EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 8470
| 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. | ||
Falling
Canada11467 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:32 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: If you think about it though, he has a small point that should be made. If they have access to the same benefits veterans do, then a lot of these problems are potentially fixed. Veterans get free healthcare and reduced costs on medications, guaranteed loans for small businesses and home financing, and basically free education with living expenses paid for. That's not a bad deal if you think about it. Granted, these are normally for 4 years of service (among other things). Reduce some of these for a 2 year bid in the military, and a lot of the issues kind of start to work themselves out. Why can't people just have those things without having to be in the army for 2 years. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:32 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: If you think about it though, he has a small point that should be made. If they have access to the same benefits veterans do, then a lot of these problems are potentially fixed. Veterans get free healthcare and reduced costs on medications, guaranteed loans for small businesses and home financing, and basically free education with living expenses paid for. That's not a bad deal if you think about it. Granted, these are normally for 4 years of service (among other things). Reduce some of these for a 2 year bid in the military, and a lot of the issues kind of start to work themselves out. They need to offer this same stuff for people working at national labs. I think it makes sense that purely science work in service of the DoD should be considered the same as military service. Just because no one is shooting at the scientists doesn't mean they aren't advancing our military's strength. edit: and shit, maybe some people would actually consider working at a national lab @_@ I know I would..! | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:34 Falling wrote: Can you complete basic university transfer while in the service? Because it already takes a long time to set up one's life, delaying university training for two years... You can but it depends on what your MOS (military occupation specialty) is. If you're administration, sure, you could probably get a 4 year done. If you're infantry or support, then a 2 year may be the best, granted everything works out perfectly. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:34 kollin wrote: Why can't people just have those things without having to be in the army for 2 years. Because people died for these benefits and some are still dying, waiting to receive them. You have to earn your lot in life. Nothing is given to you. (obvious exceptions are obvious). | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:31 Wulfey_LA wrote: I have a challenge for you. Try saying "we need to deal with race on the sly" to one of these people, to their faces. // charlottesville vigil + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/08/17/candlelight_march_ss_09-3fe842668a025637159601895c4db1ba2d320852-s900-c85.jpg) I get Lilla's point, that suburban whites are fragile flowers and don't want to hear about gender and race, but are comfortable hearing about class. And be damned if that isn't true. But I don't see how the Democratic party can function if they have to tell the people who vote for them that we have to be more politically correct about race and gender if we want to get them scared suburbanites. EDIT: the Dems could of course play a sort of two faced game, where we run suburban looking people in the suburbs and they stay strangely silent on gender and race issues while at the same time urban democrats are forthright on issues of gender and race. Threading that needle is gonna be rough. That one is easy. You deal with that one straight up. No one liked the KKK. But most racial political issue are local. They involve local governments and local actors. They are complex and nuanced. Just keep those local, rather than taking it national. Because frankly, the national news media does a terrible job covering these issues as well. Keep on the economy and pocket book issues. And for the love of god, do not rework the entire healthcare system again. If we are going to do that single payer thing, just slow roll that. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43771 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:26 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Mandatory 2 year service. Go from there. Forget that honorary bullshit. I volunteered. You don't get to just reap the same benefits because of politics or feelings. You earn it the same way I did. (by laying on a beach in Japan for 3 years). The military is a job like any other. You volunteered for your job, well done, have a gold star, the kids at McDonalds volunteered for their job too. Society should not be making the kind of benefits that form the foundation of a modern and civilized country dependent upon career choices. Especially not the highly questionable kind of career choices like signing up to surrender your own personal morality and kill on demand. The guy making fries has more nobility. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:34 kollin wrote: Why can't people just have those things without having to be in the army for 2 years. Because this is America and we don't believe in hand outs. Job training needs to be handled by the free market and goverment backed loans for 100K. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22180 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:34 kollin wrote: Why can't people just have those things without having to be in the army for 2 years. I think that's kind of the point being made. The only ones the American people seems to unanimously favor taking care of is veterans. An 'easy' way to fix the US is to make everyone a veteran. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43771 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Because people died for these benefits and some are still dying, waiting to receive them. You have to earn your lot in life. Nothing is given to you. (obvious exceptions are obvious). Weird. In the UK healthcare is given to us. From where I'm sitting it looks like MRI machines still work whether or not you make some soldiers die. It sucks that in the US they make some people die before they give anyone healthcare. But the fact that you got fucked over doesn't justify fucking over the next group of people. You didn't need to volunteer to join the military to deserve a decent minimum standard of healthcare, you always deserved it, some asshole refused to give it to you unless you jumped through some hoops. Don't punch downwards, that's a crab bucket mentality. "I'm fucking you over because some guy fucked me over" isn't a rational response. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Because people died for these benefits and some are still dying, waiting to receive them. You have to earn your lot in life. Nothing is given to you. (obvious exceptions are obvious). We're all dying mannnnn, if you're joining the army for the welfare benefits after leaving then your country doesn't treat its regular citizens well enough. Just because you choose to join an institution that requires you to risk your life (and has equal benefits for those required to aim bombs at Arab shepherds on video screens) doesn't mean that national service is a solution to anything. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11467 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:32 Plansix wrote: I believe the perception is irrelevant. They have noticed something that impacts them negatively and it appears to be associated with race. Quibbling about if it is systematic racism or just the law of averages is counterproductive when the issue could just be addressed. In the process of addressing it, the real answer if it was racist or not will likely turn up anyways. If perception is irrelevant, why does it matter so much? Well, and wouldn't what the problem is matter on how you address it? Like, if the issue is like the redlining pre-1968 era you would address the problem in one way. But if the main issue is that it's hard to get a loan because you are poor and you need to get such a large loan because the prices are so high compared to what you make and the prices are so high because housing demand vastly outstrips supply (see the Vancouver market), wouldn't you address the problem in a very different way? The outcome might look the same- minorities are not getting a loan, but cause matters a lot. Just because someone is moved by compassion or a sense of justice to do something doesn't mean they'll actually do the right thing. It matters that you actually fix what you want to fix and so digging down and finding out what's actually wrong matters... a lot. | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:38 Plansix wrote: That one is easy. You deal with that one straight up. No one liked the KKK. But most racial political issue are local. They involve local governments and local actors. They are complex and nuanced. Just keep those local, rather than taking it national. Because frankly, the national news media does a terrible job covering these issues as well. Keep on the economy and pocket book issues. And for the love of god, do not rework the entire healthcare system again. If we are going to do that single payer thing, just slow roll that. The thinking part of my brain is on board with that plan and I have thought for a while along almost identical lines that you just suggested. But do you really think we dodge race issues when Trump is running in 2020? Hell in 2018? How will this stuff not come up? He makes it come up. Bannon even said in the interview they intentionally make it come up so they can split off snowflake suburbanites. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43771 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:45 Falling wrote: If preception is irrelevant, why does it matter so much? Well, and wouldn't what the problem is matter on how you address it? Like, if the issue is like the redlining pre-1968 era you would address the problem in one way. But if the main issue is that it's hard to get a loan because you are poor and you need to get such a large loan because the prices are so high compared to what you make and the prices are so high because housing demand vastly outstrips supply (see the Vancouver market), wouldn't you address the problem in a very different way? The outcome might look the same- minorities are not getting a loan, but cause matters a lot. Just because someone is moved by compassion or a sense of justice to do something doesn't mean they'll do the right thing. It matters that you actually fix what you want to fix and so digging down and finding out what's actually wrong matters... a lot. In the WaPo case Plansix cited the minority folks could get loans, they just couldn't get loans from this one bank that wouldn't loan to minority folks. It wasn't about poverty or supply or housing prices etc. They compared the racist bank to the others to control for non discriminatory factors. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:45 Falling wrote: If perception is irrelevant, why does it matter so much? Well, and wouldn't what the problem is matter on how you address it? Like, if the issue is like the redlining pre-1968 era you would address the problem in one way. But if the main issue is that it's hard to get a loan because you are poor and you need to get such a large loan because the prices are so high compared to what you make and the prices are so high because housing demand vastly outstrips supply (see the Vancouver market), wouldn't you address the problem in a very different way? The outcome might look the same- minorities are not getting a loan, but cause matters a lot. Just because someone is moved by compassion or a sense of justice to do something doesn't mean they'll actually do the right thing. It matters that you actually fix what you want to fix and so digging down and finding out what's actually wrong matters... a lot. I think the part you're missing is that the mortgage applications are not being treated equally, and the dividing line tends towards race. Which is where the racism (systemic or overt) comes in. It's generally not "he's black, so not mortgage". It's "here are the criteria we use, some of which is historical or location based, so if your grandfather was explicitly discriminated against, then you will be effected by the same". | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:42 KwarK wrote: Weird. In the UK healthcare is given to us. From where I'm sitting it looks like MRI machines still work whether or not you make some soldiers die. It sucks that in the US they make some people die before they give anyone healthcare. But the fact that you got fucked over doesn't justify fucking over the next group of people. You didn't need to volunteer to join the military to deserve a decent minimum standard of healthcare, you always deserved it, some asshole refused to give it to you unless you jumped through some hoops. Don't punch downwards, that's a crab bucket mentality. "I'm fucking you over because some guy fucked me over" isn't a rational response. Not wanting to get into a pissing match with you or anyone else over the virtues of military service or working a fryer. I'll opt out of discussing this further. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23785 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:40 Gorsameth wrote: I think that's kind of the point being made. The only ones the American people seems to unanimously favor taking care of is veterans. An 'easy' way to fix the US is to make everyone a veteran. No, not at all. They are the ones who get the best lip service though. If you joined the military in the late 80's early 90's you could have gotten a pretty sweet deal if you stayed in for 20 years though. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 18 2017 06:45 Falling wrote: If perception is irrelevant, why does it matter so much? Well, and wouldn't what the problem is matter on how you address it? Like, if the issue is like the redlining pre-1968 era you would address the problem in one way. But if the main issue is that it's hard to get a loan because you are poor and you need to get such a large loan because the prices are so high compared to what you make and the prices are so high because housing demand vastly outstrips supply (see the Vancouver market), wouldn't you address the problem in a very different way? The outcome might look the same- minorities are not getting a loan, but cause matters a lot. Just because someone is moved by compassion or a sense of justice to do something doesn't mean they'll actually do the right thing. It matters that you actually fix what you want to fix and so digging down and finding out what's actually wrong matters... a lot. Why wouldn't it matter? Think of how these issues are raised organically. A black community can't get loans from one back. They can't find properties to buy in a specific area. Their school is being defunded because all the white families are using school of choice and the poorer blacks can't afford to transport their kids. They don't care if it is really racism or something else. It looks a lot like racism and they want to the problem solved. If the problem is prevalent across many communities, we would like to solve all of them. They do not want to debate if they are racists or not before the solving happens. But that is how the public discourse happens. No action can happen until we confirm if the white people involved were racist or not. | ||
| ||
