|
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 January 18 2017 23:32 LightSpectra wrote:
Please move to China and have three babies and tell me how that works out for you. You're literally comparing a corrupt/incompetent politician with a political party that's murdered tens of thousands, and you think it's apt?
I don't think he's comparing or advocating to be more like the Chinese at all.
He merely said that he thinks following China's lead for 4 years might be the lesser evil [for him]. That doesn't mean he has to move to China or like what they're doing. He's neither from China nor from the US so perhaps it's more about him thinking that China at least isn't going to fuck up things for where he's from.
I'm sure you'd get a hell of a different response from someone remotely close to any artificial islands being build in southeast asia.
|
On January 18 2017 22:45 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2017 22:38 Scarecrow wrote:On January 18 2017 22:35 xDaunt wrote:On January 18 2017 22:29 Scarecrow wrote:On January 18 2017 21:29 xDaunt wrote:On January 18 2017 14:30 Wegandi wrote:On January 18 2017 12:37 Nyxisto wrote:On January 18 2017 12:34 xDaunt wrote:On January 18 2017 12:22 Nyxisto wrote:
I still don't understand why anybody gives this Milo guy a public platform, he is a troll Because he is smart, media-attractive, and has a compelling message. What compelling message? "The jews run everything and gay people should get back into the closet" is compelling to you? The guy is a walking version of 4chan, are you serious? Gay people should get back in the closest? Milo? LOL. You know Milo is gay right? People don't like Milo because he's militantly anti-feminist and anti-PC. I actually find it sort of hilarious that the people who like Milo are the ones stereotyped as gay haters. The LBQT uber-alles crowd loathes him, yet he is "one of them" so to speak. It's interesting to me anyways. Edit: Sort of like Camille Paglia. Other feminists can't stand her (she's not man-hating enough), and me, as someone who is not, agrees on many of her points. Go figure. The LGBQT crowd and its allies don't like Milo because he exposes the contradictions and insanity of their arguments Sorry, but a guy who says "Like all feminists, they can only survive by sucking on the teat of Big Government" seems better at expressing insane arguments than exposing them. I don't get how being an asshole to various groups, rather than learning to stfu when you don't like someone on a superficial level, is a cause worth championing. You seem to be a product of the media you're consuming xDaunt, with all this 'regressive left' talk and trying to conflate the left with fascism. Is it really that hard living in a post-highschool world where it's not socially acceptable to be a dick to people because of someone's gender, philosophy, body shape or orientation? I feel like most of Milo's followers must be just angry white guys who want to express hateful opinions instead of keeping them to themselves. You have it backwards. People like me don't wake up in the morning looking for opportunities to be a dick to various minorities. We'd rather just be left alone. However, various elements of the regressive left won't afford us that opportunity. They have an agenda to push. And for as much as I may agree or disagree with various elements of the agenda, what I particularly object to is the manner in which it's pushed. Can you give me an example of this agenda being pushed so hard that you aren't given the opportunity to ignore it? LightSpectra provided a good example. Perhaps the best one is BLM, where the argument from the Left is basically "it's okay for black people to riot and break shit because they're not going to be able to get the attention of anyone through peaceful means." That's a pretty fucked message if you ask me.
You're okay with white people killing blacks but you're unhappy when black people get upset about it?
I can see why you like Milo.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On January 18 2017 12:34 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2017 12:22 Nyxisto wrote:
I still don't understand why anybody gives this Milo guy a public platform, he is a troll Because he is smart, media-attractive, and has a compelling message.
As someone who's not too familiar with Milo, would you mid summarizing his message? Is it basically anti-PC, let's bring discourse back to reality? I accept that he's not a bigot/homophobe/etc, he just walks the edge of those things to draw attention.
|
On January 18 2017 23:40 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2017 22:45 xDaunt wrote:On January 18 2017 22:38 Scarecrow wrote:On January 18 2017 22:35 xDaunt wrote:On January 18 2017 22:29 Scarecrow wrote:On January 18 2017 21:29 xDaunt wrote:On January 18 2017 14:30 Wegandi wrote:On January 18 2017 12:37 Nyxisto wrote:On January 18 2017 12:34 xDaunt wrote:On January 18 2017 12:22 Nyxisto wrote:
I still don't understand why anybody gives this Milo guy a public platform, he is a troll Because he is smart, media-attractive, and has a compelling message. What compelling message? "The jews run everything and gay people should get back into the closet" is compelling to you? The guy is a walking version of 4chan, are you serious? Gay people should get back in the closest? Milo? LOL. You know Milo is gay right? People don't like Milo because he's militantly anti-feminist and anti-PC. I actually find it sort of hilarious that the people who like Milo are the ones stereotyped as gay haters. The LBQT uber-alles crowd loathes him, yet he is "one of them" so to speak. It's interesting to me anyways. Edit: Sort of like Camille Paglia. Other feminists can't stand her (she's not man-hating enough), and me, as someone who is not, agrees on many of her points. Go figure. The LGBQT crowd and its allies don't like Milo because he exposes the contradictions and insanity of their arguments Sorry, but a guy who says "Like all feminists, they can only survive by sucking on the teat of Big Government" seems better at expressing insane arguments than exposing them. I don't get how being an asshole to various groups, rather than learning to stfu when you don't like someone on a superficial level, is a cause worth championing. You seem to be a product of the media you're consuming xDaunt, with all this 'regressive left' talk and trying to conflate the left with fascism. Is it really that hard living in a post-highschool world where it's not socially acceptable to be a dick to people because of someone's gender, philosophy, body shape or orientation? I feel like most of Milo's followers must be just angry white guys who want to express hateful opinions instead of keeping them to themselves. You have it backwards. People like me don't wake up in the morning looking for opportunities to be a dick to various minorities. We'd rather just be left alone. However, various elements of the regressive left won't afford us that opportunity. They have an agenda to push. And for as much as I may agree or disagree with various elements of the agenda, what I particularly object to is the manner in which it's pushed. Can you give me an example of this agenda being pushed so hard that you aren't given the opportunity to ignore it? LightSpectra provided a good example. Perhaps the best one is BLM, where the argument from the Left is basically "it's okay for black people to riot and break shit because they're not going to be able to get the attention of anyone through peaceful means." That's a pretty fucked message if you ask me. You're okay with white people killing blacks but you're unhappy when black people get upset about it? I can see why you like Milo.
I'm pretty sure he means people who associate themselves with BLM and spout idiotic stuff that flys all over the internet with some sort of idiotic/sensationalist caption like + Show Spoiler +"I hope your white baby dies #BLM"
Spoilered cause I don't consider this a statment even remotely connected to the BLM movement. I saw it more or less like that and have no idea whether that's actually a genuine comment or simply internet propaganda.
|
Norway28781 Posts
I don't even want three babies here in Norway, why would I want to move to China to do it there? I also think restrictions on how many children people can have might just be completely necessary, especially in a country like China, it's just completely unfeasible in the west. But that is a different discussion altogether.
As for their murdering of tens of thousands, I am staunchly opposed to capital punishment, and China having killed something like 100k people in the past 25 years is indefensible. But the US also has absolutely immense problems with its penal system, incarceration rates are significantly higher than any other country, and life in rape-jail isn't necessarily much better than death. Either way, I'm not trying to defend China here. It's just that Trump is the fucking worst. For China, I can at least understand why they enact the aspects of their policies that I the most disagree with - they're still a developing nation. And if you look at the needs of a country as sort of a maslowian pyramid where stability and security are the bottom level and economic development is level two, you might say that this is where China currently is at. Then 'not abuse capital punishment' and 'respect for democratic processes' ends up being third and fourth - they're just not there yet. (My understanding is also that China has actually about halved their use of capital punishment over the past 5 years though!)
Like, to put it this way; if you look at the period of 'enlightened absolutism' in Europe, I would not want to live in any european country during that time and age. But my understanding is that several of those rulers (frederich the great, catherine the great) were actually quite competent. I still vastly prefer living in a badly governed western country of today over any of those countries in the past, but if I could choose between President Frederich the Great or President Trump in countries that upon their accession to power are the same, I'm going with the former, and it's not even close. You can't just look at country A and then look at country B and then see that country A is better than country B and conclude that the reason is the current day leadership.
|
You'd rather live in a well-run authoritarian bloody dictatorship than a poorly-run constitutional democratic republic. That's quite clear. You value your rights and freedoms less than your dictator's boots being clean. Hope your tongue's ready; oppression can be quite savory for those who aren't declared subversive.
|
Norway28781 Posts
That is literally the opposite of what I wrote. What on earth are you babbling about?
|
You wrote "if I could choose between President Frederich the Great or President Trump in countries that upon their accession to power are the same, I'm going with the former, and it's not even close."
Although Friederich II of Prussia was admired in his days for being relatively progressive, by today's standards he'd be considered nothing more than tinpot militarist dictator. Wake me up when Trump's invading countries to annex them or axing people's freedom of speech.
|
Norway28781 Posts
How very nice of you to cut out the first part of that very sentence you quoted: 'I still vastly prefer living in a badly governed western country of today over any of those countries in the past'. Seriously dude..
Trump has also spoken positively about annexing natural resources of countries you invade, and there are somewhat legitimate arguments to make on how he doesn't necessarily respect the first amendment, but whatever. Judging by your previous posts I don't think I really have any interest in arguing this with you.
|
I think what Liquid Drone is saying is that he'd rather live in a well run absolute monarchy then a poorly run constitutional democratic republic.
The problem is pretty much the same Drone though as you'd have the same amount of chance that the mob will chose a good leader as much as you'll get from the loins of the ruling noble house. At least with the democratic republic you have a sense of responsibility for the executive.
Would having a US oil company take control of Iraq's oil resources for a few years to pay for the rebuilding of the nation and the invasion be that bad? In the end they get a well built (or well paid for) nation with a state of the art oil industry to fund their nation in the years ahead.
|
President Barack Obama will leave office Friday with his highest approval rating since 2009, his presidency largely viewed as a success, and a majority saying they will miss him when he is gone.
A new CNN/ORC poll finds Obama's approval rating stands at 60%, his best mark since June of his first year in office. Compared with other outgoing presidents, Obama lands near the top of the list, outranked only by Bill Clinton's 66% in January 2001 and Ronald Reagan's 64% in January 1989. About two-thirds (65%) say Obama's presidency was a success, including about half (49%) who say that was due to Obama's personal strengths rather than circumstances outside his control.
CNN
|
Norway28781 Posts
What I am saying is that 'where I'd rather live' is not necessarily related to 'who does a better job leading', because current day leadership is a fairly small factor in determining how well off a country currently is. I don't think Norway's current government is great by any means, however I still think it's arguably the best place in the world to live - possibly throughout the entirety of human history. I think our leadership during the 60s-70s was absolutely fantastic, so great that it laid the foundation for how great our current society is. Likewise China had some incredibly bad leadership / negative consequences from colonialism/imperialism which set their point of departure 60 years ago at a much lower level than that of western countries, and then I actually think the development they've seen post-Mao is quite impressive, and one that speaks positively of their leadership during this period of time, even if they've also made terrible moral transgressions or whatnot.
In the same way, I still think the US today is one of the better places in the world one could live. But that is not because Trump is becoming your president 2 days from now, it's because of other historical factors (including competent leadership of the past). As far as electing a leader that I am willing to follow, Trump is to me literally one of the worst possible candidates, and if there was an election where candidate A was Donald Trump and candidate B was Xi Jinping, I am voting for Xi Jinping. I'd still much rather live in the US than China.
|
So...medicaid nationwide for people who can't afford private insurance?
“We're going to have a plan that's going to be great for people. And it's going to be much less expensive. And you will be able to actually have something to say about who your doctor is and your plan,” Trump told Fox News’s “Fox & Friends” in an interview that was taped Tuesday and aired Wednesday morning. “We have to cover people that can't afford it. And that's what I'm talking about. And we'll probably have block grants of Medicaid back into the states… Nobody is going to be dying on the streets with a President Trump.”
Source
|
On January 19 2017 00:31 Sermokala wrote:
Would having a US oil company take control of Iraq's oil resources for a few years to pay for the rebuilding of the nation and the invasion be that bad? In the end they get a well built (or well paid for) nation with a state of the art oil industry to fund their nation in the years ahead.
Yeah, the rebuilding Part really worked in Iraq and Afghanistan...
|
On January 19 2017 00:44 Liquid`Drone wrote:
In the same way, I still think the US today is one of the better places in the world one could live. But that is not because Trump is becoming your president 2 days from now, it's because of other historical factors (including competent leadership of the past). As far as electing a leader that I am willing to follow, Trump is to me literally one of the worst possible candidates, and if there was an election where candidate A was Donald Trump and candidate B was Xi Jinping, I am voting for Xi Jinping. I'd still much rather live in the US than China.
Alright, that's not an outrageous thing to say, although your previous posts really did sound like anti-democratic apologism.
|
On January 19 2017 00:52 Mohdoo wrote:So...medicaid nationwide for people who can't afford private insurance? Show nested quote +“We're going to have a plan that's going to be great for people. And it's going to be much less expensive. And you will be able to actually have something to say about who your doctor is and your plan,” Trump told Fox News’s “Fox & Friends” in an interview that was taped Tuesday and aired Wednesday morning. “We have to cover people that can't afford it. And that's what I'm talking about. And we'll probably have block grants of Medicaid back into the states… Nobody is going to be dying on the streets with a President Trump.” Source
And where are the billions needed for medicaid expansion going to come from when the ACA taxes are removed?
|
On January 19 2017 00:53 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 00:31 Sermokala wrote:
Would having a US oil company take control of Iraq's oil resources for a few years to pay for the rebuilding of the nation and the invasion be that bad? In the end they get a well built (or well paid for) nation with a state of the art oil industry to fund their nation in the years ahead. Yeah, the rebuilding Part really worked in Iraq and Afghanistan...
Rebuilding a nation to compete in the modern world takes a long period of time just look at Japan. It didn't help that an ethnic civil war broke out in the middle of the transition.
|
On January 19 2017 00:57 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 00:52 Mohdoo wrote:So...medicaid nationwide for people who can't afford private insurance? “We're going to have a plan that's going to be great for people. And it's going to be much less expensive. And you will be able to actually have something to say about who your doctor is and your plan,” Trump told Fox News’s “Fox & Friends” in an interview that was taped Tuesday and aired Wednesday morning. “We have to cover people that can't afford it. And that's what I'm talking about. And we'll probably have block grants of Medicaid back into the states… Nobody is going to be dying on the streets with a President Trump.” Source And where are the billions needed for medicaid expansion going to come from when the ACA taxes are removed?
I don't see why they couldn't just pass a new tax. Although more likely they'd just swallow the budget deficit and leave our crippling debt as a problem for the next generation.
|
I think if nothing else, Trump's election shows just how badly people have lost perspective. I asked before what it would take for Hillary voters to vote Trump instead and the sheer insistence on "stop Trump, costs be damned" was quite telling. And now at least one European liberal who should consider China to be the epitome of what is wrong with the world says that they would rather support China than Trump's America.
I obviously don't see China the same way a lot of others do. And I did make it clear that I voted Clinton (most disgusting vote I ever cast, btw). But you know what? Trump is the president now, and you should all be a bit more willing to acknowledge that. Think about exactly what a realignment towards China would entail, and put Trump into perspective, and perhaps it would be clear just how absurd this realignment would be.
|
Trump can't competently manage when he doesn't know about what he's managing.
The Obama administration has written 275 briefing papers for the incoming Trump administration: nearly 1,000 pages of classified material on North Korea’s nuclear program, the military campaign against the Islamic State, tensions in the South China Sea, and every other kind of threat the new team could face in its first weeks in office.
Nobody in the current administration knows whether anyone in the next has read any of it.
...
[T]he chronic upheaval in Mr. Trump’s transition, a delay in appointing senior National Security Council staff members, and a dearth of people with security clearances have deprived the Trump team of weeks of prep work on some of the most complex national security issues facing the country.
“We really wanted to make sure there was nothing a new team needed to know that we hadn’t told them,” Ms. Rice said in an interview. “It took them more time than we expected for them to be ready to engage with us.” Now, she added, “we’re racing to make up lost time.”
Ms. Rice insisted that she was confident the Trump administration would have the information it needed by the time Mr. Trump was sworn in.
...
Still, officials from both the Obama and Trump teams acknowledged that the transition had been rocky, in no small part because Mr. Trump’s defeat of Hillary Clinton caught both the outgoing and incoming administrations so completely by surprise. Had Mrs. Clinton won, her staff planned to place a transition team in the N.S.C. within a couple of days.
In Mr. Trump’s case, the first contact with the National Security Council did not come until Nov. 22, two weeks after Election Day. That delay was caused by the purge of the original transition team led by Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey...Marshall Billingslea, [NSC transition leader], a former Pentagon and State Department official, arrived in the West Wing with six people, only two of whom had security clearances.
New York Times
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
