

Can't believe I just watched the whole video  :P

Yikes. Bad worms.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on March 30, 2016, 06:10:25 PM
This may be as good a method of political prediction as any.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s)

"The poor will be bombed into prosperity"  ;D

Can't believe I just watched the whole video  :P

Yikes. Bad worms.

ho.  lee.  cow.

that's so awesome.  how have i note seen that yet?!?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on April 02, 2016, 11:51:08 PM
This may be as good a method of political prediction as any.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEM3wXIB4Oc?t=1m36s)

"The poor will be bombed into prosperity"  ;D

Can't believe I just watched the whole video  :P
(https://media.giphy.com/media/kZD8cN1MycfKw/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 06, 2016, 06:50:49 PM

[youtube]5F4pSt1eV98&nohtml5=False[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 09, 2016, 12:46:53 PM
Sorry for the double post.

Nice to see a reaction to the religious freedom bill. This particular bit of bigotary from the land of the free means someones belief can trump your biological function. While the law is unconstitutional and generally offensive to a lot of people both affected and not affected by it I don't think it will stand for long as the prime motivator in the USA appears to be money and money in terms of jobs and events lost that must be millions to date.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36000905 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36000905)

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Peat on April 09, 2016, 04:14:33 PM
I think it's a great reaction by Springsteen.

Meanwhile, there's a protest today in London over David Cameron's participation in tax evasion, calling on him to resign. And I'm half-pleased that this is happening and some people are trying to exercise a democratic voice, and half-disgruntled because I think there's far more important things happening in British politics and wonder why people can't concentrate on that.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nighteyes on April 09, 2016, 07:23:53 PM
I think it's a great reaction by Springsteen.

Meanwhile, there's a protest today in London over David Cameron's participation in tax evasion, calling on him to resign. And I'm half-pleased that this is happening and some people are trying to exercise a democratic voice, and half-disgruntled because I think there's far more important things happening in British politics and wonder why people can't concentrate on that.

Its pretty damn important. If the Prime Minister of the country has in the past profited from loop holes set up to circumnavigate paying taxes, what chance have we got of getting the multi millionnaires, and giant global companies to pay their fair share of taxes? 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Peat on April 09, 2016, 11:12:15 PM
I think it's a great reaction by Springsteen.

Meanwhile, there's a protest today in London over David Cameron's participation in tax evasion, calling on him to resign. And I'm half-pleased that this is happening and some people are trying to exercise a democratic voice, and half-disgruntled because I think there's far more important things happening in British politics and wonder why people can't concentrate on that.

Its pretty damn important. If the Prime Minister of the country has in the past profited from loop holes set up to circumnavigate paying taxes, what chance have we got of getting the multi millionnaires, and giant global companies to pay their fair share of taxes?

Well it was no chance before, so it's hardly got worse :p

I don't want to say it's unimportant. But compared to the NHS contracts, or whether we leave the EU, it seems small fry to me. I wish we could see the same level of passion over these issues too.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on April 10, 2016, 09:48:06 AM
Side note: @Peat (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=41189), I thought you were american!
I think it was because of your comments on american sports...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on April 10, 2016, 12:15:48 PM
Side note: @Peat (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=41189), I thought you were american!
I think it was because of your comments on american sports...

He just a global kind a guy, our @Peat (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=41189).  :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Peat on April 10, 2016, 04:30:57 PM
Side note: @Peat (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=41189), I thought you were american!
I think it was because of your comments on american sports...

Oh, I'm British, but with an American girlfriend who I've been staying with for the last couple of months. So a fairly substantial foot in both worlds at the moment :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: DireWolfSnow on April 12, 2016, 06:53:50 PM
http://www.wusa9.com/opinion/speeders-beware-new-police-interceptor-has-no-profile-light-bar/127422260


Semi-related to politics. There was some discussion that police cars should be visible and not stealthy and that stealth police are only out to catch people who set one small toe outside of the absolute law. It does seem that more and more of American police are being turned into revenue generators and only focus on enforcing laws that allow them to make a quick buck for their city or county.

For example: I was stopped and ticketed one morning because a 2 x 5 inch sticker on my windshield was out of date. This cost me over $200 in fees and half a day sitting in court to prove that my sticker was up to date and that I was a capable human being.

That same week, my store was burglarized and they made off with several hundred dollars worth of product. We called and reported it and it took several hours for someone to return our call and several days for someone to come out and take a copy of the video footage. We had them on video, we had their car make and license plate, but the police just seemed completely uncaring about this and simply went through the motions.

It just seems like they were so enthusiastic to catch someone with an outdated registration sticker, but when it came to catching someone who burglarized a business, it felt like it was much, much lower on their priority list. 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 14, 2016, 07:42:56 PM
Catching the mostly law abiding is easier and profitable catching criminals is difficult and costly.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 19, 2016, 05:37:42 PM
Quote
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/18/politics/donald-trump-9-11-7-11-mix-buffalo/index.html

Really I thought this was parody. Remember elect the most senile among you.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on April 19, 2016, 06:13:38 PM
Quote
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/18/politics/donald-trump-9-11-7-11-mix-buffalo/index.html

Really I thought this was parody. Remember elect the most senile among you.

/sigh
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on April 20, 2016, 01:56:58 AM
Welcome to the Clusterfuck of Fun:

http://gothamist.com/2016/04/18/voter_registration_lawsuit.php

http://gothamist.com/2016/04/19/brooklyn_boe_court.php

Only saw this cos I happen to follow people from NY who had problems.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 20, 2016, 09:53:30 AM
Quote
Welcome to the Clusterfuck of Fun:

http://gothamist.com/2016/04/18/voter_registration_lawsuit.php

http://gothamist.com/2016/04/19/brooklyn_boe_court.php

Only saw this cos I happen to follow people from NY who had problems.

Reading through this and what I have heard I am inclined to put this down to incompetence rather than malice. It would be far easier to lose votes at the dodgy electronic voting machines, and impossible to prove afterwards. Losing or denying voter registration would be asking for the exposure that has been reported.
I had no idea the numbers were so high though.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on April 20, 2016, 11:41:19 AM
Definitely some incompetence. But also some normal processing of lists being viewed as dodgy during a heated election cycle.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 20, 2016, 01:14:33 PM
Quote
Definitely some incompetence. But also some normal processing of lists being viewed as dodgy during a heated election cycle.

Then regardless of politics and election results this must be pursued and anyone found to have been involved punished to the full extent of the law. Rigging an election is bad enough and those involved should be imprisoned but change is only 4 years away. Breaking the process means you will never have a fair election again and its not the rational who will use this but those who can rationalise that they know whats best for everyone else.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on April 20, 2016, 03:06:16 PM
nah.  it's a sneaky party thing.

statistically speaking, republicans have repeatedly done better in elections when fewer people have come out to vote.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression_in_the_United_States

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/republicans-admit-voter-id-laws-are-aimed-at-democratic-voters.html
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 20, 2016, 06:47:36 PM
Only in the land of the free....
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 20, 2016, 11:20:02 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36094881 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36094881)

WTF America?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on April 21, 2016, 02:17:37 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36094881 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36094881)

WTF America?

You hadn't head about this? It was the flavor of the day outrage for the candidates during the Michigan primary campaign.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 21, 2016, 11:31:54 AM
No I had not, but I see how it could happen. It comes down to if you change an input variable you likely change an ouput variable and varience is what you try and remove from any process.

Either a correct risk assessment was carried out and suppressed or ignored or it was incompetant.
Then lead pipes, even in the uk we have 20th century solutions. Corroding your own infastructure will never end well and in this case released a toxic heavy metal into drinking water.
Then falsifying results because that was really going to stand up inn the light of day when people start getting admitted to hospital.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on April 21, 2016, 02:30:51 PM
I'm pretty sure today is the 203rd day where absolutely nothing has been done about the Flint water crisis.

The water pipelines in Flint are still poisoning people. And no one seems to care.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on April 21, 2016, 02:53:14 PM
it comes from treating government like a capitalistic venture -- running it like a business.

now, me?  i LOVE me some capitalism.  it got me where i am today.  i work hard, and i'm successful.  love, love, love.

however.

in capitalism, if you make bad decisions and cut the wrong corners, your business implodes, people lose their jobs and you have to file for bankruptcy protection.  it sucks, but it's not permanent and you can find a better job or start a better business.  in capitalism, there are, necessarily, a few winners and a majority of losers.

in government, if you make bad decisions and cut the wrong corners, people are permanently harmed.  or die.  or your country disappears.  you can't have losers, much less a majority of them.  you can't look at someone who might not be as talented, but who works just as hard as you do, and ruin their life just because they disagree with you.  or aren't as smart.  or don't move as fast.

you can't say "we have earned nicer water here, so we'll give them shit water to save money" because you end up poisoning them.  you don't just make the people find a new job to pay for better water, you do permanent brain damage to their children.

i love capitalism, but get it the HELL out of my government.  bureaucracy and "red tape" are there to slow your roll and force you to justify your plans and get majority agreement.  forces you to consider ALL aspects of your decisions.

it's slow and ponderous for a reason -- because failure can be permanent.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on April 21, 2016, 02:58:31 PM
Well said, @m3mnoch (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40419). Well said.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on April 21, 2016, 03:47:42 PM
it comes from treating government like a capitalistic venture -- running it like a business.

now, me?  i LOVE me some capitalism.  it got me where i am today.  i work hard, and i'm successful.  love, love, love.

however.

in capitalism, if you make bad decisions and cut the wrong corners, your business implodes, people lose their jobs and you have to file for bankruptcy protection.  it sucks, but it's not permanent and you can find a better job or start a better business.  in capitalism, there are, necessarily, a few winners and a majority of losers.

in government, if you make bad decisions and cut the wrong corners, people are permanently harmed.  or die.  or your country disappears.  you can't have losers, much less a majority of them.  you can't look at someone who might not be as talented, but who works just as hard as you do, and ruin their life just because they disagree with you.  or aren't as smart.  or don't move as fast.

you can't say "we have earned nicer water here, so we'll give them shit water to save money" because you end up poisoning them.  you don't just make the people find a new job to pay for better water, you do permanent brain damage to their children.

i love capitalism, but get it the HELL out of my government.  bureaucracy and "red tape" are there to slow your roll and force you to justify your plans and get majority agreement.  forces you to consider ALL aspects of your decisions.

it's slow and ponderous for a reason -- because failure can be permanent.

+1 to everything here. I've been following this story for awhile, long before most of the media picked up on it, and it's been an absolute horror show.

The simple understanding you've just laid out is, unfortunately, lost on many in government today, including Governor Snyder, who STILL seems confused as to why people are upset about dead people, ruined infrastructure, and poisoned babies. Running government "like a business" is what leads to horrific situations like what happened in Flint. And yet you still have people running for office *this very moment* who use "let's run the government like a business" as their starting point. That is one of several reasons I will *never* vote for a politician who endorses that approach.

As a new parent of a (now) 19 month old, knowing that there are babies and toddlers in Flint who now have permanent brain damage due to lead poisoning caused by their government's stupid decision to save a few bucks on water both saddens and infuriates me. The only thing those children and their parents did to deserve that was to live in a city that happens to be poor. I cannot even begin to imagine what those parents must be feeling, though I'd hazard a guess it's an almost overwhelming mix of agony and rage.

And now, of course, I'm pissed off just typing this. Time to go watch a video of people assembling crazy things in Fantastic Contraption or something.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 21, 2016, 06:08:31 PM
Quote
it comes from treating government like a capitalistic venture -- running it like a business.

now, me?  i LOVE me some capitalism.  it got me where i am today.  i work hard, and i'm successful.  love, love, love.

however.

I kind of agree, but have yet to see a service that was better run as a profit engine. Apply this to healthcare, transport and municipal services and those who need them most wind up getting shafted. A service should be just that. I dont want them to run at a loss but they should never be run for the profit of the few. Every example i can think of in the UK has become more expensive for less, or a poorer service while staffs pay is frozen yet managers receive obscene pay rises and bonuses.  The USA has far clearer cut examples than the Uk.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 21, 2016, 10:14:08 PM
Congrats you have made the UK warning list.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36104879 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36104879)

I wonder if I will live long enough to see America partitioned?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on April 22, 2016, 01:53:11 AM
Potential rant incoming!
So, I heard something Trump said about agreeing with allowing anyone of any gender to enter any bathroom, no operation required. While I don't agree with this because of all the problems it may cause in schools(especially middle and high schools) and could increase the opportunity for sexual assault in public bathrooms, that's not what I'm here to discuss.

My stepdad is a Trump supporter. He wanted to know the official definition of transgenders. So I explained that it's someone who identifies as the opposite sex. I'll apologize ahead of time if I'm wrong. Anyway, his response? "So they're gay." "No," I said. "If they were gay, they would have to identify as a male.
Transgenders identify as the opposite sex, therefore calling them gay could be offensive." Obviously I have no idea if a transgender male would become offended or not, but, in theory, it's a good precaution. His response? "Well those people are stupid. They're gay because they're guys. The only reason they're claiming to be transgender is for special rights. Yup. That's gotta be it."

After a second of shock, I laughed and walked away. I mean, whah? Really, what special rights does the LGBT community get? It's not like colleges have quotas that force them to accept a certain amount of students with a sexual orientation that falls under the LGBT movement. Not that I know of anyway. Where's the benefits? You get slandered, bullied, looks... Ugh. I mean, maybe they're are a number of scholarships now that only accept LGBT members that are worth a lot of money, but even that is flimsy. You can get special scholarships for being left-handed.

I just don't understand this train of thought. People will come up with any argument necessary to justify keeping their current perspective on life. As I'm sure most of you know, I've said several things here that have gone against what a lot of you think. The responses have stuck with me. While I haven't completely changed my mind due to the overwhelming amount of conflicting information on both sides, I've gone from being almost certain to neutral. I still listen, I'm just not taking a side until I know more. However, this does not seem to be the case with him.

Honestly, it's frightening. He's about 60 years old. It scares me to know that I could potentially become as old and stubborn as him. It scares me that instead of wanting to learn, people are so quick to judge. This next statement could be very wrong, but it scares me to think that people who don't continue to watch and  read current forms of entertainment could miss gaining new perspectives on things. I consider myself to be very open-minded because of all the books I've read in the past year, and the ways new ideas have been presented to me as well as teaching me to get into the head of the opposing side. It's just... Wow.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on April 22, 2016, 02:07:22 AM
'tis a good and just rant.

i'll also add that self-awareness is a very, very important trait.  if you are aware of the possibility of becoming old and stubborn, chances are you won't.  i think you're safe, man.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on April 22, 2016, 01:17:06 PM
Potential rant incoming!
So, I heard something Trump said about agreeing with allowing anyone of any gender to enter any bathroom, no operation required. While I don't agree with this because of all the problems it may cause in schools(especially middle and high schools) and could increase the opportunity for sexual assault in public bathrooms, that's not what I'm here to discuss.

Alright, I have to wade in here on this.  There is no readily available evidence that allowing transgender people to use whatever bathroom they identify with leads to sexual assault in public bathrooms.  All that is is a scare tactic based on no real fact.  If you're the person who wants to commit a sexual assault in the bathroom you're going to do that regardless.  A few months ago I wasn't pay attention in an airport and accidentally walked into a women's restroom.  As soon as I saw there were no urinals I looked down and got out of there and I don't think anyone actually noticed.  I didn't have to dress like a woman to get in there and there wasn't anything else to prevent me from going in either. 

And yes, middle school and high school kids can be huge assholes when it comes to bullying someone different than them.  They are also tend to be a lot more open and fine with issues like this than the adult population. 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on April 22, 2016, 01:27:03 PM
Potential rant incoming!
So, I heard something Trump said about agreeing with allowing anyone of any gender to enter any bathroom, no operation required. While I don't agree with this because of all the problems it may cause in schools(especially middle and high schools) and could increase the opportunity for sexual assault in public bathrooms, that's not what I'm here to discuss.

OK, I live in NC, which has that horrendous law that has triggered so much attention (it does more than just require people to use the bathrooms assigned to the gender on their birth certificates, it actually is written to nullify any local laws that provide non-discrimination support for people based on sexual orientation or gender identity.  It's a huge step backward. The bathroom aspect of it has had the most attention though (for the record, this bill was passed as something like 2AM in the morning in a special session with no advanced notice, so we had no way of knowing about it until after it was passed)

Anyway. What I seriously do no understand about the "bathroom safety" argument in support of this bill is why would a sexual predator be fine with physically assaulting someone, ignoring the laws and common sense that should prevent that, but see this "bathroom law" and think... OH NO! I can't go into that bathroom to find a victim, because there's a law against it. I shall have to find my victim somewhere else. Like Hedin said, there's no bathroom police to keep people out. Not even in NC.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 22, 2016, 01:36:56 PM
OK the reason the travel warning was given is because it gives businesses the right to refuse to serve LBGT customers on religious grounds.

The bathroom thing has become an obsession of the press but the law is more far reaching than that.
I must admit I laughed at the idea of someone born a woman but living as a man and having a functional penis being forced to use the ladies because a bunch of prissy right wing conservatives deemed it the godly thing to do.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on April 22, 2016, 02:46:05 PM
since my entire family is of the hard-liner, right-wing flavor, usually my quiver in this conversation contains two arrows:

arrow one:  so, a "girls only" sign will keep out a bad guy with a penis?  just like a "no guns" sign keeps out a bad guy with a gun?

arrow two:  sweet!  so that means it's legally required for this guy to be in there, with your 12 year-old daughter, peeing in the stall next to her.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_Angel

arguing with backwards people requires simple, cognitive-dissonance-inducing, sound-byte-friendly questions.  you can't make complex, grey-filled arguments.

"i don't mind gay people.  i just don't approve of their lifestyle because being gay is a choice."

"so, do gay animals choose to be gay?"
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 22, 2016, 03:47:38 PM
Just to add further confusion. The only transgender people i have met was a friend of friends who was born male and felt female but was attracted to women and a guy I worked with who went through the preparation for a sex change (dressing as a woman and hormone therapy) while working.

This is on the BBC today

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36092431 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36092431)

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on April 22, 2016, 06:23:55 PM
Just to add further confusion. The only transgender people i have met was a friend of friends who was born male and felt female but was attracted to women and a guy I worked with who went through the preparation for a sex change (dressing as a woman and hormone therapy) while working.

yeah.  i have two friends that i know of -- one male->female, the other female->male -- who are trans.  neither would you guess.  both married.  the female to her same wife.  the male, to his non-gay wife.

the world is so much smaller these days, which only makes it feel more complicated than it used to be.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on April 22, 2016, 08:42:29 PM
I don't think the argument is that it would stop it, I just think it makes it easier.

For example, in schools, I've heard talks about having bathrooms with no gender assigned to them. So basically guys shower with girls. Yeah, because that's a good idea. That's not what I hear about most though.

Let's say I want to go into the girl's bathroom, but I don't want to get in trouble. First solution, I'm blind, so I can just stumble in there. No big deal. But let's say I don't want to make people think of blind people in a more depressing way than they actually do. Well, what if I decided to wake up in the morning, dress  like a girl, say I'm a transgender, and walk in the bathroom? Now I have access, and since no one can prove that I'm not a transgender because, well, there is no way to prove it...

By forcing people to go in the bathroom of their same biological gender, it helps eliminate the problem. Now, if I'm a predator and I get caught in there, I can get in serious trouble. But without it, I could cast glances all day long and look at the girls, and no one could say anything to me about it since I have the right to be there. If they approached me, I could just say that It's a simple misunderstanding, and that I wasn't minding my own business. It's my word against theirs.

Now, once someone has had the surgery, by all means go ahead. You've changed your gender biologically. The chances of sexual assault have decreased. But otherwise, what's to stop people?

I get the argument. A predator will do what he's going to do regardless. But now, we're giving them a legal way to do it. As any good rule breaker knows, you only outright defy the law if there's no way to do what you want legally.

I seriously didn't want to talk about this, because I tend to make people angry. But I felt I should at the very least write something to give a perspective from the group who believes what I do. Now, feel free to tear apart each and every sentence, dispute them, and post links. I will comment if there's anything more I can contribute, but I'm not near as resourceful as the rest of you.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on April 22, 2016, 09:56:59 PM
I'll take a run at it. You never know when a fact might help dispel misperceptions or misinformation!

For example, in schools, I've heard talks about having bathrooms with no gender assigned to them. So basically guys shower with girls. Yeah, because that's a good idea. That's not what I hear about most though.

Just to clarify, the typical "Unisex" bathroom is like the bathroom in your home. There is one toilet (the sit down kind) and no urinal. There is a lock on the door of this Unisex bathroom.

If you need to use this Unisex bathroom, whether you are male or female, you enter (alone) and lock the door. No one else is in there with you, as there is only one toilet. No one else is coming in there with you, because if you are in there, you have locked the door.

Unisex bathrooms are also nice for parents with small children (too young to go to the bathroom alone) where those small children are the opposite sex of the parent who happens to be with them that day.

I'm not aware of any Unisex bathrooms with multiple toilets. And no one is arguing for Unisex showers in public schools. That's another of those made up Facebook memes from your average nutter, like how we faked the moon landing, and President Obama secretly being a Muslim or not being eligible to be president.

Do not believe every Facebook meme your crazy right-wing uncle reposts. In fact ... probably don't believe any of them. :0

Quote
By forcing people to go in the bathroom of their same biological gender, it helps eliminate the problem. Now, if I'm a predator and I get caught in there, I can get in serious trouble. But without it, I could cast glances all day long and look at the girls, and no one could say anything to me about it since I have the right to be there. If they approached me, I could just say that It's a simple misunderstanding, and that I wasn't minding my own business. It's my word against theirs.

If you are a predator in a restroom, you can already get in serious trouble. The law changes nothing. But it doesn't need too, because the problem the law purports to stop doesn't actually exist.

I don't know if you know any transgender people. If you don't, I'd recommend you get to know one. If you do, I'd like you to ask him or her about the process of transitioning.

Ask them about the year or more of therapy they must complete before the doctor approves the hormone therapy.

Ask them about that hormone therapy, and how long it takes, and how uncomfortable it is.

Ask them about how their parents reacted. Did their parents disown them? Are they still on speaking terms?

Ask them how their friends reacted. Did their friends abandon them? Do they still have all the friends they had before they started transitioning?

Ask them what it's like to date. How does the average person react (male or female) when the transgender person tells them they used to be the opposite sex? How often do they just say "oh, no worries!" and how often do they say "Oh! Well, I'd prefer not to date you then. But thanks for being honest!"

Ask them how most of the right-wing bigots who made this law will treat them. Any chance those bigots will try to take their rights away? (Spoiler: Governments across the US are trying to do that EVERY DAY).

Ask them if they're afraid people will assault or murder them because they are transgender.

When you're done asking them all of these things, ask them "Hey, is it worth going through all that bullshit just so you'll have the opportunity to stare at another person's junk in a public restroom? What? It isn't? Oh. So I guess that's not a problem, then. Good to know!"

This problem only exists in the minds of bigoted right-wing idiots in North Carolina.

Quote
Now, once someone has had the surgery, by all means go ahead. You've changed your gender biologically. The chances of sexual assault have decreased. But otherwise, what's to stop people?

But here's where this law gets even more fun. What you just wrote is not what the law allows. Have you completed sexual assignment surgery? We don't care! Only your birth certificate matters.

You MUST use the bathroom associated with your birth certificate, period. That's what this law says.

If you HAVE completed your sexual assignment surgery, and you DO have a penis, and you look like a man, you are REQUIRED (by this law) to enter the woman's restroom. If you now have a vagina, but your birth certificate says "Male", you are required to use the men's restroom. I'm sure that won't alarm or confuse anyone in those restrooms.

You must, according to the NC law, always use the bathroom assigned to the gender on your birth certificate. Because North Carolina government officials are bigoted idiots.

Quote
I get the argument. A predator will do what he's going to do regardless. But now, we're giving them a legal way to do it. As any good rule breaker knows, you only outright defy the law if there's no way to do what you want legally.

This is incorrect. The theoretical predators who want to stare at or assault people in restrooms will do so regardless of laws or signs on doors. Again, this law changes nothing.

So, moving on!

We've established above the law doesn't solve the problems it claims to solve, and in fact, the problems it claims to solve, for the most part, don't even exist. Transgender people do not go through the difficulty of changing their sex because they want to stare at people's junk.

But hey, the law doesn't have any effect, right? So what's the harm of passing it?

Here's some "fun" links!

First, there are no reported cases of transgender people attacking others in bathrooms.
http://mic.com/articles/114066/statistics-show-exactly-how-many-times-trans-people-have-attacked-you-in-bathrooms#.xyUs2YNpp (http://mic.com/articles/114066/statistics-show-exactly-how-many-times-trans-people-have-attacked-you-in-bathrooms#.xyUs2YNpp)

Second, trans people experience violence at a disproportionate rate to non-trans people!
http://www.avp.org/storage/documents/ncavp_transhvfactsheet.pdf (http://www.avp.org/storage/documents/ncavp_transhvfactsheet.pdf)

So, that's great. To restate:

There are no documented cases of a transgender woman assaulting a man in a public restroom, or elsewhere. There are a LARGE number of reported cases of transgender people being assaulted, primarily physical assaults (simply beating the shit out of them or in some cases, killing them). It happens in restrooms. It happens everywhere.

So yeah, here's a great idea. Let's force transgender women into men's restrooms. I'm sure that won't cause any confusion or problems, or put them in any danger at all.

This NC law says that if you are a transgender woman, and you have a vagina, and you are dressed like a woman, and you look like a woman, you must enter the men's restroom. Because your birth certificate lists you as a man.

Some men may simply be shocked when you enter the restroom with them. Other men may simply be angry. Angry people sometimes lash out. Transgender people already face the threat of being attacked by intolerant people wherever they go, and wherever their transgender status is known, because they are transgender, and some people believe this is a reason to assault or kill them. This bill makes that worse.

But it gets even better! Guess what? Police in NC have no idea how to enforce this law. That little nugget of wisdom wasn't included in the law, so everyone's scrambling to figure it out.

Do you put a police officer at the door to every restroom? Okay, we can't do that, because we don't have the budget or that number of officers, but hey, let's go to right-wing crazy town and say we do.

Great, so we've got a police officer standing at every restroom. So, what now?

If a transgender woman looks like a woman, what is the procedure for verifying their identity before they are allowed into the woman's restroom? Do women need to carry their birth certificates in their purse, and present them? Or do they simply need to expose themselves to the officer, so the police officer can verify they have a vagina?

But wait! What if the transgender woman has completed her surgery? She has a vagina! So how does the police officer, upon inspecting the vagina, determine if the vagina existed when the woman was born? Is it a *real* vagina? (Note: I know that's insulting and I'm using it to make a point).

How about on the other side? Do men need to whip out their penis before using the men's restroom? How does the police officer know the status of that penis? The stupidity grows and grows!

But wait. That's not all. Because the bathroom portion of the law, which is what has made the most news and what we're discussing, which is stupid, isn't even the BIGGEST part of the law. It's a minor detail!

What is the actual law? The actual law overrides the ability of any employer or public entity in North Carolina from making laws that provide equal rights for LGBT people. It also prevents employers from being punished for firing LGBT people because they are LGBT (they find it "morally unacceptable", and the law protects their ability to fire people for that reason). So the law basically provides a government sanctioned way to discriminate against LGBT people without repercussion.

Now, replace everywhere I've said transgender with "black" or "latino" and tell me how you'd feel about the law, then. Not so good, huh?

North Carolina's senators passed a law to fix a problem that doesn't exist and created many problems that now do exist, thanks to the law they passed.

These right-wing senators have this irrational, insane worry that people undergo long and painful hormone therapy, months or years of therapy, loss of family members, discrimination, and the threat of ASSAULT OR DEATH solely for the purpose of having an officially sanctioned opportunity to stare at a person's junk in a public restroom.

These people are idiots.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 22, 2016, 10:00:40 PM
Quote
For example, in schools, I've heard talks about having bathrooms with no gender assigned to them. So basically guys shower with girls. Yeah, because that's a good idea. That's not what I hear about most though.


unisex toilets tend to be stalls and no urinals so you have privacy.
I have not heard of this suggested for schools. i have used unisex communal showers and changing rooms.
It is strange for about 3 days then just seems normal. It wasn't at all erotic or arousing.
The only noted lechery was by the English girls who always seemed to shower as a group at the same time as a Norwegian blacksmith and it annoyed his wife.
The attitude was there is a big difference between nudity and sex. I think that is a good thing I am not sure it is something that can or should be imposed on children though.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on April 22, 2016, 10:20:47 PM
Well, what if I decided to wake up in the morning, dress  like a girl, say I'm a transgender, and walk in the bathroom?

that's just not realistic.

for example, back in my day, you'd get your ass kicked, and would probably spend most of the in-between-class-time stuffed in a locker.  or upside down in a garbage can.  every day from then on.

these kind of things tend to work themselves out.  dudes who are actually chicks, nobody cares about because it's known and that's how they are.  and they're probably getting harassed already.  if you're a dude who wants to be a chick that day just for the perve of it?  again, people know.  oh, and you're probably in for a football-team-laden beatdown once word gets out.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on April 22, 2016, 10:28:14 PM
These right-wing senators have this irrational, insane worry that people undergo long and painful hormone therapy, months or years of therapy, loss of family members, discrimination, and the threat of ASSAULT OR DEATH solely for the purpose of having an officially sanctioned opportunity to stare at a person's junk in a public restroom.

These people are idiots.
Oh no, no no no no no. Oh my gosh! That is not what I was trying to say at all! I know personally my family doesn't feel this way, nor do I. In fact, I can't name a single person who believes the same thing I do that people become transgender to stare at people. Holy hell, I'm sooo sorry it came across that way.

Let me try again. I'm not saying that transgenders try to stare at people. I'm saying that a creep could pretend to be a transgender person in order to gain access to the restroom. Without the surgery, it wouldn't be hard to fake it. I disagree with states like North Carolina not allowing the surgery to be taken into account.

Wow. I know I tend to make people angry, but seriously, that's not what I was trying to say at all. I'm seriously sorry for anyone, transgender or otherwise, who thought I meant that transgenders were creeps and child molesters. That is not at all the message that me nor the majority of my family is trying to get across. I can't speak for the others, but I highly doubt the majority of my conservative friends feel this way either. In fact, I've never heard it stated like the way you put it. I understand people who lean right are generalized as racists and greedy and terrible people, but honestly, we care too.

Seriously, I'm in shock and feel terrible. I could barely finish reading the post when I realized that's what you thought. It's just shocking. I'm sure people out there believe what you're saying, but... Man, I have no words.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on April 23, 2016, 12:53:35 AM
Wow. I know I tend to make people angry, but seriously, that's not what I was trying to say at all. I'm seriously sorry for anyone, transgender or otherwise, who thought I meant that transgenders were creeps and child molesters. That is not at all the message that me nor the majority of my family is trying to get across. I can't speak for the others, but I highly doubt the majority of my conservative friends feel this way either. In fact, I've never heard it stated like the way you put it. I understand people who lean right are generalized as racists and greedy and terrible people, but honestly, we care too.

Seriously, I'm in shock and feel terrible. I could barely finish reading the post when I realized that's what you thought. It's just shocking. I'm sure people out there believe what you're saying, but... Man, I have no words.

Thank you for saying that. It really is great to hear. However, I would like to comment on part of what made me write such a long post, and led to this "misunderstanding" as you put it. It's an age old political practice sometimes referred to as "dog whistling".

This has long been used politicians for centuries who want to gain the support of people with less mainstream opinions, while maintaining plausible deniability with those who would speak up against them. It's asking questions like "Would you like to live in a neighborhood with black people?" On the surface, it seems like a simple question. But when said by certain people, in certain contexts, what the person is really asking is "Would you like to live in a neighborhood with criminals?" Because all black people are criminals, obviously.

Dogwhistling is part of the argument being made by some (not all, granted, but a good number) of people who pass bills like the NC bill. The thing they claim is happening (a "creepy" straight man puts on a dress, claims to be a transgender woman, and does that solely to gawk at ladies in the bathroom) is something that never actually happens. It never has. But by making that (spurious) claim, they trivialize transgender people and their experiences, and show their constituents who oppose transgenders that they are "on their side".

Saying a man will just wake up one day and pretend to be transgender to gawk at boobs implies coming out as transgender is a casual decision. A guy will just say "I'm a girl" one day, people claim, because he thinks it's a great way to get into the women's locker room, ignoring the massive personal implications of making such a statement. They're flat out stating that people who identify as transgender *may* be doing so simply out of a sense of sexual perversion, or for some ulterior motive, rather than a fundamentally distressing feeling they are in the wrong body.

Moreover, you can also imply other things with dog whistling. For instance, the statement only a "creep" would want to go into a women's bathroom, if they were born a man. It's a nice way to imply that transgender people are creeps, and again, this is never officially said - not publically, at least. It's a "wink wink, nudge nudge" sort of thing. The people who agree with you "hear" it.

That's where the term dog-whistling comes from. When you blow a dog whistle, only dogs can hear it. So by using coded language or making statements that have obvious distressing implications, you can tell other likeminded people "Hey, I'm on your side, racist or homophobe!" without, in your view, being called to account for saying those things. And if someone calls you on it, you just say "Oh, that's not what I meant at all!"

Now, I'll be clear in that, based on what you've said, I don't think you're doing this now, nor do you believe transgender people are perverse, which again, I'm glad you've come out and said. But the way your post was written, it could imply that, and as these arguments have been made by a number of NC politicians, they *are* implying these things. Though honestly, that's the least distressing part of the NC bill.

And, I don't know if it will reassure you or the other people who are worried about the case you've mentioned (a man being able to claim to be a woman, simply for the purpose of gawking at boobs), but ... that isn't happening. It's a problem that doesn't exist. So, there's no need to be worried about it. :)

One addendum: Should also be clear that politicians from all parties have been known to do this, for different purposes. It's not a right or left wing thing.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on April 23, 2016, 01:15:47 AM
And, I don't know if it will reassure you or the other people who are worried about the case you've mentioned (a man being able to claim to be a woman, simply for the purpose of gawking at boobs), but ... that isn't happening. It's a problem that doesn't exist. So, there's no need to be worried about it. :)

One addendum: Should also be clear that politicians from all parties have been known to do this, for different purposes. It's not a right or left wing thing.
At the moment, I don't see a need for a guy to put on a dress and walk into a bathroom to look at girls. There's no transgender protection for him at the moment. If it becomes legal though, that's one of the problems we could face. How can there be any problems for a situation that hasn't been made widely legal yet?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on April 23, 2016, 02:49:24 AM
And, I don't know if it will reassure you or the other people who are worried about the case you've mentioned (a man being able to claim to be a woman, simply for the purpose of gawking at boobs), but ... that isn't happening. It's a problem that doesn't exist. So, there's no need to be worried about it. :)

One addendum: Should also be clear that politicians from all parties have been known to do this, for different purposes. It's not a right or left wing thing.
At the moment, I don't see a need for a guy to put on a dress and walk into a bathroom to look at girls. There's no transgender protection for him at the moment. If it becomes legal though, that's one of the problems we could face. How can there be any problems for a situation that hasn't been made widely legal yet?
But... a guy putting on a dress + going into a bathroom to look at girls would still be illegal. There's a lot more to being transgender than simply putting on different clothes.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lady Ty on April 23, 2016, 04:41:48 AM
Warning: Lady Ty Rant

I usually avoid contributing to this thread because I have very strong political views and do not hesitate to express and discuss them elsewhere, but do want to support and endorse what @tebakutis (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=31262) wrote about dog whistling.  It is absolutely correct and important that you should be fully aware of that and other political dirty tricks that are practised.

Examples like pork barrelling during an election campaign to offer advantage to a local community such as a new hospital -having already quietly guaranteed big contract with a building firm in exchange for party donation;  astroturf organisations demonstrating and lobbying, for/against a law while purporting to represent the interests of some disadvantaged group, but in reality hurriedly formed and put together by non-representative group who will financially benefit.

Need to comment also on what @ultamentkiller (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=40103) wrote here, which made me sorry and very sad

Quote
........ I understand people who lean right are generalized as racists and greedy and terrible people, but honestly, we care too.


Of course, most right leaning people are good, kind, honourable and decent. We all recognise and acknowledge that, a generalisation is often based on extreme examples and not at all fair.  There will be those on the right  who probably disagree with some of the policy of their chosen party and may even object or change their vote. There are others equally good and decent who may disagree but remain steadfast to the original basic principles of that party and feel obliged to continue to support them. Unfortunately many also  trust their politician/party of choice to do the right thing and do not question who has background control.

Over the last twenty odd years the main democratic conservative or liberal style parties in UK, US, Australia and Europe have been infiltrated by ultra-extreme groups who have gradually caused those basic principles to be altered and corrupted to their advantage. This way they have gained power, control and wealth. These groups are composed of and backed by various fundamental extremists, restrictive religious organisations, or big business with huge financial interests to protect and promote.

On the left side of politics it can also be argued that the unions have too much power and influence and can hold a government to ransom through industrial action, such as postal workers at Christmas or airports in tourist season or even nurses and doctors on occasion. They are also often guilty of misusing funds and corrupt pre-selection practices.

Democracy depends on the right to have different opinions and the freedom to express them and this is not a Left/Right discussion.  I truly beg you all to look very carefully at all the statements, policies and election promises that you hear and laws that are proposed in the future and try to play devil's advocate, as well as research exactly whose interests they are designed to benefit and what the long-reaching or wider effects may be.

No weeping heart here and admit to strong left affiliation, but I try to be fair. I have experience of dealing with policy and legislation plus seeing politicians and their behaviour close up.  I am well aware of practical problems and difficulties, but am very concerned about the ever widening gap between rich and poor, and the obscene contrast of the two extremes.

In a modern world of the twenty-first century, with all skills, resources and technologies at our disposal to improve living standards everywhere, this inequality is wrong and dangerous. Please be careful who you put in power whether at local, state or national level and even if you do not have compulsory voting, please don't waste the one you have by just not voting.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Eclipse on April 23, 2016, 06:39:52 AM
Warning: Lady Ty Rant

I usually avoid contributing to this thread because I have very strong political views and do not hesitate to express and discuss them elsewhere

I'm surprised I thought it was you who brought politics into the kings paw and we ended up with this topic as people didn't want the kings paw overrun with politics as it could get heated. Hehe I think it was the Australian election's
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lady Ty on April 23, 2016, 07:55:02 AM
Warning: Lady Ty Rant

I usually avoid contributing to this thread because I have very strong political views and do not hesitate to express and discuss them elsewhere

I'm surprised I thought it was you who brought politics into the kings paw and we ended up with this topic as people didn't want the kings paw overrun with politics as it could get heated. Hehe I think it was the Australian election's

 ;D Yes, true, I accidentally started more serious discussion by others here through posting this

Quote
Absolutely not going to bring actual politics into the forum except to mention in passing that today Australia began with one Prime Minister and before I go to bed I'll be able to tell you if he is still there or if we have a new one. ;D ;D ;D
Won't be a different party in Govt, but we don't waste time here always waiting for elections to change the boss. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Edited to Add : Australia has new Prime Minister now. ;D ;D ;D

But I did follow up with

Quote
Rostum yes I have huge interest in politics, and enjoyed your particular comments, but come to F-F to escape it.  I should have held back on my comment, but my cynical self found the whole performance here yesterday very funny. I apologise, because RL politics doesn't have a place here on our friendly forum except as reflected in pure fiction and writing contests. ;D.

So others obligingly started a separate thread, which I can't help reading, but prefer never to comment here, because I would get cranky and need a Cake Therapist  :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Eclipse on April 23, 2016, 08:52:51 AM
I be starting on the cake therapist soon :-) as well .
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on April 23, 2016, 05:30:25 PM
And, I don't know if it will reassure you or the other people who are worried about the case you've mentioned (a man being able to claim to be a woman, simply for the purpose of gawking at boobs), but ... that isn't happening. It's a problem that doesn't exist. So, there's no need to be worried about it. :)

One addendum: Should also be clear that politicians from all parties have been known to do this, for different purposes. It's not a right or left wing thing.
At the moment, I don't see a need for a guy to put on a dress and walk into a bathroom to look at girls. There's no transgender protection for him at the moment. If it becomes legal though, that's one of the problems we could face. How can there be any problems for a situation that hasn't been made widely legal yet?
But... a guy putting on a dress + going into a bathroom to look at girls would still be illegal. There's a lot more to being transgender than simply putting on different clothes.
Right, and that's not what I'm saying. i understand that transgender people do more than simply put on the other gender's clothes. What I'm saying is that is one of the only ways to tell when they're still going through the surgery, or aren't able to have the surgery yet.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on April 25, 2016, 03:49:41 PM
Sorry for the meme, but it fit with the discussion.

(http://i.imgur.com/LZwOOgk.jpg)

The whole bathroom thing is like @tebakutis (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=31262) said; it's a solution for a non-existent problem. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on April 28, 2016, 07:07:46 PM
Quote
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-36163188

How does this fit into the separation of church and state?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on April 28, 2016, 07:13:09 PM
Quote
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-36163188

How does this fit into the separation of church and state?
Lucifer in the flesh, as opposed to ghost lucifer! Woooooooo. #2spooky

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on May 03, 2016, 07:11:47 PM
Corruption, Intrigue and incompetant attempted murder (allegedly)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36185194 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36185194)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on May 03, 2016, 08:23:02 PM
Well my state is probably going to seal the nomination for Trump today.  He'll still be mathematically short but if he wins Indiana it looks like it'll be his nomination to lose.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on May 03, 2016, 08:31:08 PM
So, maybe I'm reading this incorrectly. But here's how it came off.

"If Trump gets enough delegates, then hopefully he'll lose the nomination since the Republican Party officials don't like him."

I know many don't like Trump. I'm not a huge fan either. But is taking the people's choice away really the best decision? Despite how much I disagree with it and my wish that Carson had won, I can't support taking away democratic choice. It's setting a dangerous precedent. "Oh, we don't need the people anymore. We can just nominate whoever we like now. No big deal." Maybe the response is, "But it's for the greater good. We need to protect this country from Trump." First, we're all Fantasy readers. We've read enough about villains doing the wrong thing in the name of the greater good. Second, I've heard people say that if Trump wins the nomination, then the liberal candidate will win by a landslide. So what's the big deal? Let him win. If people are so confident that Trump will lose, then there shouldn't be any worries.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on May 05, 2016, 03:54:35 PM
A bit on UK politics.
Today there are local elections in England, and for the Scottish and Welsh Parliaments in Scotland and Wales.

I discovered that EU citizens living here can vote for the Scottish and Welsh Parliament --> fair enough, they are affected by the decisions made there.
However my situation is unfair because there's no 'English Parliament' and I can't vote in the General Elections, so I have zero say in the big decisions that affect me.

Sure, I'll go vote in the locals, but the power that councils have is quite small in the big scheme of things :-\
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on May 05, 2016, 03:56:10 PM
So, maybe I'm reading this incorrectly. But here's how it came off.

"If Trump gets enough delegates, then hopefully he'll lose the nomination since the Republican Party officials don't like him."

I know many don't like Trump. I'm not a huge fan either. But is taking the people's choice away really the best decision? Despite how much I disagree with it and my wish that Carson had won, I can't support taking away democratic choice. It's setting a dangerous precedent. "Oh, we don't need the people anymore. We can just nominate whoever we like now. No big deal." Maybe the response is, "But it's for the greater good. We need to protect this country from Trump." First, we're all Fantasy readers. We've read enough about villains doing the wrong thing in the name of the greater good. Second, I've heard people say that if Trump wins the nomination, then the liberal candidate will win by a landslide. So what's the big deal? Let him win. If people are so confident that Trump will lose, then there shouldn't be any worries.

Well, it's pretty much a done thing now.
And I'm not at all confident he'll lose.   :-\
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on May 05, 2016, 04:01:56 PM
I'm not either, but I've seen several posts that predict a landslide. We'll see where this goes.

Also Scarlet, that's messed up and would infuriate me. Hopefully some changes can be made there. I don't completely understand your situation, but it sounds like not everyone has the right to choose.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on May 05, 2016, 04:45:21 PM
Landslide predictions always worry me because if enough people believe that then maybe they figure they don't need to vote and things become a lot closer than they normally should be.  Hillary is definitely not a popular candidate and I too think its going to be close.   I can't believe I'm actually going to have to vote for one of these two.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on May 05, 2016, 05:16:42 PM
Landslide predictions always worry me because if enough people believe that then maybe they figure they don't need to vote and things become a lot closer than they normally should be.  Hillary is definitely not a popular candidate and I too think its going to be close.   I can't believe I'm actually going to have to vote for one of these two.

RANT INCOMING. Yes, another one. I apologize in advance. :0

I'm hoping even people who aren't big fans of Hillary Clinton will recognize that, since it's a choice between her and Trump, voting "defensively" is better than not voting at all. Even if you don't feel Hillary is going to be the president you want, you *know* what type of president Trump is going to be. Even most sane Republicans don't want him in power.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/05/03/any-republican-who-thinks-its-better-to-elect-trump-than-hillary-needs-their-head-examined.html?intcmp=hphz03 (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/05/03/any-republican-who-thinks-its-better-to-elect-trump-than-hillary-needs-their-head-examined.html?intcmp=hphz03)

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/05/former-presidents-bush-plan-to-sit-out-2016-general-election.html?intcmp=hpbt1 (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/05/former-presidents-bush-plan-to-sit-out-2016-general-election.html?intcmp=hpbt1)

Interesting fact: this is the first election in which the Bushes could endorse the Republican candidate and have not done so. Yet for some reason, they're "staying out of it". I wonder why.

Trump is a man who has repeatedly gone bankrupt, a man who endorses and encourages his supporters to commit violence against people at his rallies, a man with such a fragile ego he freaks out whenever anyone talks about his fingers being small. A man prone to temper tantrums and completely out of touch with reality (Mexico will pay for that wall!) is not someone we want in charge of our domestic and foreign policy, nor our military. I've already ranted extensively about how unqualified and dangerous Trump is many times. While I don't think he'll win, it is *possible*, and that scares me. He shouldn't even have gotten this far.

Not to mention (as someone recently pointed out) a Trump presidency has already been called out as one of the top 10 risks to world stability.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35828747 (http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35828747)

Quote
The EIU ranking uses a scale of one to 25, with Mr Trump garnering a rating of 12, the same level of risk as "the rising threat of jihadi terrorism destabilising the global economy".

We know how this happened ... when you tell enough people, enough times, that the president you disagree with politically is a communist, fascist, Muslim dictator who wants to take their guns away, make you get gay married, and destroy our military while hiding his birth certificate because he's not qualified to be president, eventually, you're going to convince some portion of the population those things are true.

The problem with the right-wing media in this country is they have only just realized they can no longer control the Frankenstein monster they have created. They have constantly lied to people to stir up votes for things these people would never support (tax cuts for millionaires and corporations, etc) because they've blinded these people with social issues. All they want to do is make themselves richer and more powerful, but they've managed to focus many voters purely on keeping two people who love each other from getting married, or what bathroom people use. They have poor people voting against their own self interest.

For instance, many poor white folks who are on food stamps actually vote for candidates who want to eliminate food stamps. How nuts is that? They've succeeded because they've promised to stop "the gays" from getting married, and to stop the government from "taking all your guns away" (which will absolutely *never* happen).

Not being able to eat affects a large number of poor voters far more than whether two people they don't know can get married in another state, but that's not what these people focus on, because the right-wing media has ensured they see other things instead. The problem is, this year, Trump took what the right-wing media were doing and turned it up to 11. And he stole all the misguided voters created by Rush Limbaugh and Fox News.

The other problem is that, assuming we do manage to stop Trump from becoming president, these same right-wing pundits and media who have spent so much time convincing people "President Obama is out to get you!" will go right back to what they've been doing after this election, completely ignoring the fact that their distortions and lies are the reason enough people in America are willingly voting for Trump.

If, God forbid, this country does somehow elect Trump, we will take the first steps toward Idiocracy, and President Camacho de Mountain Dew can't be far behind.

On the other hand, if we elect Hillary, 24 will suddenly become one of the most prescient shows (at least regarding future presidents) ever to air on television. So ... there's that?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lanko on May 05, 2016, 05:24:34 PM
Go, Trump! Make America great again!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on May 05, 2016, 09:53:24 PM
Landslide predictions always worry me because if enough people believe that then maybe they figure they don't need to vote and things become a lot closer than they normally should be.  Hillary is definitely not a popular candidate and I too think its going to be close.   I can't believe I'm actually going to have to vote for one of these two.
I feel the same way you do.

In my opinion, this election really comes down to war. No matter what, everything both of these candidates do is going to suck. So the question becomes do we strike first or wait to retaliate? That's what I'm deciding anyway. The rest is a wreck. Maybe the debates will change my mind. We shall see.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on May 06, 2016, 12:01:57 AM
Landslide predictions always worry me because if enough people believe that then maybe they figure they don't need to vote and things become a lot closer than they normally should be.  Hillary is definitely not a popular candidate and I too think its going to be close.   I can't believe I'm actually going to have to vote for one of these two.
I feel the same way you do.

In my opinion, this election really comes down to war. No matter what, everything both of these candidates do is going to suck. So the question becomes do we strike first or wait to retaliate? That's what I'm deciding anyway. The rest is a wreck. Maybe the debates will change my mind. We shall see.

Respectfully, the statement that "both of these candidates are the same" is simply untrue. There are stark differences between Hillary Clinton (Democrat) and Donald Trump (Republican), and what will happen in the United States if one or the other is elected.

Neither candidate may offer *everything* you'd like in a president, but to say which one is elected will make no difference is absolutely incorrect. There are very large differences.

Here is a summary of the current Republican party platform. These are things they have publicly and repeatedly stated they will try to accomplish, if Donald Trump is elected president.

Republican Platform Goals:

Overturn Roe vs Wade: Make abortion illegal everywhere, for everyone. Force women (even those who are raped, sometimes by family members) to carry their rapist's baby to term, regardless of their age or circumstances. Disallow all exceptions save for "health of the mother".

Trump Bonus: Trump has publicly said he believes women should be "punished" for having an abortion.


Elect Very Conservative Justices to the Supreme Court: This is perhaps the largest and longest impact our next president will have - nominating Supreme Court justices. Under Trump, we will see more justices in the vein of Scalia or Thomas. Under Clinton, we will see more justices in the vein of Kagan or Sotomeyer. Judge for yourself which you will think will move this country forward, but absolutely understand that YOU help determine who is appointed to a lifetime Supreme Court position, by voting for Clinton or Trump.


Eliminate the Public Safety Net: Republicans actively campaign about ending food stamps and all other forms of government assistance to the poor. This includes the so called "child care credit" where people can ask for additional assistance if they have children. So to restate: the Republican platform insists that you MUST have a child, but once that child is born, you MUST NOT accept any money to take care of him or her. Good luck working any job as a single-mom with a newborn child.


Make Gay Marriage illegal again: Republicans and their president will work to overturn the Supreme Court decision that recently allowed marriage equality in the US. Methods suggested including amending our Constitution to state "Marriage is between one man and one woman" and/or "leaving it up to the states" (which means any state that wished too could completely ignore your legally binding marriage).


Allow governments to actively discriminate against LGBT people: See the dozens of recent state laws, including the North Carolina "Bathroom Bill". The Republican word for this is "religious freedom". What this means is to give people who believe LGBT people are perverse the "freedom" to refuse to serve these people at your business, deny them admission to your business, fire them from their jobs for being LGBT, and even deny them housing (what if the person who owns an apartment complex is against gay people? Kick them out.)

If Republicans succeed in implementing their "religious freedom" bills, they will successfully strip rights away from American citizens who are LGBT. Republicans in the House and Senate, as well as local legislatures, will be free to go as far as they like in denying LGBT rights if Trump is elected, and Trump will not stop them.


Overturn and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Republicans in the house have already voted to do this over 20 times. Each time, Obama has vetoed the bill. Trump would not veto the bill.

Overturning the Affordable Care Act (which, by the way, has been upheld by the Supreme Court) would strip millions of Americans of the health insurance they have recently acquired since it was enacted, including many people who could not previously get insurance at all due to 'pre-existing' conditions.

Paul Ryan Bonus: Ryan has publicly said that he believes insurers should be able to put anyone with a 'pre-existing' condition in high risk insurance pools (read - super expensive) or deny them healthcare altogether.


Forcibly Round Up and Exile Illegal Immigrants: This includes those who have lived and worked here for over 10 yeras, with no criminal record, and who may also  be the parents of children who may themselves be US citizens. That's right, the kids (many of whom may still be children) can stay, but their parents must go. Also, Trump apparently thinks he can make Mexico pay for a wall on our border. Mexico will not do this. Finally, a report released recently suggests that if Trump's plan was successful, he could slice 2% off the US GDP, and estimates of how much it would cost to build the wall make it impossible even if Mexico did pay for it. So there's that.


Do Absolutely Nothing About Climate Change: The official position of the Republican party is that climate change is a "hoax", despite overwhelming, worldwide, and near universal scientific consensus to the contrary. Florida is currently trying to figure out how to prevent itself from going underwater in the next ten years due to rising sea levels, and Florida workers are currently forbidden from using the word "climate change".

The Pentagon and the Navy have both asked to prepare for climate change, and been expressly forbidden to do so by the Republican senate. Should Trump be elected, will will not honor existing climate agreements, and we will do *nothing* to slow or mitigate climate change. This means our children and grandchildren could live in a vastly warmer world, with a shortage of food and resources as well as unrest across the world, and a number of previously livable areas underwater.

This is what the Republican party officially believes we should do about climate change ... take no action.


Disenfranchise Poor and Minority Voters: A number of local legislatures controlled by Republicans are actively working to disenfranchise poor and minority voters by passing bogus "voter ID laws" (obstensively to prevent voter fraud, but actually to make it harder for poor people to vote), closing down polling locations in poor areas, shortening or getting rid of early voting periods (most people who work have to use those to vote, since they can't get off work) and shortening the hours at which you can go to the polls (again, the focus is to make it harder for people who have to work during the day to vote). Under a Republican president, these policies will continue and grow.

So what does Hillary believe, and what is the democrat platform?

Now, I could restate the Democratic platform on which Hillary is running in reverse to all I've typed above, but it's simpler to simply state that Hillary Clinton is opposed to ALL of these things. If Clinton is elected president, she will not work to make abortion illegal, will nominate progressive Supreme Court justices, will not make gay marriage illegal, will not endorse and allow discrimination against LGBT people, will not remove the public safety net, will not overturn the Affordable Care Act, will not endorse disenfranchising poor or minority voters, will not ignore climate change (she has stated it is very real and we must act), and will not round up and exile illegal immigrants, even those with jobs and families.


You may be in favor of the rungs of the Republican platform, and the stated policy goals of Donald Trump. If that's true, we respectfully disagree, however, you are at least clear in what you support, and are being honest about what a vote for Trump and the Republican party will do if he is elected.

Your vote is your vote: but you should at least understand what it means.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Lanko on May 06, 2016, 12:18:08 AM
I don't even follow this thread, but man, I can't resist these "Trumpocalypse" posts  ::)

(http://media.oregonlive.com/oregonian/photo/2015/08/03/18463984-standard.jpg)

"I think we would get along very well." Trump on Putin.

(http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/intelligencer/2015/12/17/17-vladimir-putin-donald-trump.w529.h352.jpg)
Putin and Trump riding together.

(http://img.ifcdn.com/images/432d62eed204acbec78e1abcaf8017c14ff797535375533de24c1458856182dd_1.jpg)
Image: "Breaking News, April 8th, 2020: President Trump congratulates Putin on the retaking of Constantinople for the Western Alliance."

You are guys are getting it all wrong! The Great Wall of Texas is just a diversion! Putin will get Ukraine and Trump will get Mexico! It's all already planned!

Go, Trump! Make America great again!  ::) (Ironic icons where)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on May 06, 2016, 12:20:20 AM
So I had to start skimming that list halfway down. Half the stuff on that list is impossible to accomplish, and is pretty much everything bad and extreme that Republicans want to do. No matter who gets elected each side will have pros and cons. I hope that's what the debates will show me. What you did is list Republican positions, listing only the cons and none of the pros. You also chose the most radical position you could find.

Also, something the Media refuses to talk about with this whole Health Care mess. If you don't get health insurance, you have to pay a fee to the government if they can track you down, and it's pretty high. I know because my family faced this issue a couple of years ago. We ended up getting health insurance, but the price was insane. Also, lots of Republicans want what is called "open competition", which would force health insurance companies to compete beyond state lines and cause a reduction in prices. That's not terrible is it? Sure, it's not the free health care lots of people want, but it's a better option than we have. State boundaries are apart of the price issue. At least here in Georgia.

Bottom Line: There are diverse political positions within the party itself. The President doesn't have all the power. A Republican president who believes all of the radical viewpoints you listed would not be able to accomplish half of them.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on May 06, 2016, 12:52:55 AM
So I had to start skimming that list halfway down. Half the stuff on that list is impossible to accomplish, and is pretty much everything bad and extreme that Republicans want to do. No matter who gets elected each side will have pros and cons. I hope that's what the debates will show me. What you did is list Republican positions, listing only the cons and none of the pros. You also chose the most radical position you could find.

The problem is that, in the current Republican party, "the most extreme position I can find" is the official position of those in power in the party right now. These are the positions of Ted Cruz. These are the positions of Donald Trump. Donald Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee.

And yes, moderate Republicans are running away from them. Where are those moderate Republicans now? Retired from politics, or recently voted out of office.

There are absolutely Republicans who don't endorse these rungs. The Republicans who do refer to them as "RINOS" (Republicans in Name Only). Most of those who don't endorse these views were recently voted out for not being conservative enough, and replaced with Tea Party candidates and others. Those are the people in power RIGHT NOW in the House, passing crazy bills every day. The only thing holding them in check, for the most part, is not having absolute control of the Senate, and Obama's veto pen.

Don't get me wrong. There are people on the left who have absolutely crazy ideas as well. The difference between the left and the right, currently, is that the "crazy left wingers" are marginalized. As of right now, the "crazy right wingers" are in charge.

I get what you're saying. There are moderate Republicans who don't want to repeal the Affordable Care Act, or remove the public safety net, or make abortion illegal for everyone, or discriminate against LGBT people. These Republicans exist. But they are NOT running the Republican party right now.

Also, something the Media refuses to talk about with this whole Health Care mess. If you don't get health insurance, you have to pay a fee to the government if they can track you down, and it's pretty high. I know because my family faced this issue a couple of years ago. We ended up getting health insurance, but the price was insane. Also, lots of Republicans want what is called "open competition", which would force health insurance companies to compete beyond state lines and cause a reduction in prices. That's not terrible is it? Sure, it's not the free health care lots of people want, but it's a better option than we have. State boundaries are apart of the price issue. At least here in Georgia.

State boundaries are one issue, and there are certainly arguments to be made for multiple ways to provide affordable health insurance. I've said many times that the Affordable Health Care Act is not ideal by any means, but it has accomplished two things - enabling millions more Americans to get healthcare coverage, and enabling those with pre-existing conditions to get healthcare coverage.

The current Republican goal is "repeal". They have not offered a plan to replace the Affordable Care Act. They do not currently have one.

Bottom Line: There are diverse political positions within the party itself. The President doesn't have all the power. A Republican president who believes all of the radical viewpoints you listed would not be able to accomplish half of them.

You are absolutely correct. Except Republicans already current control the house. And Republicans currently have a majority in the Senate.

Due to gerrymandering, most Republican incumbents, even those with approval ratings below 10%, are "safe". They will not be voted out. It is almost certain that Republicans, after November, will continue to control the House, and may pick up seats in the Senate. Without someone to balance that out, they'll be able to accomplish quite a bit.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on May 06, 2016, 01:29:36 AM
Adding some reading material, so you know I'm not just making the Republican positions on these issues up. And remember, I accept that there are moderate Republicans who disagree with these stances. Those Republicans are not running today's Republican party. The most extreme view IS the default of those in power.

On Pre-Existing Conditions
http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20160428/BLOG/160429901 (http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20160428/BLOG/160429901)

On overturning the Affordable Care Act:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/03/21/the-house-has-voted-54-times-in-four-years-on-obamacare-heres-the-full-list/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/03/21/the-house-has-voted-54-times-in-four-years-on-obamacare-heres-the-full-list/)
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/06/politics/house-obamacare-repeal-planned-parenthood/ (http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/06/politics/house-obamacare-repeal-planned-parenthood/)
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/why-republicans-are-voting-to-repeal-obamacare-again/385105/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/why-republicans-are-voting-to-repeal-obamacare-again/385105/)
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform (https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform)

(Note: The only thing that has stopped the Affordable Care Act from being repealed is Obama's veto pin. The Republicans currently in power have already voted to repeal it, successfully, over 50 times.

On eliminating the public safety net:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/03/22/GOP-Candidates-Would-Sacrifice-Social-Safety-Net-Tax-Cuts (http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/03/22/GOP-Candidates-Would-Sacrifice-Social-Safety-Net-Tax-Cuts)
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-budget-idUSKBN0MN0LR20150327 (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-budget-idUSKBN0MN0LR20150327)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/17/republican-budgets-whack-_n_6885122.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/17/republican-budgets-whack-_n_6885122.html)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-04-01/ryan-unveils-republicans-budget-plan-looking-to-election (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-04-01/ryan-unveils-republicans-budget-plan-looking-to-election)

On making abortion illegal:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/04/17/republicans-seek-to-put-abortion-on-the-front-burner-in-2016 (http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/04/17/republicans-seek-to-put-abortion-on-the-front-burner-in-2016)
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-candidates-ban-abortion-no-exceptions (http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-candidates-ban-abortion-no-exceptions)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/10/26/on-abortion-the-gop-presidential-candidates-are-even-more-extreme-than-their-constituents/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/10/26/on-abortion-the-gop-presidential-candidates-are-even-more-extreme-than-their-constituents/)
http://time.com/4211007/republican-debate-abortion-rape-new-hampshire/ (http://time.com/4211007/republican-debate-abortion-rape-new-hampshire/)  (I should call out Christie for NOT being in favor of banning abortion - guess who's not running for president anymore)

On Supreme Court Nominees:
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/02/19/3750758/what-if-donald-trump-wins-inside-his-plans-for-the-supreme-court/ (http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/02/19/3750758/what-if-donald-trump-wins-inside-his-plans-for-the-supreme-court/)

On deporting illegal immigrants:
http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-deportation-plan-2015-11 (http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-deportation-plan-2015-11)
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/boom-donald-trump-announces-5-point-plan-about-illegal-immigration/ (http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/boom-donald-trump-announces-5-point-plan-about-illegal-immigration/)
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform (https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform)
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-deportations-idUSKCN0XW0TP (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-deportations-idUSKCN0XW0TP)

On Voter ID Laws and Disenfranchisement
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/06/politics/glenn-grothman-voter-id-wisconsin-republican-2016/ (http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/06/politics/glenn-grothman-voter-id-wisconsin-republican-2016/)
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/05/politics/justice-department-investigation-arizona/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/05/politics/justice-department-investigation-arizona/index.html)
http://www.mediaite.com/online/study-shows-that-republican-backed-voter-id-laws-are-really-working-for-them/ (http://www.mediaite.com/online/study-shows-that-republican-backed-voter-id-laws-are-really-working-for-them/)
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-634 (http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-634)

On making gay marriage illegal again:
http://www.hrc.org/2016RepublicanFacts/donald-trump (http://www.hrc.org/2016RepublicanFacts/donald-trump)
https://www.tedcruz.org/issues/life-marriage-and-family/ (https://www.tedcruz.org/issues/life-marriage-and-family/)
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/25/politics/national-organization-marriage-same-sex-marriage/ (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/25/politics/national-organization-marriage-same-sex-marriage/)
https://ballotpedia.org/2016_presidential_candidates_on_gay_rights (https://ballotpedia.org/2016_presidential_candidates_on_gay_rights)
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-gaymarriage-idUSKCN0PI2NE20150708 (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-gaymarriage-idUSKCN0PI2NE20150708)
https://usatelections.wordpress.com/2015/06/26/presidential-candidates-reaction-gay-marriage/ (https://usatelections.wordpress.com/2015/06/26/presidential-candidates-reaction-gay-marriage/)

On opposing LGBT rights:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/06/18/why-does-the-republican-party-still-oppose-lgbt-rights/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/06/18/why-does-the-republican-party-still-oppose-lgbt-rights/)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/06/11/north-carolina-okays-opt-out-for-officials-who-oppose-same-sex-marriage/?tid=a_inl (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/06/11/north-carolina-okays-opt-out-for-officials-who-oppose-same-sex-marriage/?tid=a_inl)
http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2015/06/11/snyder-michigan-same-sex-adoption-religious/71062938/ (http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2015/06/11/snyder-michigan-same-sex-adoption-religious/71062938/)

On climate change being a hoax:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385?lang=en (https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385?lang=en)
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jan/24/bernie-s/yes-donald-trump-really-did-tweet-climate-change-h/ (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jan/24/bernie-s/yes-donald-trump-really-did-tweet-climate-change-h/)
http://billmoyers.com/2015/02/03/congress-climate-deniers/ (http://billmoyers.com/2015/02/03/congress-climate-deniers/)
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/where-the-2016-republican-candidates-stand-on-climate-change/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/where-the-2016-republican-candidates-stand-on-climate-change/) (again, Christie stands out as saying climate change is real, and is human-caused. He's not running. Guess who still is ;P)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Peat on May 06, 2016, 06:13:53 AM
Not a huge amount of interesting things happening in the local elections here. Suppose the biggest news is that the Tories seem set to push Labour into being the third party in Scotland which is arguably quite the symbolic blow.

That, or the fact nothing much is happening.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on May 06, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
Quote
That, or the fact nothing much is happening.

Except voters turned away from Barnet polling stations.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on May 06, 2016, 04:21:09 PM
I love reading your posts, @tebakutis (http://fantasy-faction.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=31262). They're always truthful and informative. Thank you. :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on May 06, 2016, 04:57:40 PM
Dont follow Twiptter but saw this and felt it had to be shared

    Shouldn't #TedCruz have been forced to carry his unviable campaign to term?

    — Full Frontal (@FullFrontalSamB) May 4, 2016

   
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on May 17, 2016, 10:12:50 PM
Quote of the week from my stepdad.

"This isn't my America anymore. I'm ready to burn the flag. This country's now made up of fools, faggets, and foreigners."

Oh, what a lovely day...
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on May 17, 2016, 10:40:06 PM
Quote of the week from my stepdad.

"This isn't my America anymore. I'm ready to burn the flag. This country's now made up of fools, faggets, and foreigners."

Oh, what a lovely day...

heh.  that's quite the alliterative statement.

did you know 1-in-14 people think the moon landing was fake?  i mean, at those odds, we all probably know quite a few of those people.  people believe crazy stuff.  especially if it's played on repeat on fox news.

/shrug

i find the best remedy for that kind of stuff is travel.

well.

travel and math.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Arry on May 18, 2016, 01:16:00 AM
Quote of the week from my stepdad.

"This isn't my America anymore. I'm ready to burn the flag. This country's now made up of fools, faggets, and foreigners."

Oh, what a lovely day...

*sigh* At least you can look on the bright side that you don't share his views on this. You might not be able to change him, but at least your not like him.

Probably easier for me to say this not having to hear that from someone in my own house.
Title: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on May 18, 2016, 02:05:41 PM
The moon landing was an inside job. Bush did it.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on May 19, 2016, 11:40:29 AM
I may have mentioned that I learned the word "faggot" as applied to homosexual men comes from the good old days when they were burned at the stake for their crimes. I don't think I'll ever complain about hijacking the word "gay" ever again.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on May 19, 2016, 01:34:11 PM
I think the term faggot applied to homosexuals is 19th-20th centuary. Do you have any evidence for this. Not trying to be any more arguementative than normal but I have never come across an auto de fe for and sexual trangression?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on May 19, 2016, 02:44:29 PM
I think the term faggot applied to homosexuals is 19th-20th centuary. Do you have any evidence for this. Not trying to be any more arguementative than normal but I have never come across an auto de fe for and sexual trangression?

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=faggot
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ScarletBea on May 19, 2016, 02:51:36 PM
I think the term faggot applied to homosexuals is 19th-20th centuary. Do you have any evidence for this. Not trying to be any more arguementative than normal but I have never come across an auto de fe for and sexual trangression?

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=faggot
Thanks, m3m! It seems Jmack was caught in an urban legend.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on May 19, 2016, 03:15:02 PM
I think the term faggot applied to homosexuals is 19th-20th centuary. Do you have any evidence for this. Not trying to be any more arguementative than normal but I have never come across an auto de fe for and sexual trangression?

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=faggot
Thanks, m3m! It seems Jmack was caught in an urban legend.

i think jmack IS an urban legend.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on May 19, 2016, 07:51:49 PM
Even the link states people burnt at the stake for there sexuality. I know of none in Europe at all.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on May 26, 2016, 08:54:44 PM
There are now, definitively, enough people in the United States who believe Donald J. Trump would make a great president. He has clinched the Republican nomination. On behalf of the US, I'd like to apologize to every other country in the world. We tried (well, at least half of us).

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/26/politics/donald-trump-has-delegates-to-clinch-gop-nomination/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/26/politics/donald-trump-has-delegates-to-clinch-gop-nomination/index.html)

The other half of the US, of course, is no doubt thrilled that we'll soon be magically deporting every "Mexican" in America, forcing Mexico to build a magic wall it can neither afford and has repeatedly said it will not build, ensuring "the gays" can't get married, protecting our children from the transgender boogeymen who exist for no other reason than to enter the wrong bathroom, stopping "those corrupt scientists" from fooling the world regarding climate change, keeping "the govm't from coming for our guns!", barring Muslims from entering the United States (cause, you know, every Muslim in existence is a terrorist, right?) and hey, while we're at it, why don't we put those Muslims on a national list too? That worked out well in the past.

Even if the democratic candidate (whether that be Hillary or Bernie) defeats Trump in the general, I honestly consider this a turning point for American politics. The "old GOP" - people like George W. Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain, et all ... they're done. I don't think the right wing is coming back from this. The bar has been set, and that bar is Donald J. Trump. The next guy to run for his spot is going to have to be even crazier.

Trump is the new face of the right wing. While there was some initial push back on the right before the primary ended (I linked a bunch of notable conservatives who laid out what an awful candidate Trump was) now that he has clinched the nomination, these same conservatives are, one by one, falling in line behind him. "Winning", I suppose, is more important than, you know, electing an idiot. Also, I guess they'd prefer to be on the inside of a disastrous administration than on the outside, which is a cynical but rational move.

The conservative party in this country has nominated (and is now rapidly consolidating their support behind) an openly racist, xenophobic, misogynistic ignoramus. They are completely willing to let him set our social and economic policy, our foreign policy, command our military, and control our nuclear arsenal. They are cheering for a man who officially ranks above terrorism as the biggest threat to world stability.

Even if Trump loses the general election, I really doubt the millions who voted for him are going away. Given these people have proven 100% immune to any attempts to alter their viewpoints about "the scary browns and gays taking their country away and seizing all their guns", they'll simply vote for the next guy who insists he'll "Make America Great Again!" ... whatever the hell that means.

It is a depressing day.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on May 26, 2016, 09:20:48 PM
Proper doom for everyone! The world shall burn!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on May 26, 2016, 10:28:59 PM
Proper doom for everyone! The world shall burn!

Hehe, you joke now. Wait until we're both drinking Brawndo and watching the latest episode of Ow, My Balls.

But to be honest about what's going to happen to you and me if Trump is elected, the answer is ... not much. We're both straight white dudes, and we have pretty much all the rights we need. We can get married, live wherever we like, and have any job we like without fear of being fired for our sexual preference or religion. We have it pretty good, all things considered.

As much as I harp on how terrible Trump is, the short answer is that is likely won't change either of our lives that much. Sure, he's terrible for a lot of *other* people, but for us ... he's really not going to have a huge impact. That doesn't comfort me at all, but I know it does comfort a lot of other people.

So one thing I'm curious about, since we argue about politics a great deal ... and you don't have to answer this if you're not comfortable doing so. Have you ever considered what it might be like to be in different shoes than you are now? Do you think you would feel differently about the things we often argue about?

Let's say you were born black, or LGBT, or a Muslim, or Latino, or a woman who one day might day need access to healthcare or an abortion. In that case, many of the rights you take for granted may be stripped from you if Trump gets elected. For instance, you might not be allowed to marry the person you love, or you might not be able to live in certain areas. You couldn't even use the public bathroom matching your genitalia, assuming that's changed from what's on your birth certificate.

Do you think you'd be more worried about Trump than you are now?

I ask because I realize that a lot of my outrage and social activism is, ultimately, directed at protecting people who aren't me. And to a lesser extent, people wouldn't support Trump unless they agreed with him on his platform ideas, oppressive, racist, and misogynistic though they may be.

I respect you, Ultament, and I enjoy our discussions, but I really do have a hard time understanding the mindset here. Trump has said he will ban Muslims from entering the country, suggested woman should be punished for having abortions, and a half dozen other incendiary statements. This really doesn't bother you?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Nighteyes on May 27, 2016, 06:53:47 AM
I think the term faggot applied to homosexuals is 19th-20th centuary. Do you have any evidence for this. Not trying to be any more arguementative than normal but I have never come across an auto de fe for and sexual trangression?

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=faggot
Thanks, m3m! It seems Jmack was caught in an urban legend.

I remember giggling at an Edward Thomas poem at school called The 50 faggots. Was actually about people collecting faggots for the winter. No awareness of any inenuendo so certainly that expression is later than World War I.

Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on May 27, 2016, 06:54:02 PM
Have you ever considered what it might be like to be in different shoes than you are now?

Unfortunately, most right wing people I've encountered have a problem with empathy. It doesn't matter unless it effects them.

For example, my best friends' mom is a very right wing Catholic and hated gay people, until she found out her own daughter was gay. Now after dealing with it and accepting her own daughter, she's fine with it.

Empathy seems to be (again, in my encounters) something most right wingers don't understand.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on May 27, 2016, 07:11:51 PM
Have you ever considered what it might be like to be in different shoes than you are now?

Unfortunately, most right wing people I've encountered have a problem with empathy. It doesn't matter unless it effects them.

For example, my best friends' mom is a very right wing Catholic and hated gay people, until she found out her own daughter was gay. Now after dealing with it and accepting her own daughter, she's fine with it.

Empathy seems to be (again, in my encounters) something most right wingers don't understand.


i dunno if it's an empathy thing, but both of my sets of parents have gone through this.  my dad and step-mom with the out-of-wedlock pregnancy of my step sister.  my mom with the difficulties of immigration because she started working in the undergrad department at a university with lots of foreign students.

all of a sudden, they're staunch advocates of liberal thoughts on their respective issues.

but!

my dad is still all "immigrants just need to get legal!" and my mom is still all "out of wedlock births are for trash".

/sigh
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on May 27, 2016, 08:09:37 PM
Have you ever considered what it might be like to be in different shoes than you are now?

Unfortunately, most right wing people I've encountered have a problem with empathy. It doesn't matter unless it effects them.

For example, my best friends' mom is a very right wing Catholic and hated gay people, until she found out her own daughter was gay. Now after dealing with it and accepting her own daughter, she's fine with it.

Empathy seems to be (again, in my encounters) something most right wingers don't understand.
I wouldn't call it a lack of empathy. It's more of a logical approach than an emotional one, which comes across as cold to others. Also, you have to respect that people believe different things, even if you think they're completely wrong. So to them, their logic will be completely different from yours, because they're most likely viewing it from a completely different moral code.

I'm not fully right either. I believe when I posted the results of which side I'm on, my beliefs only coincide with 13 percent of the population. I tend to be conservative on economic issues, and liberal on social policies. I really have thought about how it's going to effect other people than myself. The difference is, just like with the democratic candidates, half of the stuff everyone talks about will never happen. So why should I worry?

Take a look at it from the conservative viewpoint when Obama became elective. Back then, I was more firm in the right, and was shouting prophecies of doom and destruction from the tops of mountains. And look where we are now? Was his Presidency great? Not really. Was it terrible? Not really. It's kind of neutral at this point.

And now, I'm seeing the same thing happen, but it's from the left instead of the right. To be honest, I'm laughing because the roles are reversed. Sure, things could really go downhill, but that's with any president. And I know we've had this discussion before, but lots of the things said are really exaggerated, just like they were with Obama. Trump talks. And talks. and talks. That's what he's good at. He's also good at saying the right things to the right crowd, and then making supporters forget about his lies and hypocrisy a week later. I'm curious to see what happens when the final debates roll around. How much of his tune will change?

Also, even though a lot of crazy things are the public stance of the Republican party, that doesn't mean every single person in the party stands for them. So when it comes time for Congress to vote, it may not go the way people expect it to. For example, take into consideration the National Federation of the Blind, and organization I have a decent leadership role in. They have official stances on issues that I don't agree with at all. And yet I still choose to take part in their movement, because I believe that, at the core, they match my beliefs best. Yet whenever the NFB is talked about, all everyone points out is the radical side of issues, and the official stances on things. They don't take into consideration the people in the middle who also have the power to change and not support the official stance. I see this same thing happen with Republicans and Democrats alike. In my household, I hear all the time about the radical Left movement. On the Internet, I hear all the time about the radical right movement. From the left side, I see it this way. A lot of times they complain about stereotypes and how they aren't right, yet love to toss them at the other side. And one of the stereotypes is that the right stereotypes. It's hilarious. It's not one side or the other that stereotypes. It's the human race. That's what we do. Now, if I throw out a comment like, "Stereotypes exist for a reason," how many people will become angry? Yet if the right says something to defend those stereotypes and try to correct them, the left will use that same argument without realizing the hypocrisy.

Bottom line, the world is not ending. Life will go on. Could things get bad? Yes. Will they? No matter who gets elected, probably not, despite what the opposing side would have you think. The media would have you believe that if Republicans get elected,nuclear war will begin. Yet when it comes to a bad candidate on their side, they won't say a word. Don't fall into their panic. The best thing we all can do is try to support which side we think is right, and live with the consequences. Spreading thoughts of fear and Apocolypse  doesn't help the situation at all. if anything, you're just turning more Republicans away from the discussion, because no one wants to listen to someone who can only point out the negative.

This is not a personal shot at you. Honestly, I enjoy your perspective. I'm just too relaxed to become panicked over things that may or may not happen. I also don't respond well to fear mongering, which is half of the reason I never watch the news. It's not a good strategy for making others see your pov.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on May 28, 2016, 01:17:39 PM
Two interesting perspectives. The questions I have is why is the choice usually between those who are least fit to lead? Why is this accepted without question? Why is the aim to elect the least damaging candidate and why is the illusion of choice accetable?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: marshall_lamour on May 28, 2016, 03:26:29 PM
Two interesting perspectives. The questions I have is why is the choice usually between those who are least fit to lead? Why is this accepted without question? Why is the aim to elect the least damaging candidate and why is the illusion of choice accetable?
Because they're the most interested in the positions of leadership. A proper leader would be someone compelled out of duty, hopefully brought up with adequate faculties but with no ambition or intention to use them for that purpose. Our society is generally structured to reward moxie, rather than merit.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on May 30, 2016, 09:18:55 PM
Looks like we are back to the 'If you are going to put people on a pedastool wear a broad brimmed hat'
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on May 30, 2016, 09:56:17 PM
I think the term faggot applied to homosexuals is 19th-20th centuary. Do you have any evidence for this. Not trying to be any more arguementative than normal but I have never come across an auto de fe for and sexual trangression?

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=faggot
Thanks, m3m! It seems Jmack was caught in an urban legend.

I remember giggling at an Edward Thomas poem at school called The 50 faggots. Was actually about people collecting faggots for the winter. No awareness of any inenuendo so certainly that expression is later than World War I.

Strange. I heard this from a gay friends, so assumed it was fact. I hadn't caught up on this thread for a while, so didn't see the debunking above.

Oddly, today I was researching my WIP and was reading a dictionary of 1920s slang. The dictionary noted the first use of the word "faggot" for gay men in the 1920s. It mentioned that "faggot" - a bundle of sticks - had been previously applied as a derogatory for women. [A burden to carry around, like a bundle of sticks.] When I dug further, I found references to the burn-at-the-stake derivation as an urban legend. While gay people had been burned at the stake in various places, they were hanged in England. (vive la difference, not)

And then confirmed here. Odd timing.
But an insult and crudity under any origin story.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 01, 2016, 03:16:29 PM
*boggle*

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-veterans-controversy-goes-bad-worse

Quote

At another point yesterday, Trump insisted, “I didn’t want to have credit” for the charitable donations, except we know that’s not true, either: he obviously did want credit, which is why he held a televised fundraiser in which he boasted about his self-proclaimed leadership on raising money for veterans.


the general election is going to be a bloodbath.  i bet texas turns blue.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on June 03, 2016, 02:31:34 PM
Because pointing out he lied about anything, or explaining why one of his randomly spouted plans isn't possible is "a hit piece".

"One of the things I'm going to do if I win, and I hope we do and we're certainly leading. I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We're going to open up those libel laws. So when The New York Times writes a hit piece which is a total disgrace or when The Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they're totally protected," Trump said.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/02/donald-trump-libel-laws-219866
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on June 03, 2016, 04:25:42 PM
Because pointing out he lied about anything, or explaining why one of his randomly spouted plans isn't possible is "a hit piece".

"One of the things I'm going to do if I win, and I hope we do and we're certainly leading. I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We're going to open up those libel laws. So when The New York Times writes a hit piece which is a total disgrace or when The Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they're totally protected," Trump said.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/02/donald-trump-libel-laws-219866

I veer between this man is hateful and egotistic - but really sort of harmless-  to, this man is evil.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on June 03, 2016, 09:32:05 PM
Self-centered stupidity is one of the worst kinds of evil.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 03, 2016, 10:19:31 PM
then there's obama.

he's (if you can even follow what they're saying) going to 1) release all the blacks from prison to 2) make room for all the christians he's going to throw in, 3) activate the beyonces to go out and kill cops, then 4) not leave the presidency after his term's up.

these people not only exist, but vote.

[youtube]p8TSfkWv1dU[/youtube]
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Mr.J on June 03, 2016, 11:09:57 PM
Just to break away from the awfulness of the US election I thought I'd chip in with this little nugget of genius from the guy who is the former EDUCATION secretary in the UK, when discussing our EU Referendum coming up...

Quote
People in this country have had enough of experts
- Michael Gove.

Yea fuck those 'Experts', what have people with intelligence, training, knowledge and experience ever done for us? We're all fucking doomed.



Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on June 03, 2016, 11:49:54 PM
I hate to tell you this but it has been govenment policy to ignore experts even ones they employ for longer than you or even I have been alive.

Even staunch tories are unlikely to say that Gove would have any comprehension of other peoples views after the issues he has caused not listening to anyone else it is a miracle he still holds a cabinet post.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: xiagan on June 04, 2016, 12:40:52 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/EMLhacp.png)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 04, 2016, 02:54:35 PM
Just to break away from the awfulness of the US election I thought I'd chip in with this little nugget of genius from the guy who is the former EDUCATION secretary in the UK, when discussing our EU Referendum coming up...

Quote
People in this country have had enough of experts
- Michael Gove.

Yea fuck those 'Experts', what have people with intelligence, training, knowledge and experience ever done for us? We're all fucking doomed.

yah.  that's not just a uk issue.  i'm sure you can find ridiculous quotes like that all over the u.s. house of representatives.  bleagh.

this article on the subject is super-interesting.
http://thefederalist.com/2014/01/17/the-death-of-expertise/
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on June 04, 2016, 03:40:09 PM
You have to admit there's kind of  a point to that. "Well, experts say..." "According to experts..." It's almost to the point where I'm willing to say, "Yep. Everyone on every side has experts that they've paid enough money to for them to say whatever they want." Does that happen all of the time? Certainly not. but it still does, so whenever I hear that phrase, I stop listening to whoever said it. Another one that's just as bad. "Studies show..." "According to this survey..." Same situation, different terms.

Basically what I'm saying is, I doubt that phrase was meant to be taken literally.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 04, 2016, 03:48:54 PM
that reminds me of this quote from that article:

Quote
Tackle a complex policy issue with a layman today, and you will get snippy and sophistic demands to show ever increasing amounts of “proof” or “evidence” for your case, even though the ordinary interlocutor in such debates isn’t really equipped to decide what constitutes “evidence” or to know it when it’s presented.

if you go look at the "experts" making statements, it's pretty easy to discover which are actually experts and which are members of partisan-funded think-tanks.  from there, it's not difficult to parse facts from fiction.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 04, 2016, 05:56:20 PM
sorry for the double-post, but this begs to be read.

trump tweeted:
Quote
In Crooked Hillary's telepromter speech yesterday, she made up things that I said or believe but have no basis in fact. Not honest!

hillary responded, quoting her speech word-by-word, with links to exactly where trump said them:
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/updates/2016/06/02/trump-literally-said-all-those-things/

gloves.  are.  off.

internet and tv this fall are going to be SMOTHERED in video of trump saying ridiculous, dangerous, irresponsible things juxtaposed with exactly why they're awful.  not hinted at, but full-on blatant.  she will get to do and say things the other republican candidates couldn't because they were all trying to appeal to the same "republican base" of voters.

hillary doesn't give a shit about pandering to the republican base.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on June 04, 2016, 08:28:06 PM
Since the Republican primary is wrapped up, I'm pretty much past the "arguing about whether Trump is a terrible candidate or not" phase, and from here forward, I'll simply be posting links outlining his unique mix of buffoonery and genuine threats to US democracy.

http://www.avclub.com/article/idiocracy-writers-team-terry-crews-anti-trump-ads-237726 (http://www.avclub.com/article/idiocracy-writers-team-terry-crews-anti-trump-ads-237726)

Talking to BuzzFeed, Cohen says he and Judge “thought it would take much, much longer to get to this point,” and that they considered the film a satire of celebrity culture, and its political elements “a crazy joke.” He says that, at first, the parallels between this election cycle and the film were “just a general lizard brain kind of thing.” Then, he says, “it started to get, as the year went on, weirdly specific ... the more things go on, the more it actually seems to be kind of merging in a very specific, eerie way.”
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 06, 2016, 03:46:45 PM
i'm so excited!

we've only got a couple more days before the REAL attacks come out against donald trump.  and the wheels are already falling off:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trump-does-not-have-campaign

also, i discovered this book:
http://hillarybook.nationalmemo.com/

which, on the whole, makes sense when you think about it.  i mean, she's had how many hearings and special investigations over the years?  but, all of them always come up with nothing.  either she has magical powers to intimidate all the most powerful people in the country despite them trying and trying and trying and trying... or they're just making shit up.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: BeardKing on June 06, 2016, 04:13:09 PM
I'm going to go ahead and say it's the latter. :)
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 06, 2016, 07:11:42 PM
In regards to former secretary Clinton I can for a fact say she is definitely not good for this country.  Though I feel that way about most of the establishment.  When you picture your evil villains in all the stories the ones that masterfully manipulate and know when and what to say and make the lesser factions war with one another and always manages to avoid getting pinned down.  If you have worked for her or her inner circles it is pretty apparent how she feels about the common citizen.  They are toys to be played with and pawns with no other value than to be sacrificed for her gain.

This brings me to Option B the one and only Mr. Trump.  Someone who has made plenty of bad decisions and through the miracle of luck and personality comes out on top again and again.  He is rude and very much the epitome of everything the rest of the world seems to hate about America.  He skates around giving any major defining policy and gets away with it.  He feel like a professional politician without being one.

Finally there is bless his heart Senator Sanders.  Someone who believes the gospel he is preaching and stays true to the beliefs as long as anyone can remember.  However he ideas are too idealistic and he doesn't have a true answer to how he will fund everything and still keep the economy (which is the U.S. number one concern in most recent polls) going.  Which will be fought by every surviving piece of the congress side of the system and fail or will succeed but likely lead the U.S. to what I can only foresee as the Greece scenario.

None of these are happy.  My hope is that Trump wins and then just sits in office and tweets all day and turns into the next Calvin Coolidge and just lets the government do it's job.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 06, 2016, 10:54:11 PM
In regards to former secretary Clinton I can for a fact say she is definitely not good for this country.  Though I feel that way about most of the establishment.

feel?  or fact?  two totally different things.


When you picture your evil villains in all the stories the ones that masterfully manipulate and know when and what to say and make the lesser factions war with one another and always manages to avoid getting pinned down.  If you have worked for her or her inner circles it is pretty apparent how she feels about the common citizen.  They are toys to be played with and pawns with no other value than to be sacrificed for her gain.

wait.  you worked for her or her inner circles?


This brings me to Option B the one and only Mr. Trump.  Someone who has made plenty of bad decisions and through the miracle of luck and personality comes out on top again and again.  He is rude and very much the epitome of everything the rest of the world seems to hate about America.  He skates around giving any major defining policy and gets away with it.  He feel like a professional politician without being one.

um.  sure.  if professional u.s. politicians said things like mexicans are rapists, muslims need to be banned, he'd build a wall to dwarf the great wall of china between us and mexico, japan and south korea need nukes, he's not going to release his tax returns, when he gets into power he'll have that mexican judge investigated, etc.

yeah.  trump's totally gonna come out on top this time.


Finally there is bless his heart Senator Sanders.  Someone who believes the gospel he is preaching and stays true to the beliefs as long as anyone can remember.  However he ideas are too idealistic and he doesn't have a true answer to how he will fund everything and still keep the economy (which is the U.S. number one concern in most recent polls) going.  Which will be fought by every surviving piece of the congress side of the system and fail or will succeed but likely lead the U.S. to what I can only foresee as the Greece scenario.

why not like scandinavian countries instead?


None of these are happy.  My hope is that Trump wins and then just sits in office and tweets all day and turns into the next Calvin Coolidge and just lets the government do it's job.

the point of that "wheels falling off" article i just linked was that he's having problems because he doesn't listen to anyone but himself.

are you sure you're not just sitting around watching fox news?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: ultamentkiller on June 06, 2016, 11:18:30 PM
I actually agree with Clinton being evil. And no, I don't watch Fox News.

She manipulated the democratic party to have her former campaign manager be in charge of the primaries, allowing him to schedule debates when he knew the majority of the party wouldn't be watching. I'm sure there's a whole bunch of other stuff he's done to undercut Sanderson, who wouldn't be much better anyway because he can't do most of what he promises. Clinton's also, hopefully, going to be arrested soon for at least one of the crimes she's committed in this country. Here's the issue. Right now she already has enough people in her pocket to delay the hearing, because she's in a "noble family." If she becomes president, the hearing will never happen because she'll be running things. I won't vote for someone who already got three or four Americans killed through incompetence. As usual, none of the candidates are even close to decent, so I'll vote for whichever one is less likely to take my money and get me killed within their term.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 06, 2016, 11:40:01 PM
I actually agree with Clinton being evil. And no, I don't watch Fox News.

She manipulated the democratic party to have her former campaign manager be in charge of the primaries, allowing him to schedule debates when he knew the majority of the party wouldn't be watching. I'm sure there's a whole bunch of other stuff he's done to undercut Sanderson, who wouldn't be much better anyway because he can't do most of what he promises. Clinton's also, hopefully, going to be arrested soon for at least one of the crimes she's committed in this country. Here's the issue. Right now she already has enough people in her pocket to delay the hearing, because she's in a "noble family." If she becomes president, the hearing will never happen because she'll be running things. I won't vote for someone who already got three or four Americans killed through incompetence. As usual, none of the candidates are even close to decent, so I'll vote for whichever one is less likely to take my money and get me killed within their term.

so, you fall on the "she's so diabolical and powerful that even with all the forces in washington -- the cia, the fbi, the entire right side of the aisle, all the people who have been able to do things like shut down the entire government -- trying to simply charge her with a crime, any crime, but are unable to do so" side of the fence.

and logic doesn't dictate that maybe, just maybe, there's nothing really there other than "she's not a criminal, just a bitch who makes old white guys angry"?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 07, 2016, 12:25:40 AM
feel?  or fact?  two totally different things.

Fact on personal experience.  Also testimony and discussion with peers and their insight.

wait.  you worked for her or her inner circles?   

You got me on this one. No.  However, overhearing conversation when you are wall dressing is a different story and paints some very unbecoming pictures.

um.  sure.  if professional u.s. politicians said things like mexicans are rapists, muslims need to be banned, he'd build a wall to dwarf the great wall of china between us and mexico, japan and south korea need nukes, he's not going to release his tax returns, when he gets into power he'll have that mexican judge investigated, etc.

Not here to defend Trump.  However, I believe the entire quote though awkward referenced the criminal element not all mexicans.  2.  Muslim immigration being stopped to come up with a better solution is not banning Muslims as a whole.   If you can quote him saying he wants to directly ban and kick out the Muslim population in the U.S. I will admit being wrong here.  Japan and South Korea don't want nukes so moot point.  If they did have them it would be significantly less scary than some other nations that do have them.  I don't care about tax returns they are all a bunch of rich people who in all of my life experience don't understand or actually care about the working class.  He says things that annoy normal people because he gets emotional which is strangely enough refreshing to me.  Though that aspect I agree is out of line.

yeah.  trump's totally gonna come out on top this time. 

Never said he was, only my hope in the current options is that he does and then chooses to do nothing in office and let the legislature (hopefully a replaced and more useful one) do their jobs.  I can't predict the future.

why not like scandinavian countries instead?
 
Often persistent negative economic growth, economy based on tourism and natural finite resources, tax rates and loss of high level doctors to capitalist countries that would remain.  Lots of room to debate the pros and cons.  However bottom line on this is I value less federal control and more access to freedoms.

the point of that "wheels falling off" article i just linked was that he's having problems because he doesn't listen to anyone but himself.

Then let him be a do nothing president is my take on this. 

are you sure you're not just sitting around watching fox news?

I have watch plenty of news from many sources around the world.  I am well traveled with face time with many different culture governments and ideologies all of which I have had the pleasure of learning from.  We are not perfect and neither are the other countries.  I speak because I am concerned.  The foundation of freedom I believe in and work everyday to support.  However if you want to paint me in a box and attack my concern that is your right. I will do everything I can to support those rights no matter if we disagree.  That is the lot I have chosen with my freedom.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 07, 2016, 01:34:34 AM
I have watch plenty of news from many sources around the world.  I am well traveled with face time with many different culture governments and ideologies all of which I have had the pleasure of learning from.  We are not perfect and neither are the other countries.  I speak because I am concerned.  The foundation of freedom I believe in and work everyday to support.  However if you want to paint me in a box and attack my concern that is your right. I will do everything I can to support those rights no matter if we disagree.  That is the lot I have chosen with my freedom.

painting in a box?  heck no!  freedom?  heck yes!

heh.  i know enough conservatives (my full-colonel-worked-at-the-pentagon-best-friend-since-grade-school being one of many) to know there's a lot of nuance among the group.  not to mention, i'm the only male -- dad, brother, uncles, grandfather, step-dad, step-brother, step-in-laws, basically in my whole family -- to not go into the military.  and they cover all branches, from running nukes to the army corps of engineers.

so, yeah.  to say i am familiar with conservatives is a gross understatement.

tho, i'm fascinated.  you make it sound like you've been pretty close to the wheels of washington.  now, i'm completely curious as to what you do for a living.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 07, 2016, 01:43:55 AM
Just a civil servant.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 07, 2016, 02:16:38 AM
Just a civil servant.

hrm.  that's kind of an anticlimactic occupation reveal.

but, nice to meet you nonetheless!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 07, 2016, 02:55:39 AM
Just a civil servant.

hrm.  that's kind of an anticlimactic occupation reveal.

but, nice to meet you nonetheless!
I wanted to say Commander Shepard but that would have been a lie.  Though, we both have gotten shot at s/he seems to have cooler friends. 

With that my hijacking is done.  Continue the debate and discussion.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 07, 2016, 03:37:18 AM
Just a civil servant.

hrm.  that's kind of an anticlimactic occupation reveal.

but, nice to meet you nonetheless!
I wanted to say Commander Shepard but that would have been a lie.  Though, we both have gotten shot at s/he seems to have cooler friends. 

With that my hijacking is done.  Continue the debate and discussion.

that would have been so awesome!  total missed opportunity!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 07, 2016, 03:44:44 AM
Just a civil servant.

hrm.  that's kind of an anticlimactic occupation reveal.

but, nice to meet you nonetheless!
I wanted to say Commander Shepard but that would have been a lie.  Though, we both have gotten shot at s/he seems to have cooler friends. 

With that my hijacking is done.  Continue the debate and discussion.

that would have been so awesome!  total missed opportunity!

oh.  and apparently my response could have been taken as a "public servants are lame" reply.  it was absolutely a "there are sooooo many positions that fall under public servant from librarians to the president of the united states and all you say is public servant" response.

just in case, i thought i'd clear that up.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on June 07, 2016, 07:12:27 PM
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.Winston Churchill

You guys are trying really hard to prove him wrong.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on June 07, 2016, 09:01:51 PM
Wait, are people trying to seriously argue on here that Donald Trump would be better for the country than Hillary Clinton? Because that's just... no, just no... For all her admitted flaws, Hillary is nowhere goddamn near as bad as Trump.
 
Let's go over this, shall we? Trump, to date...
-Has openly advocated War Crimes.
-Has openly mocked women, disabled people and McCain for being a Prisoner of War
-Has openly threatened to shut down news organisations that mock him.
-Refuses to denounce hate groups/white supremacists who support him.
-Is openly bigoted
-Is openly sexist
-Has zilch in the way of political experience
-Is a habitual liar (and this is by politician standards, which are already fairly terrible)
-Has openly advocated for his supporters to beat up protesters and refuses to condemn those that do
-Acts tough but has a thinner skin than plastic wrap
-Has only one real consistent policy (the Mexico Wall) which not only would be ridiculous and expensive but, as anyone with any kind of knowledge of illegal immigration would tell you, would not work in the slightest.
-Can be reasonably argued that he's a genuine fascist
-Is an immature, narcissistic manchild
 
Hillary, at worst, is going to be more of the same. Benghazi and the email server thing are bullshit scandals blown out of all proportions by Republicans who have been desperate to smear her for years. And while there are genuine worries to be had about things Clinton's ties to Wall Street or her foreign policy (which is still miles better than Trump's advocating war crimes), it's also easy to forget that she's quite likely the most qualified candidate of the entire field. Sanders certainly has the better ideas (which is why I'm torn between which I'd support), but his suggestions for putting them into place have been fairly spotty. But either candidate is still miles better than Trump who is genuinely hateful and dangerous. And don't give me that 'I'm sure he'll improve when he gets into to office' crap. Saying there's a chance he might not start World War III over Vladmir Putin insulting him in a meeting is a terrible argument no matter how you try to spin it. If anything, his recent attacks on that Hispanic judge have proved beyond a doubt that no matter how much allied Republicans try to keep him under control, he's going to do whatever the hell he wants, consequences be damned. And that is not someone you want in control of the largest arsenal in the world.
 
TLDR: No matter how much you dislike her, Hillary is nowhere near as bad as Trump. Trying to argue otherwise is silly.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 07, 2016, 09:27:31 PM
it's funny.  my favorite comparison of the two is this:

untrustworthy, liar hillary:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/

plain-speaking donald:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

heh.

makes you wonder at the definition of "untrustworthy" for some folks.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 07, 2016, 09:53:24 PM
Let's go over this, shall we? Trump, to date...

-Has openly advocated War Crimes.  Not that I expect him to admit wrong doing.  When was the last time he brought this up?  March?  He went silent on the issue.  I would want him to renounce that position but, I can assure you no matter how bad you think of the military they would never carry out that order. 

-Has openly mocked women, disabled people and McCain for being a Prisoner of War  See your narcissistic manchild who attacks opponents and then later talks them up when they are supposed to be allies.

-Has openly threatened to shut down news organisations that mock him.   The press don't care as they shouldn't. Now if we could only get them to start actually bringing facts on all sides out instead of picking sides.

-Refuses to denounce hate groups/white supremacists who support him.    http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/donald-trump-disavows-david-duke-kkk/index.html

-Is openly bigoted  Yes unfortunately so HRC she just hides it better.  https://socialistworker.org/2016/01/26/the-clintons-shameful-hypocrisy-on-racism

-Is openly sexist  This is a very mixed bag.  I have seen opinions both ways I will wait for evidence.

-Has zilch in the way of political experience   So yes this is where I agree and don't mind at all really.  Give me a better outsider and I would probably back them as well.

-Is a habitual liar (and this is by politician standards, which are already fairly terrible)   The difference here?

-Has openly advocated for his supporters to beat up protesters and refuses to condemn those that do    Vice the other not publicly condemning violence of their own supporters which to date I believe has been significantly more extreme?

-Acts tough but has a thinner skin than plastic wrap  Once again give me another option?  HRC is adept at controlling who is around her when not in control she is pretty bad about taking criticism.  Actually anytime she doesn't know she has a camera on her she is pretty thin skinned.

-Has only one real consistent policy (the Mexico Wall) which not only would be ridiculous and expensive but, as anyone with any kind of knowledge of illegal immigration would tell you, would not work in the slightest.   https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform  Enforcing the law would help.  I would take a deeper look at the entire policy plan.

-Can be reasonably argued that he's a genuine fascist   Our definitions of fascism differ.  When I have evidence of Trump supporters trying to drown out liberal opinions in an open forum and when you have a conservative riot over a liberal gathering.  When I see fact and debate vice one sides fact with source drowned out by catchy phrases and closed minds then I will agree with you on this.

-Is an immature, narcissistic manchild    This is why I want a do nothing president Trump who tells us his plans openly so we can shut down the bad ones.  The other option is one that will use the U.S. for personal gain and throw away the leftovers uncaringly.  The cost in life and liberty is not worth it.  If you fear a fascist state I would keep my eye on her very closely.  A nation where the government controls less of your life is not the kind that can become fascist easily.

I didn't realize my distaste based on personal knowledge and experience would bother you.  I think all bad ideas should be challenged and corrected.  Trump I think is far more pliable to the needs/desires of the citizens.  But, I am silly as you say.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Doctor_Chill on June 07, 2016, 10:14:33 PM
Johnson/Weld 2016!
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rostum on June 07, 2016, 10:29:57 PM
Quote
I didn't realize my distaste based on personal knowledge and experience would bother you.  I think all bad ideas should be challenged and corrected.  Trump I think is far more pliable to the needs/desires of some citizens.  But, I am silly as you say.

I think you will find women, muslims and hispanics can be citizens as well.
America has a history of pliable presidents being led by the nose not by the citizens but by big business.
I do know a little about the Clintons and dislike the power and influence that they wield. That said Bill Clinton was one of the best presidents for the American people of the 20th century. He employed people, created sensible education reform, he turned the army into a social welfare and daycare system. Which the provided higher education to the enlisted. The wealth of the general population was was raised and you hardly invaded anywhere. Thats got to be a win from from a world perspective. Sadly the money still moves upwards and you are back to ensuring the rich get richer at the expense of pretty much everybody else.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 07, 2016, 10:33:46 PM
again, from the lede of that article i posted:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trump-does-not-have-campaign

Quote
“Bottom line, you can hire all the top people in the world, but to what end? Trump does what he wants,” a source close to the campaign said.

he can't be led by the nose.  he won't sit passively and do what he's told.  he won't hang around and tweet.  he will aggressively chase his own, seat-of-the-pants agenda.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on June 07, 2016, 10:36:22 PM
Just when I think I'm out, they rope me back in! :)

EDIT: Looking at this post without the red haze that overtook my vision when I read your original response, I believe some of it was disrespectful when it should not have been. I've edited the tone, but not the content.

Let's go over this, shall we? Trump, to date...

-Has openly advocated War Crimes.  Not that I expect him to admit wrong doing.  When was the last time he brought this up?  March?  He went silent on the issue.  I would want him to renounce that position but, I can assure you no matter how bad you think of the military they would never carry out that order. 

I don't believe our military would defy a direct order from their commander-in-chief. I'm not aware of a time in recent memory where the military refused to carry out an order from the President of the United States. If you can cite one, I'd be curious. The United States military does not set our foreign policy, it carries it out.

And to describe Trump's policy in his own words, he has advocated for more waterboarding (it doesn't go far enough, he says), as well as sharing that lovely story about dipping bullets in pig's blood (take that, Muslims!) and intentionally targeting the families of terrorists (yes, let's go after women and children).

I can't accept your statement of "Well, sure, he should walk back some of his statements of war crimes, but if he asked our military to do those sort of things, I'm sure they'd refuse" as valid. For a person in the military to refuse a direct order of the President of the United States is treason. If you think that it's acceptable to elect someone who would give our military the choice to commit war crimes or commit treason, you need to rethink your position.

There's a reason most of the other leaders of the free world fear President Trump, and it's not because he's going to "Make American Great Again." It's because he has zero understanding of how foreign relations and military operations work.

-Has openly mocked women, disabled people and McCain for being a Prisoner of War  See your narcissistic manchild who attacks opponents and then later talks them up when they are supposed to be allies.

I'm not sure I understand who you're referring to here. Neither Sanders or Clinton has openly mocked the disabled, or said "I like my heroes to not get captured". If I missed a case of that, I'd be happy for a link.

-Has openly threatened to shut down news organisations that mock him.   The press don't care as they shouldn't. Now if we could only get them to start actually bringing facts on all sides out instead of picking sides.

Whether or not you believe "the press" is doing their job (and I have a ton of problems with how they've handled things, including giving Trump all the free air time) a President should not be openly saying he's going to shut down the fourth estate because they don't agree with them.

Freedom of the press is one of the best things an open democracy has going for it. You know who doesn't have freedom of the press? China and North Korea.

-Refuses to denounce hate groups/white supremacists who support him.    http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/donald-trump-disavows-david-duke-kkk/index.html

You're right here. He did denounce David Duke. He only had to sit and think about it for a few days. The person I want for president would be able to say immediately, when directly asked "I do not accept the endorsement of a racist leader of the KKK". Trump refused to say this when asked, repeatedly. He had to think about his denouncement for days.

-Is openly bigoted  Yes unfortunately so HRC she just hides it better.  https://socialistworker.org/2016/01/26/the-clintons-shameful-hypocrisy-on-racism

One candidate being racist doesn't make another candidate being racist okay. Being racist isn't okay, period, so this doesn't excuse Trump. And again, Trump is far more *openly* racist than Hillary (if you accept that she's racist, which I don't) and the fact that he is openly racist is inspiring his supports to be the same.

That isn't happening on Hillary's side.

-Is openly sexist  This is a very mixed bag.  I have seen opinions both ways I will wait for evidence.

If "bleeding out of her whatever" and his vast litany of derogatory comments about women haven't convinced you, I'm not sure anything could. However, there is no mixed bag. Unless you ignore a large number of on the record statements from Trump, his misogyny is well documented.

-Has zilch in the way of political experience   So yes this is where I agree and don't mind at all really.  Give me a better outsider and I would probably back them as well.

I disagree. This feeds into "let's get all the smart, experienced people out of government." This is a bad precedent. For years (since Bush I) there's been this growing perception that anyone who has experience, intelligence, or higher education is "bad" for the country. That is incorrect.

I want educated leaders, not uneducated ones. And say what you will about Hillary, but she has education and experience. Trump might have education, but lacks experience in politics, domestic policy, foreign policy, diplomacy, and every other area where our commander-in-chief should be well educated.

-Is a habitual liar (and this is by politician standards, which are already fairly terrible)   The difference here?

Again, saying another person does it doesn't excuse Trump. And all you have to do is compare them to see that Trump lies FAR more often, and far more randomly. I honestly wonder sometimes if he lies so much as simply forgets what he said five minutes after he said it. Either is bad.

-Has openly advocated for his supporters to beat up protesters and refuses to condemn those that do    Vice the other not publicly condemning violence of their own supporters which to date I believe has been significantly more extreme?

Patently false. Hillary has never told her supporters to commit violence, and has repeatedly denounced cases where it happened. Trump has openly stated things like "Well, maybe he had it coming" and "what he was doing was terrible, so he deserved it". Just scroll a few pages back in this thread to find those links.

-Acts tough but has a thinner skin than plastic wrap  Once again give me another option?  HRC is adept at controlling who is around her when not in control she is pretty bad about taking criticism.  Actually anytime she doesn't know she has a camera on her she is pretty thin skinned.

Again, this is demonstrateably false. Go watch the Benghazi hearings again to see just how unflappable she is. Republicans have been throwing every accusation under the sun at her since Bill Clinton was president, and she's still undeterred. Last I checked, Trump was busy accusing a judge of being a "Mexican racist" because the judge is presiding over a lawsuit related to his university.

-Has only one real consistent policy (the Mexico Wall) which not only would be ridiculous and expensive but, as anyone with any kind of knowledge of illegal immigration would tell you, would not work in the slightest.   https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform  Enforcing the law would help.  I would take a deeper look at the entire policy plan.

You can't look at Trump's plan because he doesn't *have* a plan. It changes from day to day and works entirely in generalities. Again, his lack of experience is telling. Not a person I want as president.

-Can be reasonably argued that he's a genuine fascist   Our definitions of fascism differ.  When I have evidence of Trump supporters trying to drown out liberal opinions in an open forum and when you have a conservative riot over a liberal gathering.  When I see fact and debate vice one sides fact with source drowned out by catchy phrases and closed minds then I will agree with you on this.

I agree that definitions of fascim differ, but even if you don't say Trump goes that far, the rest of his traits (idiocy, lying, racism, advocating violence, misogyny, and thin skin) are more than enough of an argument that he should not be a candidate for the president of the United States.

Sorry to say this, but what remains of the Republican party has just straight up lost its mind this year. That's why you see people like Paul Ryan openly criticizing Trump, the Republican nominee.

I didn't realize my distaste based on personal knowledge and experience would bother you.  I think all bad ideas should be challenged and corrected.  Trump I think is far more pliable to the needs/desires of the citizens.  But, I am silly as you say.

I don't think you're silly. I think you genuinely care about this country, and you have genuine concerns about Hillary Clinton. I respect that, but in this case, I'm telling you, straight up, that you've got a great many facts wrong. You are factually incorrect.

Also, I have to disagree with you that we should overlook all Trump's failings on the off chance that he will "do nothing" as president, instead of implementing all the disastrous policies he's proposed.

Respect.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Rukaio_Alter on June 07, 2016, 11:23:31 PM
Let's go over this, shall we? Trump, to date...

-Has openly advocated War Crimes.  Not that I expect him to admit wrong doing.  When was the last time he brought this up?  March?  He went silent on the issue.  I would want him to renounce that position but, I can assure you no matter how bad you think of the military they would never carry out that order.
I'm sorry, what freaking logic is this?! It's acceptable because he hasn't brought it up for a while?! Really?! Just... really?!

And, as I mentioned before, saying that we should vote Trump in because there's a chance he might not do what he says he's going to do is a terrible argument regardless of how you spin it.

Quote
-Has openly mocked women, disabled people and McCain for being a Prisoner of War  See your narcissistic manchild who attacks opponents and then later talks them up when they are supposed to be allies.

There's nothing wrong with attacking an opponent in politics before teaming up later. Clinton and Obama did so in their primary. But those attacks were largely based on policy or experience. Trump was mocking women for being women, disabled people for being disabled people and, again, McCain for being a fucking prisoner of war! That is what makes despicable and unpresidential.

Quote
-Has openly threatened to shut down news organisations that mock him.   The press don't care as they shouldn't. Now if we could only get them to start actually bringing facts on all sides out instead of picking sides.
Reporting what Trump is actually saying is not the same as 'picking sides'. Also 'they don't care' means we should friggin ignore it? Wha?


Quote
-Refuses to denounce hate groups/white supremacists who support him.    http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/donald-trump-disavows-david-duke-kkk/index.html
Yes, after the public twisted his arm on it. It also hasn't stopped him from repeatedly retweeting comments from hate group/white supremacist accounts and not denouncing them either.

Quote
-Is openly bigoted  Yes unfortunately so HRC she just hides it better.  https://socialistworker.org/2016/01/26/the-clintons-shameful-hypocrisy-on-racism
First of all, look up what the word 'openly' means. Second of all, that article really doesn't make a strong case for Hillairy apparently being racist. Supporting a possible dodgy welfare bill and having some wacko racist supporters does not make her racist (unless you're willing to claim that Sanders deserves blame for all the 'Bernie Bros' harassing people).

Third, and most importantly of all, even if those examples did indicate racism it's still nothing compared to what Donald Trump has been saying. This is the guy who claims most Mexican immigrants are murderers and rapists, that Muslims should be banned from entering the country and is currently claiming a Mexican judge can't do his job impartially because of his heritage. When Hillary Clinton gets even close to that level of open bigotry, then you can start calling her as bad as Trump.

Quote
-Is openly sexist  This is a very mixed bag.  I have seen opinions both ways I will wait for evidence.
Is it hell. He claimed Megyn Kelly was giving a hard time in a debate because she was menstruating. He, just recently, said that he'd consider female judges to be just as unable to be as impartial in his cases as the Mexican judge. He objectified his one-year old daughter.

Quote
-Has zilch in the way of political experience   So yes this is where I agree and don't mind at all really.  Give me a better outsider and I would probably back them as well.
This is the kind of logic that just makes me slap my head against a wall. If you need someone to fix your toilet, do you call a librarian rather than a plumber? No because they probably don't know the first thing about fixing toilets. Same thing here. Politicians are trained to have the knowledge and experience to try and run a country. Donald Trump does not.

Quote
-Is a habitual liar (and this is by politician standards, which are already fairly terrible)   The difference here?
Politicians try not to actively and openly lie because, if they're discovered, it'll hurt them. Instead, they tend to go for concealed and half truths. And while you could make the argument that hidden lies are more dangerous than open lies, that's simply not true here. Because Donald lies so constantly and so blatantly that it's impossible to tell whether anything he's saying is the truth or what he believes in or what he's planning to do. When you listen to a regular politician speak, at least you know that their statement is likely technically true, even if there are things hidden behind the surface. When Donald speaks, you don't know if anything he says is true. How is that better?

Quote
-Has openly advocated for his supporters to beat up protesters and refuses to condemn those that do    Vice the other not publicly condemning violence of their own supporters which to date I believe has been significantly more extreme?
Really? Because I've yet to see any Clinton/Sanders supporters sucker punch someone. And definitely I've yet to see either of them praise a supporter for violently attacking someone. Certainly there have been protests, but that's within their right.

Quote
-Acts tough but has a thinner skin than plastic wrap  Once again give me another option?  HRC is adept at controlling who is around her when not in control she is pretty bad about taking criticism.  Actually anytime she doesn't know she has a camera on her she is pretty thin skinned.
Yeah, but that has more to do with the fact that the media and Republicans have been trying every dirty trick to tear her down for basically the last 25 years. I'd be a little pricky myself after all that. And she's never resorted to throwing a temper tantrum like Trump has.

Quote
-Has only one real consistent policy (the Mexico Wall) which not only would be ridiculous and expensive but, as anyone with any kind of knowledge of illegal immigration would tell you, would not work in the slightest.   https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform  Enforcing the law would help.  I would take a deeper look at the entire policy plan.
Okay, first of all, are you seriously trying to claim that Donald Trump's website is going to be a reliable and unbiased source on this matter?

Second of all, no, no matter what else he might add on, the wall is still ridiculous, expensive and not going to work.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU8dCYocuyI

Quote
-Can be reasonably argued that he's a genuine fascist   Our definitions of fascism differ.  When I have evidence of Trump supporters trying to drown out liberal opinions in an open forum and when you have a conservative riot over a liberal gathering.  When I see fact and debate vice one sides fact with source drowned out by catchy phrases and closed minds then I will agree with you on this.

A campaign based on a platform of scapegoating minorities? Threatening to shut down press freedom? Poltical violence? Applying restrictions to certain groups/minorites? None of this ringing a bell?

Certainly, it's not a 100% thing, which is why I said 'can be reasonably argued', but the parallels are frightening.

Quote
-Is an immature, narcissistic manchild    This is why I want a do nothing president Trump who tells us his plans openly so we can shut down the bad ones.
 
I'm sorry, but this just ridiculous on all levels. I reemphasis, you seriously think we should vote Trump in because there's a chance his stupid ideas might not come to fruition? That's not any kind of sensible logic. That's like ordering a ham sandwich in the hopes that it might somehow transform into a cheese sandwich. Or, for a more accurate example, like bringing home a wild and savage dog which you know is wild and savage, which experts have told you is wild and savage, which you have seen examples of it being wild and savage in the hopes that it might not attack you and your children. Because Trump has made no attempts to hide his despicableness. Even his claims that he'll tone it down for the general election have very quickly fallen apart. And you seriously think this egotist is going to let it all go once he's in the oval office? Really?

Quote
The other option is one that will use the U.S. for personal gain and throw away the leftovers uncaringly.  The cost in life and liberty is not worth it.  If you fear a fascist state I would keep my eye on her very closely.  A nation where the government controls less of your life is not the kind that can become fascist easily.
Yeah, I'm sorry, but what evidence do you have of any of this aside from hearsay and gossip and speculation? You openly admitted you had nothing to do with the Hillary campaign and are basing your opinions entirely on water cooler chatter. That's not a reliable source. We, on the other hand, are criticizing Donald for stuff he is actually openly saying here.

Also, I'm fairly certain this sort of ridiculous stuff was said about Obama back in 2008. And remember how he turned America into a fascist state? No? Exactly.

Quote
I didn't realize my distaste based on personal knowledge and experience would bother you.  I think all bad ideas should be challenged and corrected.  Trump I think is far more pliable to the needs/desires of the citizens.  But, I am silly as you say.
Yes, I think you're silly. Very silly. I know everyone else likes to try and keep things friendly and polite here, but I'm not going to sugarcoat this. Voting for/supporting Trump means you support, or at least tolerate, his views. You support banning Muslims from entering the country. You support shutting down press freedom. You support Trump's open racism/sexism/manbaby attitude because, whether you think he'll go through with it or not, that is what he is offering. And what he's offering is not just silly. It's dangerous.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on June 07, 2016, 11:55:28 PM
Also, on a more general level, I think it best to clearly state some beliefs I have that will not change. If you're going to discuss politics with me, these are good things to keep in mind.

1: The statement that voting for candidates with less education and experience is good is ludicrous.

I believe the growing idea that we need less educated, less experienced people in politics is false. This idea has been festering for more than a decade now, and it has given us people like Sarah Palin and Donald Trump. To lay out just how silly this idea is, here are some comparisons.

- I'm going to have open heart surgery. I want to hire someone who did not graduate from medical school, and has never done any other surgeries.

- My car has broken down. To fix it, I want to hire someone who knows nothing about cars. In fact, I'd like someone who doesn't even know how to change their own oil.

- I'd like my child to learn to read. To teach them, I want something who is illiterate and hasn't read any existing books.

I could go on and on, but this idea that the best politicians are "outsiders" with no political experience is ludicrous. I can think of no other profession where I hear anyone, on the left or right, saying that the best person to perform a service for them is a person who does *not* know how to perform that service.

2: Because another person does it, the fact that the person I'm endorsing does it is okay.

This is the other argument I see made time and again by people on both the left and the right. Basically, it boils down to this.

Person A: Your candidate is a racist.

Person B: Well, your candidate is a racist too, so we shouldn't care that my candidate is a racist.

This is not acceptable. The correct response is "No candidate should be a racist, and if my candidate is a racist, I believe they should not be."

I'm tired of hearing people make excuses for politicians (or anyone, for that matter) using the justification that other politicians are "just as bad". No. We should demand better from our elected representatives.

Carry on.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 08, 2016, 12:00:48 AM
personally, i enjoy (and, by enjoy, i mean eyeroll) when folks hold grudges against hillary for something she said  20 years ago against her today.  yet!  they'll be like "donald trump was just kidding when he said that stupid and terrible thing two months ago because he hasn't mentioned it since."

edit:

speaking of false dichotomies, if you're a rich dude, it's totally cool.  you're powerful, bro.  if you're a rich chick?  stupid, wasteful, distasteful!!

http://nypost.com/2016/06/05/hillarys-extravagant-campaign-wardrobe-costs-at-least-200k/
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 08, 2016, 03:19:25 AM
I am silly and stuck in a horrid place.  I can not in good conscience ever vote for Clinton.  Bernie I wish had a better shot without being held back by his own party.  That is even if I disagree with his vision of the U.S.  I really would love to see some working class or middle class people get to run for big public office.  I would love to see alternative candidates right now.  Unfortunately my hands are tied on the issue.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on June 08, 2016, 06:17:13 AM
I am silly and stuck in a horrid place.  I can not in good conscience ever vote for Clinton.  Bernie I wish had a better shot without being held back by his own party.  That is even if I disagree with his vision of the U.S.  I really would love to see some working class or middle class people get to run for big public office.  I would love to see alternative candidates right now.  Unfortunately my hands are tied on the issue.

A lot of people refuse to vote for Hillary Clinton. You're not alone, and I don't think anyone should vote for someone they don't agree with. If you intensely dislike Clinton, you have absolutely no reason to vote for her. All I'm saying is ... don't vote for Trump.

I wish the Republican party had chosen a better candidate, I really do. I know reasonable Republicans who are very upset that they don't have a sane choice for a candidate. I've seen a number of more traditional Republicans burning their voter cards rather than vote for Trump.

One story on the subject:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/republicans-are-burning-voter-registration-cards.html (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/republicans-are-burning-voter-registration-cards.html)

I think the danger is that Republicans feel they have to vote for Trump, despite him not being remotely qualified to be our president, to keep Hillary out of office. But the reality is, no matter how you feel about Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump would be far, far worse. He's proven that time and again, and will continue to prove it as the campaign continues.

So, don't vote for Hillary. But don't vote for Trump either, because if enough people do that, the US is ****ed. Write in the name of a candidate you truly believe in, or vote third party. But don't let your animosity toward Hillary drive you toward electing someone who is possibly the worst candidate for president we've seen in fifty years.

If I convince even one person who reads these forums not to toss a vote toward Donald Trump, I will count that as my personal contribution to not turning the United States into Idiocracy.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Jmack on June 08, 2016, 11:56:59 AM
I am so wishing I had the option to vote for Paul Ryan or John Kasich. Not saying I would or wouldn't, but it would be so heartening to have a real choice.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 08, 2016, 02:57:01 PM
If I convince even one person who reads these forums not to toss a vote toward Donald Trump, I will count that as my personal contribution to not turning the United States into Idiocracy.

we watched that again the other night.  i'm pretty sure there are shows just as stupid as "ow, my balls!" on tv now.  it's on of the reasons we don't subscribe to cable.


I am so wishing I had the option to vote for Paul Ryan or John Kasich. Not saying I would or wouldn't, but it would be so heartening to have a real choice.

i do find it amusing that the only people posting these memes are republicans:
(https://i.imgflip.com/11hx8e.jpg)

and the people railing against "the system" are bernie supporters:
(http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/host.madison.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/93/89388eb2-c1dc-5763-b6a4-abbcbfd94302/5744cf20ab8d2.image.jpg)

and hillary supporters (like my wife) are all just quietly going about their day.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 08, 2016, 03:30:44 PM

i do find it amusing that the only people posting these memes are republicans:
(https://i.imgflip.com/11hx8e.jpg)

and the people railing against "the system" are bernie supporters:
(http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/host.madison.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/93/89388eb2-c1dc-5763-b6a4-abbcbfd94302/5744cf20ab8d2.image.jpg)

and hillary supporters (like my wife) are all just quietly going about their day.

The system was heavily slanted against Bernie Sanders.  The rules of the contest were made to allow that.  If Bernie were thought of as a legitimate contestant for the nomination the Democratic Party would have given them equal support.  I completely disagree with him on the majority of his stances but the lack of monetary and political support behind him in his own party in favor of Hillary Clinton from the beginning was seemingly unfair.  If they had been on equal footing within the party from the beginning I don't think it would be as cut and dry as it is now.  Snowballing of public opinion is pretty common amongst human beings.  However systems for changing the way races are run in the future are in place.  Bernie is able to voice his grievances at the convention so there is a chance to change the balance for the future Bernies out there. 
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 08, 2016, 03:42:02 PM
The system was heavily slanted against Bernie Sanders.  The rules of the contest were made to allow that.  If Bernie were thought of as a legitimate contestant for the nomination the Democratic Party would have given them equal support.  I completely disagree with him on the majority of his stances but the lack of monetary and political support behind him in his own party in favor of Hillary Clinton from the beginning was seemingly unfair.  If they had been on equal footing within the party from the beginning I don't think it would be as cut and dry as it is now.  Snowballing of public opinion is pretty common amongst human beings.  However systems for changing the way races are run in the future are in place.  Bernie is able to voice his grievances at the convention so there is a chance to change the balance for the future Bernies out there.

you don't think that it has something to do with him being an independent elected official since 1981, only switching to democrat last year in order to run for president?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 08, 2016, 03:50:41 PM
double-post!  new thing!

this is awesome:
https://twitter.com/existentialfish/status/740511956050804736

Quote
trump last night banned @dcbigjohn from buzzfeed, gave credentials to infowars

for those that don't know, infowars is a conspiracy site.  the one from my post last week -- where he said obama was going to activate the beyoncees to go out and kill cops.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on June 08, 2016, 04:21:43 PM
I am so wishing I had the option to vote for Paul Ryan or John Kasich. Not saying I would or wouldn't, but it would be so heartening to have a real choice.

If either of those men were the Republican nominee, I would be much more comfortable. While I disagree with both of them on social issues and some (not all) economic issues, they are also thoughtful, sane, intelligent people who, if elected president, I believe could do the job well.

The rise of the "crazy" Republican candidates in the past 5-10 years is just alarming. If you look at the Republican primary, the top two candidates all along were Ted Cruz (religious fanatic) and Donald Trump (bombastic imbecile). None of the others even came close.

Moderate Republicans like George Bush Sr. and Bob Dole are now considered "RINOS" and even the policies of the immortalized Ronald Reagan would be too "liberal" for the majority of those now running the Republican party. As many Republicans have said across the party, if the GOP wants a future, this trend has got to change.

Like I said, I feel for Republicans who feel like they have an impossible choice this year. But to be frank, you need to look to your own party, not anyone else. While I agree with many that a two-party system isn't ideal, it's what we have at the moment, and that means both parties (Republican and Democrat) need to present sane, qualified candidates who aren't nut jobs.

This year, for a number of various reasons, the Republican party failed to do that.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 08, 2016, 04:37:12 PM
you don't think that it has something to do with him being an independent elected official since 1981, only switching to democrat last year in order to run for president?
It most likely does.  However the party chose to let him in.  I think they should have fully supported him equally as the rest of the candidates.  Sanders could always continue his campaign as an independent, though downsizing his staff makes that seem quite improbable at this time.  He should be applauded for bringing to light how broken our education system has become and putting big money and how they work to manipulate governance into the spot light.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 08, 2016, 05:29:28 PM
you don't think that it has something to do with him being an independent elected official since 1981, only switching to democrat last year in order to run for president?
It most likely does.  However the party chose to let him in.  I think they should have fully supported him equally as the rest of the candidates.  Sanders could always continue his campaign as an independent, though downsizing his staff makes that seem quite improbable at this time.  He should be applauded for bringing to light how broken our education system has become and putting big money and how they work to manipulate governance into the spot light.

who is the "they" that should have supported him as much as the other candidates?  you think he got less support than o'malley or webb?  you don't think he got enough support given he started as a "not even fathomable" candidate?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 08, 2016, 05:56:00 PM
you don't think that it has something to do with him being an independent elected official since 1981, only switching to democrat last year in order to run for president?
It most likely does.  However the party chose to let him in.  I think they should have fully supported him equally as the rest of the candidates.  Sanders could always continue his campaign as an independent, though downsizing his staff makes that seem quite improbable at this time.  He should be applauded for bringing to light how broken our education system has become and putting big money and how they work to manipulate governance into the spot light.

who is the "they" that should have supported him as much as the other candidates?  you think he got less support than o'malley or webb?  you don't think he got enough support given he started as a "not even fathomable" candidate?
They are the democratic party and yes all the candidates should have been given equal support by the party no matter how unfathomable.  However look at the way things went from the beginning it seems as though the party was always emphasized her.  How quickly the Super Delegates fell in line does little to change that opinion.  When it was down to two I do not think the gave him equal support.  In the last few weeks his support seemed to even grate on the party as leading members began pressuring that he should just step down and play nice. So, if he had started as a fathomable and respected candidate from the beginning I do think that the end result would have been much more even if not in his favor seeing how strong the grass root movement beneath him grew. 

Your adamant defensiveness on the subject does make me believe you think the system in place is perfectly fine and balanced though.  I just don't see it.  Though I am sure the advertising from those Super PACs doesn't come with any backdoor promises.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: tebakutis on June 08, 2016, 06:44:56 PM
For those Republicans unsatisfied with this year's Republican nominee, John Stossel over at Fox News suggests these folks.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/06/08/stossel-no-not-trump-or-clinton-voters-really-do-have-another-choice.html?intcmp=hphz03

Food for thought, for those who oppose Hillary Clinton, but understand how dangerously unbalanced Trump is. You don't actually have to vote for either of them.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 08, 2016, 06:50:51 PM
They are the democratic party and yes all the candidates should have been given equal support by the party no matter how unfathomable.  However look at the way things went from the beginning it seems as though the party was always emphasized her.  How quickly the Super Delegates fell in line does little to change that opinion.  When it was down to two I do not think the gave him equal support.  In the last few weeks his support seemed to even grate on the party as leading members began pressuring that he should just step down and play nice. So, if he had started as a fathomable and respected candidate from the beginning I do think that the end result would have been much more even if not in his favor seeing how strong the grass root movement beneath him grew. 

and, again, you don't think that has to do with how close she got in 2008 to winning the nomination coupled with years of secretary of state work?  seems perfectly enough to qualify anyone else not named "hillary clinton" to be the favorite.


Your adamant defensiveness on the subject does make me believe you think the system in place is perfectly fine and balanced though.  I just don't see it.  Though I am sure the advertising from those Super PACs doesn't come with any backdoor promises.

nah.  i'm not being adamant about defending any processes.  i'm just asking questions.  i like wondering 'why' about things.  and i don't believe in conspiracy theories.

that's where i roll with hanlon's razor -- "never assume malice when stupidity will suffice".  i'm a fan of common sense.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin on June 08, 2016, 07:06:57 PM
On a completely different political subject because I want to hear opinions.

Is there a reason to fear an armed well educated society that is taught to respect firearms and what they can be used for as well as taught and trained in their use and safety?
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Raptori on June 08, 2016, 07:27:24 PM
Is there a reason to fear an armed well educated society that is taught to respect firearms and what they can be used for as well as taught and trained in their use and safety?
Underlined the key point for me. Guns are for killing people. It's utterly crazy to me that people think it's a good idea to have loads of extremely dangerous weapons lying around.  :P
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: m3mnoch on June 08, 2016, 07:36:39 PM
On a completely different political subject because I want to hear opinions.

Is there a reason to fear an armed well educated society that is taught to respect firearms and what they can be used for as well as taught and trained in their use and safety?

personally, i'm a gun guy.  always have been.

that being said, i underlined the part that is important to me.

these dorks are doing it just for intimidation and to prove they can.  they're getting off on the feeling of power because they were stuffed in lockers in high school.  real educated and armed citizens don't do that sort of nonsense.  i know dozens of marines and former marines -- almost all of them carry either in their car or on their person.  none of them do it like these asshats.

(http://crooksandliars.com/files/primary_image/15/06/target-2-630.jpg)

respect your weapons.  they're not your goddamn dick for you to wave around showing how tough you are.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: Hedin on June 08, 2016, 09:04:56 PM
On a completely different political subject because I want to hear opinions.

Is there a reason to fear an armed well educated society that is taught to respect firearms and what they can be used for as well as taught and trained in their use and safety?

Yes there is.  As a country we average around 30,000 firearm deaths (homicides, suicides, and accidentals) year with another 8-10k non-fatal shootings.  There is no such thing as gun safety, I am safer by not owning a gun because there is no chance of an argument going really badly, or my daughter finding it, or if I have a particularly bad run of things there isn't an easy way out.
Title: Re: Politics and other ailments of the real world
Post by: WPaladin o