EPTNo offense but in the last three months, America has rather been returning to stupid.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7357
| 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. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7890 Posts
No offense but in the last three months, America has rather been returning to stupid. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1537 Posts
On April 20 2017 01:12 KwarK wrote: Some famine? Like one in twenty North Koreans died in the famine. Are you fucking kidding me right now? Yeah, that's some famine. Am I saying it's great? Obviously not, but it's not bad enough that the state cannot control it. If China completely shut down their trade, and the US used its ships to enforce an overseas embargo, you'd see a complete collapse of their military, their borders would get overrun by refugees not caring if the border patrol are shooting at them, etc. You were arguing that North Korea is a nation dependent upon foreign trade to survive and that it has core national interests that are controlled by other nations leaving it vulnerable to leverage. If you think any part of that is compatible with Juche then you need to go read what it is again. I'm not saying that you're ignorant because you disagree with me. I'm saying you're ignorant because the things you are saying are so incredibly wrong that they could only be adequately explained as ignorance or deliberate misinformation. Again, this is your argument: 1. North Korea strongly believes it should have economic independence. 2. Therefore they have economic independence. Nobody is disputing what Juche is or how it guides them. In fact, I'd say their eagerness to develop nuclear ICBMs to have leverage against China is in itself largely shaped by their desire for total socio-economic self-reliance. But, as has been said a million times already, the foremost thing the Kim family wants is to stay in power. So they're willing to trade with China to keep their power grids operational most of the time and most of their citizens fed. You know those military parades they have all the time? Wouldn't be possible if they couldn't feed their soldiers. Wouldn't be possible if there were thousands of starving children flooding the streets of Pyongyang and their tanks couldn't drive anywhere. You get the picture. But again, and I'll spell it out for you slowly this time. The North Korean government is so secure, so stable and so removed from the concerns of the populace that they could survive the people not having food. Your argument appears to be that if the Korean coal mines no longer have access to the Chinese market then North Korea will fall. That would only possibly be make sense if the coal export industry was a far more important component of the Korean economy than the having food industry, and even then, North Korea survived the inability to feed its people, there is no reason to believe it wouldn't survive the inability to export coal. You're vastly underestimating the fragility of the North Korean government. Let's look at this for instance: "In 2009, the government attempted to stem the expanding free market by banning jangmadang and the use of foreign currency,[259] heavily devaluing the won and restricting the convertibility of savings in the old currency,[208] but the resulting inflation spike and rare public protests caused a reversal of these policies.[273]" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#Economy ) Doesn't really paint the picture that North Korea is a well-oiled machine that treats famine and public discontent like flies. I've provided several sources indicating how much NK relies on China, how about you show some sources indicating that everything in Jucheland would be peachy keen and operational if China closed all their doors? | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On April 19 2017 18:10 Acrofales wrote: Your selective rewriting of history never ceases to amuse me. The US didn't want to get involved in WW1, WW2 and had the largest riots and demonstrations in recent history to get the fuck out of Nam, which is to this day still a national trauma. Post-Iraq sentiment is not a new or even remarkable exemplar of American isolationism. Pre-WWII is considered to be back when the US was still isolationist as a rule. If the implication wasn't clear, this is strictly post-WWII discussion in this context. As for 'Nam: Yes, that war in general was unpopular. In fact that's when conscription was removed in the US because people were pissed about being drafted for a pointless war. And yet my point - which perhaps you missed - is that many individuals I've read who are generally pro-war tend to complain how unfair it is that they managed to keep popular support for further interventions in other after 'Nam but how that totally fucked things up after Iraq. Now is that true? I wouldn't say that I'm sure it is. But it's also not clear that the isolationist sentiment is a passing fad more than a definitive change in public opinion. It certainly looks like the latter, which is probably why the warhawks are unhappy. They're used to "shitty result -> oh well we'll do better next time" in interventions, but that's starting to be a lot harder when there is a pretty aggressive isolationist sentiment in the general populace. I also recommend that if you want to accuse someone of selective rewriting of history, that you should probably go ahead and figure out what's being argued first instead of just butting in willy-nilly. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7890 Posts
On April 19 2017 23:57 LightSpectra wrote: Kim Jong-un is not a madman; he wants to stay in power, and to do that he needs three things: (1) Assurance that the U.S. won't bomb him. (2) Enough money to continually bribe his military officers and other influential people in the NK government. (3) Just enough infrastructure that there isn't a total economic breakdown from food riots and power shortages. The U.S. can provide all three of those things. We just can't give all three simultaneously without looking weak, hence why Donald Trump is trying to do the reverse by cutting off all three simultaneously with China's permission. But that's really playing with fire. You forget what Kim needs most: a mortal ennemy and a state of permanent crisis. That's how his regime has been holding together for decades and it seems to be working pretty well. It's extremely unlikely Kim would ever want a normalized FP and any kind of peaceful prosperity based on cooperation. He needs his Emmanuel Goldstein and the perpetual war with Oceania and Eastasia. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Again, we know every little about that nation or who knows what. China may not have as much sway as we believe. China may believe they have more sway than they do. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1537 Posts
On April 20 2017 01:25 Biff The Understudy wrote: You forget what Kim needs most: a mortal ennemy and a state of permanent crisis. That's how his regime has been holding together for decades and it seems to be working pretty well. It's extremely unlikely Kim would ever want a normalized FP and any kind of peaceful prosperity based on cooperation. He needs his Emmanuel Goldstein and the perpetual war with Oceania and Eastasia. They have South Korea for that. It doesn't require perpetual war, just a perpetual threat of takeover, which the NK media can easily invent. On April 20 2017 01:25 Plansix wrote: The problem with that theory is that we have to assume that everyone the NK goverment understands how much they rely on China. Studies of dictatorships and how members horde valuable information to assure their value show how dangerous that line of thinking can be. Again, we know every little about that nation or who knows what. China may not have as much sway as we believe. China may believe they have more sway than they do. That seems to be a pretty good argument in favor of what I suggested as opposed to what Trump is doing. Unless you're saying we bomb them now, which nobody thinks is a good idea. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On April 20 2017 01:21 Biff The Understudy wrote: No offense but in the last three months, America has rather been returning to stupid. That's what greatness looks like: Europeans thinking that we've gone off the deep end and yet still doing nothing about it other than complaining. I think we need another coalition of the willing - hopefully France will be "willing" this time, or else. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18004 Posts
On April 20 2017 01:25 Biff The Understudy wrote: You forget what Kim needs most: a mortal ennemy and a state of permanent crisis. That's how his regime has been holding together for decades and it seems to be working pretty well. It's extremely unlikely Kim would ever want a normalized FP and any kind of peaceful prosperity based on cooperation. He needs his Emmanuel Goldstein and the perpetual war with Oceania and Eastasia. Not really. You don't actually need to be at war. You just need your people to believe you are locked in perpetual war. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 20 2017 01:26 LightSpectra wrote: They have South Korea for that. It doesn't require perpetual war, just a perpetual threat of takeover, which the NK media can easily invent. That seems to be a pretty good argument in favor of what I suggested as opposed to what Trump is doing. Unless you're saying we bomb them now, which nobody thinks is a good idea. I would agree if I didn't know how limited our influence over China is on this specific issue. I don't agree with Trump's plan of full blown aggression and threats, but NK was always going to test him and push the limits. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10721 Posts
On April 20 2017 01:26 LegalLord wrote: That's what greatness looks like: Europeans thinking that we've gone off the deep end and yet still doing nothing about it other than complaining. I think we need another coalition of the willing - hopefully France will be "willing" this time, or else. What should europeans do about it whiteout fucking themselves over? | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On April 20 2017 01:33 Velr wrote: What should europeans do about it whiteout fucking themselves over? Nothing. Under current political alignments, they don't really have much of a choice but to contort themselves into making nice with the people they like to complain about a lot. Or else. That's still what #MAGA looks like. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10721 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States42778 Posts
I'm not sure how you're not getting this but that's the argument you'll need to make. Your argument so far A lack of foreign trade would be so unpopular with the people that they would rise up and depose the regime. The problems with it Starving to death wasn't sufficiently unpopular with the civilian population for the regime to be overthrown. Therefore for your argument to work you must first demonstrate that foreign trade is more popular than not starving to death. The Korean people don't themselves trade with China. The state does, to accumulate foreign cash reserves to be used to purchase the things they cannot make themselves. The Korean people aren't the ones exporting, the state is. The Korean people typically don't have access to the things bought with the foreign cash reserves. The state isn't using its extremely hard to obtain cash deserves to buy the people iPods, the people aren't going to suddenly have their supply of Wii games dry up. The entire export industry is under $3b. For perspective, a 0.5% change in the stock price of Apple is worth more than everything North Korea exports in an entire year. Walmart sells about $200 for every dollar the entire nation of North Korea sells. Trade is a near negligible factor for Korean economy, a deliberate strategy precisely for the purpose of avoiding any chance of trade being leveraged against them in the way you suggest. The Korean people lack the means to overthrow the regime. They are disarmed, pacified and denied access to the means of communication and assembly. If one province revolted the neighbouring provinces wouldn't hear about it until after it had been crushed. The Korean state is overwhelmingly, disproportionately, unimaginably powerful compared to the people. 25% of the entire population of the nation is militarized. To put that in perspective, if you got every single male civilian in North Korea, armed them, equipped them, supplied them and trained them then every single male civilian all revolting at once would still be outnumbered by the government forces. You have provided literally no evidence for your absurd claim that a lack of trade with China would somehow trigger the civilian population of North Korea to all simultaneously rise up against their oppressors, presumably using some kind of telepathy to coordinate and telekinesis to defeat the soldiers, powers that they refused to use when they were battling with mere death by starvation but that they couldn't restrain any longer when battling with a state shortage of foreign cash reserves. Would the North Korean state like Yuan? Sure, Yuan are handy for when they can't make something themselves. Would a lack of Yuan within the North Korean state be more unpopular with the Korean people than a lack of food on their plates? I think not. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
The fastest-growing occupation in the United States — by a long shot, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics — might surprise you: wind turbine technician. The number of workers maintaining wind turbines, a job with a median pay of about $51,000 a year, is set to more than double between 2014 and 2024, the agency estimates. That’s a more rapid growth rate than that of physical therapists, financial advisers, home health aides and genetic counselors. There’s a notable caveat, of course. Because “wind tech” remains a small occupation, its rapid projected growth will probably amount to only about 5,000 additional jobs in the coming years. Even so, the proliferation of wind turbine technicians hints at a larger reality: The U.S. wind industry, like renewable energy in general, is continuing to flourish. In 2016, for the first time, more than 100,000 people in the United States were employed in some manner by the wind industry, according to an annual report released Wednesday by the American Wind Energy Association. The industry grew by double digits once again. The first offshore wind farm became a reality off Rhode Island. And wind was the primary source of new energy installations in much of the Midwest, the Plains states and in Texas, which has nearly 12,000 wind turbines and generates more than a quarter of the nation’s wind energy. “Getting over 100,000 jobs in wind is an important milestone,” said Tom Kiernan, AWEA’s chief executive. “Sometimes people think of wind or renewables as a niche industry. But the proven reality is the industry is at a scale where we are reliably and affordably contributing to the grid.” That said, wind energy remains a relatively minor part of the nation’s electricity mix, contributing about 5.5 percent of overall generation in 2016, according to the Energy Information Administration. Coal and natural gas, by contrast, account for nearly two-thirds of U.S. electricity generation. And the solar industry still employs more people than wind, about 260,000. The wind industry also faces other potential obstacles, such as the gradual phaseout of a key federal tax incentive for wind energy investment that Congress extended in 2015, as well as a new president who has repeatedly criticized it in the past, while giving full-throated support to traditional fossil fuels. “The windmills kill birds and the windmills need massive subsidies,” President Trump said in an interview with the New York Times shortly after his election last fall. “In other words, we’re subsidizing wind mills all over this country. I mean, for the most part they don’t work. I don’t think they work at all without subsidy, and that bothers me.” Kiernan said that as turbines become more efficient and cheaper to produce, the wind industry should be positioned to continue to grow even without existing tax incentives. And despite Trump’s rhetoric, he said some members of the Trump administration, namely Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and Energy Secretary Rick Perry — the former Texas governor — have shown signs of support. “We are optimistic in working with them,” he said. Ultimately, it could boil down to jobs. The wind industry employs tens of thousands of people in some of the states where support for Trump was strong: Texas, Iowa, Oklahoma, Kansas. Kieran said he hopes that a president who vowed to create jobs will see the value in a sector that is doing that. “The job growth we’re seeing,” he said, “is nine times greater than the average industry in this country.” Source | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Yes, it's pretty easy to double a small number. The article even says as such. Not that coal is good, mind you - it's just that this isn't really all that impressive. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1537 Posts
You've again provided no sources for anything you've said so I feel little obligation to respond. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
But this is America, we don't build new things. We just pine for the days when we did, while complaining the goverment kills jobs. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 20 2017 01:46 LightSpectra wrote: I never said "A lack of foreign trade would be so unpopular with the people that they would rise up and depose the regime", that's your strawman. I actually think that's quite unlikely. What I think is that the basic foundations of a Weberian state, i.e. being able to marshal resources and people to form a police and military in order to monopolize legal violence, is in jeopardy if the entire world embargoed NK. They assuredly have some stockpiles of gasoline and food to keep their military operational while their famine escalated from affecting 1-15% of the population into 25-50%, but that wouldn't be sustainable for very long. You've again provided no sources for anything you've said so I feel little obligation to respond. But during that time, they could attack any SK. The starve them out plan also involves starving millions of people. If you want to see a nation do some irrational stuff, cut off the supply of food. | ||
| ||
