skhunted

Yes. Liberal states like the one I'm in should be in favor of massive federal tax cuts. I'm tired of subsidizing morons.

We are going to see liberal states talk about states rights and Republicans fighting that notion.

The U.S. outspends most NATO countries on defense spending a percent of GDP. The Europeans couldn't end the Serbia/Kosovo situation on their own. They needed the U.S. Europe needs to do more to defend themselves and not rely so much on the U.S.

Russia is not so good on the battlefield but great at sowing dissent and getting their man elected. I’ll never understand Biden giving Ukraine just enough to not lose but jot enough to win. Ukraine is fucked. But Europeans should do more for their own defense and not rely on the U.S.

Immigration at it's current levels might be great but not necessarily if it greatly increased. What you have to demonstrate is that in a world full of climate change caused chaos allowing tens of millions of people into the country is it a bad idea. We don't live in that word yet so referencing the effect of current levels of immigration is not relevant.

https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.7310

.. but I doubt you've have a rational basis for a belief that Central America in particular is likely to be one of the regions that will become dryer.

Is your belief rationally based?

The Panama Canal is having problems now due to a prolonged drought. There have already been migrations from Guatemala and Honduras due to droughts in the highlands. Mexico City is facing a water problem partially due to drought.

From NASA: Increased evaporation will result in more frequent and intense storms, but will also contribute to drying over some land areas.

Don't know if Central America in particular will dry out in the long term. Was just using it as an example of the types of migrations that will come from global warming. Please try to understand the overall point and not pedantically nitpick.

Water can be solved with desalination and investments in energy output improvement tech.

New Mexico can’t build desalination plants. Probably a good idea to not allow water intensive crops to be grown there that are exported.

Mass migrations can be handled by destroying all the layers of laws that NIMByYs use.

It’s rational for a country to not have open borders and allow anyone to just come. It’s also rational to not allow more people to come in than what the citizens are comfortable with. It’s going to be much more Darwinian in the future.

India, for instance, isn’t going to be able account 200 million climate refugees from Bangladesh.

It is a foregone conclusion. Countries should take steps to mitigate what happens to them. For instance the U.S. should prevent Saudi companies from exploiting water resources in the U.S. And we should build a wall to prevent mass migrations northward as Central America dries up.

There is nothing wrong with greed, greed is good. what there is something wrong with is envy and jealousy; all cultures and ethical traditions recognize that.

Supply side Jesus appreciates you.

greed drives people to try to improve, to get the most out of what they have.

Salk was not good at what he did because of greed. Leonardo was not great becuase of greed and being more greedy would not have made him better.

Greed is not good. All ethical traditions recognize this. Your view is pathetic. The actual Jesus does not appreciate you.

When I wrote there is a mainstreaming I meant that there is an attempt to make it mainstream. There are conservatives who say they’d rather vote for a rapist felon than a liberal. It’s an attempt to normalize certain viewpoints. I.E. voting for Hitler is better than voting for a liberal. The idea is that the worst of us is better than the best of you type mentality.

I fully expect the downvotes. America since Reagan has largely embraced the greed is good mantra. American evangelicals who profess to follow the Bible would downvote a comment that quoted the Bible by saying that the love of money is the root of all evil

a rising tide raises all boats.

The analogy to tides is not apt.

It’s absurd that 10 people can make that much money in a couple of days. No one should have as much wealth as those 10 people do.

Of course they aren't identical. The point is that prior to the internet everyone thought it reasonable to prevent kids from accessing pornography. Now it is widely available to them online. Some people think this is not right. There are no perfect solutions.

As they currently stand anyone, regardless of age, can easily access pornographic content online.

It's easy to view pornography online regardless of age. That's what we are talking about.

Here are my leftist views: No one should have more than $10 million of wealth. Everyone should have a place to live, food, and healthcare. Healthcare should be free at the point of usage. The U.S. should stop funding Israel. Higher education should be free. Churches should pay tax on the property they own. Donations to charity should not be tax deductible. Public transportation should be heavily subsidized and greatly expanded. The DOD and CIA and NSA should be greatly reduced in size and scope. Elections should be publicly funded so that each candidate gets an equal amount of funding. Abortion should be legalized everywhere. Homeschooling should be outlawed.

Can you cite some examples? I'm not understanding correctly what you are getting at.

That's disturbing and news to me. I didn't vote for Biden. The only time I voted for the winner in a Presidential election was my vote for Trump in 2016. But my vote for Trump was due to my theory that electing the dumbest, most corrupt, incompetent asshole possible is what America deserves.

Democratic persuasion techniques like this are also part of the problem...

People buy shirts that say “I’d rather be Russian than a liberal.” The demonization of the opposing ideology goes both ways. Everything you wrote applies to conservatives as well.

Trump lusts after his own daughter and if that alone doesn’t qualify him as a shitty person to his supporters then they clearly value ideology over the truth and morality.

For 40 years there has been a demonization of liberalism. Liberals are seen as the enemy. Liberals seek to destroy America and other such sentiments are common by consumers of right wing media. There are similar sentiments by liberals of conservatives.

If the true enemy is the opposing ideology then the vileness of the candidate of your ideology is overlooked by many people. It’s not a good state of affairs for so many people to view an entire ideology as evil and the enemy.

Donald Trump is a piece of shit. So is Bill Clinton. AOC is a good person. So is Mitt Romney.

See the edit to my original post.

Thanks for digging that up. I tried to find if he did tweet something when Biden won. However, my point about it being newsworthy stands. I think.

Did Tim Cook publicly comgratulate Joe Biden when he won? I don’t think so. Even if he did it wasn’t newsworthy. Trump supporters ask yourself this. What does it say about Trump that public displays of fealty are seen as necessary by powerful CEOs?

EDIT: I am wrong about Cook not tweeting when Biden won. I don’t think such tweets were newsworthy when Biden won but maybe I’m wrong. It feels to me like there is a need by the monied class to massage Trump’s ego. Maybe I’m blinded by bias in this regard and my perception is completely wrong.

Overall my post was a knee jerk reaction and not well thought out.

Hasn’t been implemented so how do you know the outcomes won’t be there? Real policy as you call often times fails to have intended outcome or has lots of unintended consequences.

In the 1980s a very few percent of people admired Hitler or sought to bring about a revival of his image. There is a mainstreaming of this revival. What is happening now is a normalization of the idea that perhaps he wasn’t all that bad. That he had the right idea to some extent. The center of the country has shifted greatly to the right. People who normally would not be right wing nationalists had the center not shifted are now right wing nationalists.

They are in the position of not wanting pro-Hitler sentiments on their site. They also don’t want conservatives, who are now in power, to punish them. It seems like a reasonable decision to just ban the word altogether. It’s expedient; not ideal.

And doing anything to upset capital is heresy.

When in Ferenginar do as the Ferengi.

Hitler’s character has been going through a revival of sorts amongst right wing white nationalists. You can find such posts on X.com. Threads doesn’t want that on their platform. They also don’t want the white nationalists to decry the fact that their posts about Hitler are deleted but posts condemning Hitler are not deleted. This will lead to things like what Texas tried to implement regarding social media platforms. Easiest course of action is to ban all mentions of Hitler.

Outcomes are more important than "real policy".

Do you think a business should be able to sell alcohol to a 10 year child? It’s not the business’ responsibility to raise a person’s kid, afterall.