EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2501
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11981 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46422 Posts
On November 10 2015 15:15 IgnE wrote: Is a white girl wanting to dress up as Pocahontas offensive? Or is Disney offensive? Neither? (I mean, I think Walt Disney was a historically racist guy or something, but the company isn't necessarily racist for having a princess of a certain race or ethnicity.) I've seen white girls dress as Pocahontas before. They didn't use blackface or whatever the equivalent would be for Native Americans. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46422 Posts
Donald Trump says Starbucks cups are anti-Christmas, suggests boycott ~ http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-carson-starbucks-1.3311844?cmp=rss 'If I become president, we're all going to be saying Merry Christmas again. That I can tell you.' Republican presidential contender Donald Trump is suggesting boycotting Starbucks over the minimalist design of its annual holiday cups. "Did you read about Starbucks? No more Merry Christmas on Starbucks," Trump told a capacity crowd of thousands gathered to hear him speak at a pre-debate rally in Springfield, Ill., on Monday evening. "Maybe we should boycott Starbucks, I don't know. Seriously. I don't care." Some religious conservatives have expressed anger over the coffee company's annual holiday-time cups — a minimalist all-red design with no images aside from the company's green and white logo. Previous years' cups have featured snowflakes, winter scenes and sometimes Christmas ornaments. But a small number of critics see the design choice as part of a larger movement away from exclusively Christian-themed holiday decorations. Starbucks Holiday While last year's cups featured a snowflake pattern, this year Starbucks has opted for an all-red design, with no inscription. (Starbucks) "In the past, we have told stories with our holiday cups designs," a spokesperson said in a statement on their website regarding this year's holiday cups. "This year we wanted to usher in the holidays with a purity of design that welcomes all of our stories." While the cups do not contain the word, the company offers Christmas Blend coffee grounds in stores and on their website. Trump, who is working to win the support of evangelical and other conservative Christians in a crowded field, has often expressed frustrations over companies using the term "Happy Holidays" in place of "Merry Christmas." He said on Monday that: "If I become president, we're all going to be saying, 'Merry Christmas' again. That I can tell you." He added that Starbucks operates a store in one of his buildings and that "that's the end of that lease, but who cares?" The rally comes on the eve of the next Republican presidential debate, which will be taking place Tuesday evening in Milwaukee for Fox Business Network. Trump is such a clown. Starbucks already has red, white, and green cups for the holidays, but Starbucks isn't promoting Christianity enough because it doesn't have even more explicitly-Christian decor on their cups? Starbucks doesn't ban anyone from saying Merry Christmas or acknowledging any other holiday. This is just a small group of Christians being ignorant whiners. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
 | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11981 Posts
I am still not convinced that Trump is actually a candidate and not just majorly trolling and as confused as anyone else that people take him seriously. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46422 Posts
On November 10 2015 20:55 farvacola wrote: This Starbucks hubbub is hilariously stupid and I would love to punch Joshua Feurstein right in his stupid face Oh you mean the guy who looks like a cross between Kevin James and Fred Durst and rages all the time on YouTube about fundamentalist nonsense? Yes. I'm sure there'd be quite a line for that. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46422 Posts
On November 10 2015 21:05 Simberto wrote: Why is that a thing? You are free to shout Merry Christmas at people if you want. Starbucks is free not to do that. Both are fine. Why does anyone give a fuck? Obviously because of the War on Christmas. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24354 Posts
On November 10 2015 21:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Obviously because of the War on Christmas. Which is clearly more real than the alleged systemic racism around the country. Which is why it deserves the attention of leading presidential candidates and news stories every season. The people bothered by this business's choice to sell cups are obviously righteously indignant. This guy isn't exploiting ignorant people and religion for personal gain. Otherwise the people who think all that is consistently happening with people overreacting to insignificant, so called "acts of racism", would surely just as quickly come to point it out here. Right? We can't marginalize the very real threat Christians face in a country that has obviously come to hate Jesus. | ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11981 Posts
This is the only war on Christmas that makes sense to me. | ||
|
Reaper9
United States1724 Posts
 | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Kasto
473 Posts
On November 10 2015 22:27 Simberto wrote: I like the idea of War on Christmas. Tanks advancing through the arctic ice, under constant fire from deadly elf-manned snow artillery. Horrific present-mines barely hidden under the thick snow, ready to rip you to shreds should you stumble upon them. Vicious hordes of reindeer feasting on the half-frozen corpses of fallen soldiers. And above, hidden by the dark stormy clouds, HE rides his war-sleigh, the horrible "HO, HO, HO" announcing that annother battailon of heroic troops has just been viciously slain. This is the only war on Christmas that makes sense to me. A last alliance of men and only men marched against the armies of Father Christmas and on the planes of North Pole they fought for the freedom of children's beliefs. Victory was near. But the power of belief in Father Christmas could not undone. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
 | ||
KwarK
United States44286 Posts
On November 10 2015 13:30 Wegandi wrote: Americans are delusional. They want Government healthcare, but they also don't want to pay the 50-60%+ in taxes that other countries with huge social welfare programs (and yes, Government healthcare is a biggy), have. We can't even run in the black. Do people actually believe that you can run a deficit in toto? LOL. We'll see how popular these programs are when people have to pay for them - and no, the "rich" are not adequate enough to pay for all your stuff. I would like to see Colorado approve this measure just to see how this turns out. (Not like proponents would change their minds if it turned out badly anyways, but it'd be fun to watch just like the Seattle and San Francisco stuff is) Government healthcare has been proven to be a hell of a lot cheaper than the current American system. Now you may argue that the free market can provide an even cheaper and more efficient solution than a single payer system. And you may be right. But what you cannot argue is that a single payer system is not cheaper or more efficient than the current American system, which has no elements of a free market. The evidence is in on that one. You can compare countless different single payer systems around the world to the American system. If enacted as it should be the vast majority of workers ought to see their paychecks rise as the employer funded health insurance premiums become raises that more than offset the healthcare taxes. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Nearly two-thirds of New Jersey voters want Gov. Chris Christie to drop out of the presidential contest and return to the Garden State, according to a Quinnipiac University Poll released Tuesday. Sixty-one percent of all voters surveyed said Christie should drop out, compared to the 33 percent who said he should remain in the race. This poll was started one day before Fox Business Network announced the debate stage line-ups, which put Christie back in the undercard debate, but was completed days after. Among Republican voters in New Jersey, 40 percent said he should leave the race compared to the 53 percent who said Christie should remain in the race. But when Christie's name is put among the 15 people running for the Republican nomination, he is in a distant fourth place among New Jersey voters. Businessman Donald Trump was the top choice at 31 percent. Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson polled at 16 percent, followed by Florida Sen. Marco Rubio at 15 percent. Christie polled at 8 percent. He was trailed closely by Texas Sen. Ted Cruz at 7 percent. In an August poll of New Jersey residents by Rutgers-Eagleton, 54 percent said Christie should leave the governor's mansion if he continued to run for President. The poll was conducted among 1,456 voters, 481 of whom are Republicans, in the Garden State from Nov. 4 to 8 by live interviews by cell phone and landlines. The margin of error was plus or minus 2.6 for all voters and 4.5 percent for Republicans. Source | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
The healthcare market removes the consumer of the product from almost all of the decision making processes in the service. They can’t even find the prices for the services they are consuming. They can’t help set them with their insurance company or service provider. People going emergency rooms don’t shop around for the cheapest MRI. The theory that a system with that structure can be directed to efficiency by free market mechanics has endless holes. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On November 11 2015 02:50 Plansix wrote: You can go more basic than that and avoid the moralistic argument. At the most basic level, the “free market” functions assuming that the consumer has reasonable information about what they are buying. The more information the consumer has, the better it functions. The converse is also true and lack of information can make it function poorly. The healthcare market removes the consumer of the product from almost all of the decision making processes in the service. They can’t even find the prices for the services they are consuming. They can’t help set them with their insurance company or service provider. People going emergency rooms don’t shop around for the cheapest MRI. The theory that a system with that structure can be directed to efficiency by free market mechanics has endless holes. not to mention that at some points the consumer flat out has no option to deny the product (assuming enough cash is there), which is the principal upon which free market & capitalism works. I can easily go on amazon and decide that I won't buy something because I think something's overpriced and that'll either lead to me finding it elsewhere cheaper or the realization that I'm a cheap fuck and it's just not viable any cheaper. Or I'll get rich making it myself for lots cheaper. With healthcare that doesn't reall work that well because you can't reasonably expect someone to just die on the operation table to stick it to the man in protest of the high prices. You don't have the option to pick another "supplier" because you might reasonably die before you get to another hospital in some cases. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
| ||
