|
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. |
On March 15 2016 05:05 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 04:58 ticklishmusic wrote:
Well that's labeling ingredients and not GMO/non-GMO, isn't it? Unless you are allergic to some version GMO wheat, but are fine with organic? Or you aren’t really allergic, but it fucks you up real good and you spend the next day running to the bathroom. That is how people how can’t drink milk live. Food should provide people with information on what it is. Not was scientist claim is “exactly the same as” because if it was exactly the same, we wouldn’t call it GMO. Just let people know and they will decide. Part of the resistance to GMOs is due to this resistance to label them, TBH. Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 05:01 oneofthem wrote:
GE crops are tested like drugs. pretty highly unlikely for an allergen gene to accidentally slip through into the organism and then slip past detection. it's not really a serious worry.
Are you saying that no person in the US will be allergic to the GMO? 100% free of allergens for 100% of people in the US?
I don't think you understand what a GMO is...
|
On March 15 2016 07:10 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 07:09 Nebuchad wrote:On March 15 2016 07:04 wei2coolman wrote:On March 15 2016 06:55 Plansix wrote:
One is people asking for labels on food.
The other is a billionaire that is telling his supporters to beat up protesters and he will pay for their legal bills. And he is running for a job that gives him control of the FBI, CIA, NASA and nukes. And he blames everything on China, mexico and wants to "Make America Great Again".
Gee, wonder why they get treated differently? Maybe cause they are different?
Do you even watch any of his talk? He literally says "I don't blame China, they're like grandmaster Chess players. They're playing the game better than us". I wish I wouldn't have to point out that your quote demonstrates that Plansix portrays Trump's position accurately... If you say that you don't blame China for doing something, it means China is doing it, and it adds the information that you don't blame them for doing it. When you say that Trump blames everything on China, it means China is doing it. That's the same thing. Literally the next sentence is "I blame our people, they don't know how to negotiate. They're politicians not business men."
Trump argument: China is the reason America isn't great. Our politicians were taken in by them and made a bad deal. I'll make a good deal and get us ahead of China with this deal. America will be greater than China, who will no longer be better than America.
He blames the the politicians and china for "holding the US people back from greatness". That isn't the cause of any of these peoples problems and no deal with China is going to magically make better paying jobs for these people. But it sounds good and that is why he says it.
I am just waiting for him to talk about a "bufferzone" to protect America from illegal immigrants and its our right to have it.
|
On March 15 2016 07:16 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 07:10 wei2coolman wrote:On March 15 2016 07:09 Nebuchad wrote:On March 15 2016 07:04 wei2coolman wrote:On March 15 2016 06:55 Plansix wrote:
One is people asking for labels on food.
The other is a billionaire that is telling his supporters to beat up protesters and he will pay for their legal bills. And he is running for a job that gives him control of the FBI, CIA, NASA and nukes. And he blames everything on China, mexico and wants to "Make America Great Again".
Gee, wonder why they get treated differently? Maybe cause they are different?
Do you even watch any of his talk? He literally says "I don't blame China, they're like grandmaster Chess players. They're playing the game better than us". I wish I wouldn't have to point out that your quote demonstrates that Plansix portrays Trump's position accurately... If you say that you don't blame China for doing something, it means China is doing it, and it adds the information that you don't blame them for doing it. When you say that Trump blames everything on China, it means China is doing it. That's the same thing. Literally the next sentence is "I blame our people, they don't know how to negotiate. They're politicians not business men." Trump argument: China is the reason America isn't great. Our politicians were taken in by them and made a bad deal. I'll make a good deal and get us ahead of China with this deal. America will be greater than China, who will no longer be better than America. He blames the the politicians and china for "holding the US people back from greatness". That isn't the cause of any of these peoples problems and no deal with China is going to magically make better paying jobs for these people. But it sounds good and that is why he says it.
I am just waiting for him to talk about a "bufferzone" to protect America from illegal immigrants and its our right to have it.
Yeah, cuz negotiation regarding trade has never worked out in the history of mankind.
Yeah, god forbid a country wants to have a clearly defined border.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the u.s. is sort of ideologically disposed to open its own markets so that is a lot of potential leverage unused. china also treats legal protection of everything as a negotiable product, while u.s. protects foreign investment and participants in our financial market. it is literally a backward step for our own institutions if some of these self imposed limits were to become negotiable but i suppose it would also be very effective actually holding china's ruling class to the fire .
of course there are also bought off beneficial tax treaties and such on real estate. china knows murica is for sale
|
I like how you completely missed the Lebensraum allusion and thought it was a good idea. Of course the buffer zone wouldn't take land away from hard working Americans. No, this would be Mexican land, purchased through years of allowing illegal immigrants to come here and send money to families in Mexico. Its already paid for and America just needs to take it and make a security zone.
And then in his second election bid, we will start settling the security zone, because we own the land. It was purchased through allowing illegal immigration for so long.
The third election bid would be to finish work on the security zone and deal with the increasing threats from the northern border.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
annexing mexico is goodz. would ensure some sort of democrat majority
|
On March 15 2016 07:25 oneofthem wrote:
annexing mexico is goodz. would ensure some sort of democrat majority
Technically we already did, it's called California.
|
On March 15 2016 07:21 Plansix wrote:
I like how you completely missed the Lebensraum allusion and thought it was a good idea. Of course the buffer zone wouldn't take land away from hard working Americans. No, this would be Mexican land, purchased through years of allowing illegal immigrants to come here and send money to families in Mexico. Its already paid for and America just needs to take it and make a security zone.
And then in his second election bid, we will start settling the security zone, because we own the land. It was purchased through allowing illegal immigration for so long.
People need to treat your Hitler analogies more seriously. There are and have been buffers all over the world: North/South Korea; Cyprus; Israel, Iraq/Kuwait and elsewhere in the Middle East.
What do you think about internal border patrol checkpoints?
|
On March 15 2016 07:28 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 07:21 Plansix wrote:
I like how you completely missed the Lebensraum allusion and thought it was a good idea. Of course the buffer zone wouldn't take land away from hard working Americans. No, this would be Mexican land, purchased through years of allowing illegal immigrants to come here and send money to families in Mexico. Its already paid for and America just needs to take it and make a security zone.
And then in his second election bid, we will start settling the security zone, because we own the land. It was purchased through allowing illegal immigration for so long. People need to treat your Hitler analogies more seriously. There are and have been buffers all over the world: North/South Korea; Cyprus; Israel, Iraq/Kuwait and elsewhere in the Middle East. What do you think about internal border patrol checkpoints?
Only to keep you out of my state. Everyone else in the US can go where they want.
But glad to see you support the new buffer zone idea. Its a flawless plan that will allow America to have the space to be great again.
|
On March 15 2016 06:45 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 06:35 Ghostcom wrote:Hey guys, some people think vaccines causes autism. Sciences has said that it 100% for certain does not. I still think we should accommodate these concerned consumers and allow their kids to get measles. Then we can slowly win them over (or let them go extinct by a modern version of natural selection). + Show Spoiler +That was sarcasm, but seriously, the anti-GMO and the anti-vaxxer movements is similar to a frighteningly degree Seriously, you are going to have to come up with a better argument if you want to impose costs on others by making completely arbitrary regulations. Anti-vaxxers were completely incorrect and caused a lot of damage due to their movement. However, I don't think the master plan of calling them stupid and irrational was that effective in curbing the damage. But I bet if made the people feel good, which is what matter. If people are concerned what is in their food, mocking them for being irrational just going to make them double down. So as smart as you think you are, you're only doing damage to make yourself feel like you are smarter.
If we begin to treat GMO as something that warrants a warning label (because that is exactly what it would be to the uninformed consumer who the labels are designed to help in the first place) we would cause damage. GMO is a way to a much more sustainable humanity (GMO can and will improve the environmental situation, eradicate hunger, and bring peace). If we stunt it due to an irrational fear we are doing massive harm to humanity.
If we begin to listen to ignorance instead of pointing it out then we are going to be doing damage. Mocking someone who couldn't even bother to read his own source which explicitly disproved his entire argument seems pretty warranted and I invite you to do the same to me if (probably when) I do the same (we do after all make mistakes).
|
On March 15 2016 07:36 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 06:45 Plansix wrote:On March 15 2016 06:35 Ghostcom wrote:Hey guys, some people think vaccines causes autism. Sciences has said that it 100% for certain does not. I still think we should accommodate these concerned consumers and allow their kids to get measles. Then we can slowly win them over (or let them go extinct by a modern version of natural selection). + Show Spoiler +That was sarcasm, but seriously, the anti-GMO and the anti-vaxxer movements is similar to a frighteningly degree Seriously, you are going to have to come up with a better argument if you want to impose costs on others by making completely arbitrary regulations. Anti-vaxxers were completely incorrect and caused a lot of damage due to their movement. However, I don't think the master plan of calling them stupid and irrational was that effective in curbing the damage. But I bet if made the people feel good, which is what matter. If people are concerned what is in their food, mocking them for being irrational just going to make them double down. So as smart as you think you are, you're only doing damage to make yourself feel like you are smarter. If we begin to treat GMO as something that warrants a warning label (because that is exactly what it would be to the uninformed consumer who the labels are designed to help in the first place) we would cause damage. GMO is a way to a much more sustainable humanity (GMO can and will improve the environmental situation, eradicate hunger, and bring peace). If we stunt it due to an irrational fear we are doing massive harm to humanity. If we begin to listen to ignorance instead of pointing it out then we are going to be doing damage. Mocking someone who couldn't even bother to read his own source which explicitly disproved his entire argument seems pretty warranted and I invite you to do the same to me if (probably when) I do the same (we do after all make mistakes).
Did I request a warning label? No. I did not. I request a label on the side, near the nutrition inform, simply stating what the food is. Or on the price per pound of the vegetable it is without packaging. I never asked for a warning label, you inferred that to make your argument.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 15 2016 07:28 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 07:25 oneofthem wrote:
annexing mexico is goodz. would ensure some sort of democrat majority Technically we already did, it's called California.
om nom nom
|
On March 15 2016 07:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 07:36 Ghostcom wrote:On March 15 2016 06:45 Plansix wrote:On March 15 2016 06:35 Ghostcom wrote:Hey guys, some people think vaccines causes autism. Sciences has said that it 100% for certain does not. I still think we should accommodate these concerned consumers and allow their kids to get measles. Then we can slowly win them over (or let them go extinct by a modern version of natural selection). + Show Spoiler +That was sarcasm, but seriously, the anti-GMO and the anti-vaxxer movements is similar to a frighteningly degree Seriously, you are going to have to come up with a better argument if you want to impose costs on others by making completely arbitrary regulations. Anti-vaxxers were completely incorrect and caused a lot of damage due to their movement. However, I don't think the master plan of calling them stupid and irrational was that effective in curbing the damage. But I bet if made the people feel good, which is what matter. If people are concerned what is in their food, mocking them for being irrational just going to make them double down. So as smart as you think you are, you're only doing damage to make yourself feel like you are smarter. If we begin to treat GMO as something that warrants a warning label (because that is exactly what it would be to the uninformed consumer who the labels are designed to help in the first place) we would cause damage. GMO is a way to a much more sustainable humanity (GMO can and will improve the environmental situation, eradicate hunger, and bring peace). If we stunt it due to an irrational fear we are doing massive harm to humanity. If we begin to listen to ignorance instead of pointing it out then we are going to be doing damage. Mocking someone who couldn't even bother to read his own source which explicitly disproved his entire argument seems pretty warranted and I invite you to do the same to me if (probably when) I do the same (we do after all make mistakes). Did I request a warning label? No. I did not. I request a label on the side, near the nutrition inform, simply stating what the food is. Or on the price per pound of the vegetable it is without packaging. I never asked for a warning label, you inferred that to make your argument.
If its not a warning label then its not needed. If its needed, then its a warning label.
But you literally do not seem to understand what a GMO is.
|
On March 15 2016 07:31 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 07:28 oBlade wrote:On March 15 2016 07:21 Plansix wrote:
I like how you completely missed the Lebensraum allusion and thought it was a good idea. Of course the buffer zone wouldn't take land away from hard working Americans. No, this would be Mexican land, purchased through years of allowing illegal immigrants to come here and send money to families in Mexico. Its already paid for and America just needs to take it and make a security zone.
And then in his second election bid, we will start settling the security zone, because we own the land. It was purchased through allowing illegal immigration for so long. People need to treat your Hitler analogies more seriously. There are and have been buffers all over the world: North/South Korea; Cyprus; Israel, Iraq/Kuwait and elsewhere in the Middle East. What do you think about internal border patrol checkpoints? But glad to see you support the new buffer zone idea. Its a flawless plan that will allow America to have the space to be great again.
The thing is that I didn't say I supported your hypothetical idea that the candidate you're trashing hasn't proposed. I'm simply saying that you have to support or reject the idea by thinking about it, not asking whether or not Hitler did it. For instance, Hitler owned a dog and never shot up a school. But there are independent reasons for us to believe that dog ownership is a good thing and school shootings aren't.
|
On March 15 2016 07:43 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 07:31 Plansix wrote:On March 15 2016 07:28 oBlade wrote:On March 15 2016 07:21 Plansix wrote:
I like how you completely missed the Lebensraum allusion and thought it was a good idea. Of course the buffer zone wouldn't take land away from hard working Americans. No, this would be Mexican land, purchased through years of allowing illegal immigrants to come here and send money to families in Mexico. Its already paid for and America just needs to take it and make a security zone.
And then in his second election bid, we will start settling the security zone, because we own the land. It was purchased through allowing illegal immigration for so long. People need to treat your Hitler analogies more seriously. There are and have been buffers all over the world: North/South Korea; Cyprus; Israel, Iraq/Kuwait and elsewhere in the Middle East. What do you think about internal border patrol checkpoints? But glad to see you support the new buffer zone idea. Its a flawless plan that will allow America to have the space to be great again. The thing is that I didn't say I supported your hypothetical idea that the candidate you're trashing hasn't proposed. I'm simply saying that you have to support or reject the idea by thinking about it, not asking whether or not Hitler did it. For instance, Hitler owned a dog and never shot up a school. But there are independent reasons for us to believe that dog ownership is a good thing and school shootings aren't.
Luckily enough, when people make Hitler comparisons, they tend not to be talking about dog ownership, but instead about bad topics or topics that they perceive to be bad. It's almost as if people are ahead of you on the insanely obvious point that you're making...
Actually I had a better answer for this post but I didn't think of it immediately, wish I could go back :/
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
labeling for popular phobia or prejudice is jusst too much star of david for me
|
I think you should let us in on your better answer... I already listed some places around the world where buffer zones existed in the absence of Hitler.
|
I'm not sure what kind of constitutional ground you could put mandatory GMO-labeling on anyway. Companies pretty clearly have first amendment rights at the moment and I'm not sure you can force them to say something without reaaaaally good reasons.
Your best bet for getting labeling about it would be turning it (or its opposite) into a hip meaningless buzzword like gluten-free has become and then it'd be everywhere.
|
On March 15 2016 07:40 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2016 07:28 wei2coolman wrote:On March 15 2016 07:25 oneofthem wrote:
annexing mexico is goodz. would ensure some sort of democrat majority Technically we already did, it's called California. om nom nom
Hey some of us don't need a reminder, ok? ¿Sí?
|
On March 15 2016 07:53 oBlade wrote:
I think you should let us in on your better answer... I already listed some places around the world where buffer zones existed in the absence of Hitler.
Care to comment on the stark contrast between what the other buffer zones you mention buffer against and the one that we're discussing now would buffer against?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
