|
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 November 28 2017 13:52 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 10:33 mozoku wrote:On November 28 2017 09:03 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:48 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 08:43 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 28 2017 08:08 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 04:14 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 03:52 Shiragaku wrote:
[quote]
What I am trying to get at is you wouldn't refuse to be friends with a liberal because Hillary and Obama did certain things that are not progressive so why is it acceptable to do the same to a Trump supporter, assuming they are not calling you a cuck every other sentence. A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me. The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them. And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied. What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react? On November 28 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 03:50 Shiragaku wrote:
[quote]
I don't know about you guys, bust most of my friendships with liberals ended was over shit like cultural appropriation, the legitimacy of gender fluidity, and my criticisms of campus identity politics.
In California, lots of gay people said that they were scared for their lives because Trump is in office and statistically and anecdotally, that is bullshit. Lots of women with nice jobs and attending good universities continue to insist they are oppressed when they are in a pretty good position compared to most Americans. And so many PoCs on college campuses engage in outright bullying and use their identity to cynically silence people. When you look more into their background, its not uncommon to see that they came from good families.
I can befriend people with many different political views and can still disagree with them, but with many urban progressives, I am always one comment from being socially ruined. I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships. I have grown up in rural America and there was definitely racism and homophobia. There were times when people refused to serve my mom because she was Asian and we had gay people who were bullied and eventually committed suicide. And the anti-Muslim sentiment was there, but on a personal level, most Muslims were integrated for the most part. But the Islamphobia is pretty bad and it is getting worse. However, with people like Jon Stewart and shows like Glee, that all changed so fast for the better. Rural America, although not San Francisco or New York is definitely way much friendly and livable than it used to be. When I moved to California, it was even better, especially for someone like me, but one thing that irks me is when I see people who have never experienced racism claiming oppression like some reward. I know what bigotry was like in action and there is nothing more infuriating when people in liberal bubbles LARP as a minority in their fictionalized view of suburban/rural America and use it to cynically promote their worldview. My problem with 'Rural Americans voted for Trump 'because the country left them behind' is that Trump in no way represents their interests. They fell for the same con they have fallen for for decades and after Trump disappointing them they will run off to the next conman who promises them everything they want to hear. I get that people don't want to accept the truth, yes the country failed them by not restructuring the economy decades ago away from failing industries, yes its shit, it sucks and there is no easy way forward. But going 'My dad worked in a coal mine, I want to work in a coal mine' , 'no one wants coal anymore' , 'well, make them use it' doesn't do anything. When offered a choice between a conman promising them the world and a shady politician with a plan she might not follow through on, the voted for the conman. Sorry that I don't feel more sympathy for believing in the impossible. The entire idea of "We're a coal family and we're proud" is a great example of how prone to tribalism humans are. How in the world do you actually positively identify with manual labor. god damn. These people are just so easily manipulated it drives me insane. Coal mining was a well enough paying job to pay for a nice house and develop a nice neighborhood. So people wanting the old life back is expected, it was a good job back then. The problem now is that coal mining is dangerous, unhealthy, increasingly automated and suffering from competition like natural gas and renewable resources. That's the reality of the situation. Unless the USA subsidies coal, they aren't getting their quality of living they once had back. And if we're subsiding (white) coal miners, that's basically welfare to prop up a shrinking industry that even China and India aren't too fond of because its dirty as heck. Subsidizing coal doesn't even work since, as you said, automation means that new and bigger mines won't even meet the demand for work and the work that is offered would require more and more education. That's actually the funny thing about Trump's campaign promise towards coal miners. If you stopped for a second and thought about why coal was dying, the economic and environmental reasons are dead obvious. But that would require some people over there to finally accept the hard truth instead of blaming China/regulations/left wing environmentalists/Democrats/RINOs/globalists/etc. You don't think coal miners have a legitimate grievance against pretty much all of those groups? All of them essentially worked to put coal miners out of business without any concern for what the coal miners would actually do after they succeeded. I'm obviously an unabashed advocate of both the free market and free trade but it doesn't take a genius to realize low-skilled coal miners can't easily transfer their skills and tend not to be the type to have both the foresight and requisite character traits to proactively learn a new skillset in preparation for the demise of the coal industry. If you're a 55 year old ex-coal miner without adequate retirement savings (like most Americans) in 2017, what do you even do? A mass retaining program starting 10-20 years ago for half of Trump's base probably would have easily paid for itself by now. If that had been available and these workers had turned it down, I'd have a lot less sympathy for them but, pragmatically speaking, I expect foresight and good planning to be a trait of the political class--not the working class--thus the much of the onus for the current mess falls on said political class. To be clear, I'm not saying it justifies Trumpism and total/utter mistrust of elites, but the elites really did fuck up as far as America's working class is concerned. And some of the sneering around here at coal miners is pretty gross. It's easy to say "lol learn a new profession" when you're a software engineer who has to learn new things for their job everyday and is mentally used to it, but when you're a union worker for 30 years where various career filters have been applied and you probably don't have personality traits that are particularly amenable for learning, the union structure provides no incentive to learn anything new so you haven't done it for 30 years, and you're 55 so your time to profit from your educational investment is 10 years (rather than 40 as for a student), the whole "learn a new profession" thing sounds a lot more daunting and a lot less worth it. Yes, I don't think they have a legitimate grievance against any of those groups. The "job killing" regulation mostly just prevents their employers from shifting externalities directly onto the workers themselves. If mining a unit of coal generates $100 in wealth and causes $150 in long term health problems to the miner then the miner wouldn't have an economic incentive to mine it. But if it's a mining company then it's still economically rational, as long as the long term health problems can be viewed as an externality, an expense a third party has to pay. One party makes $100, another loses $150, but it's economically rational to for the first party to continue. That's how the coal mines used to run, they made the communities they operated in poorer by operating and then, when forced to make payments into plans to offset future health costs for their employees, blamed the big government for interfering. But by far the number one reason coal jobs have declined is nothing to do with regulation, China, globalists, environmentalists, leftists, or anything else. It's technology. It's the same issue horses have with the internal combustion engine. The problem isn't with the coal industry, any more than it is with domestic manufacturing (which is at an all time high), it's that output has gone up while blue collar jobs have fallen. The US manufactured over twice as many automobiles in 2017 as in 2009, but I'll bet you anything they didn't employ twice the workforce.
Are not environmentalists the ones advocating for the research behind the technology that is pushing coal miners out of jobs though? And didn't the political class push for free trade, which helps the economy overall but increases the supply of working class labor? I should say, I agree with both environmentalists and free trade proponents and don't believe they were wrong to push the policies they did. But that doesn't change the fact they didn't have a plan in place to help the American worker adapt.
NAFTA was signed in the 90s, China was accepted to the WTO in 2001 (?). Green energy has been a goal since at least the 90s. Yet there wasn't a retraining fund until late enough in Obama's presidency (2013+ ?) where Trump could kill the fund before there were final plans to utilize them. I don't know whether the effects of such policies were misunderstood or if there political class didn't care, but either way the total lack of a remedy plan for the working class points to some large mistakes made by the political class. I'm even saying that as something who cares relatively little about wealth/income inequality--a maladapted workforce is straight-up bad for growth.
To your point, I don't believe it's the government's role to be predicting where the market will bring technology advancement and to attempt to shape the labor force for it. On the other hand, when the government is the actor actively driving shifts in the labor force, the losers of those shifts are those least prepared and least able to deal with it (i.e. the working class), and the government has no plan to help them get back on their feet, I think it's fair to say that the government decision-makers (i.e. those from the political class) have made a mistake somewhere.
|
United States41989 Posts
On November 28 2017 14:36 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 13:52 KwarK wrote:On November 28 2017 10:33 mozoku wrote:On November 28 2017 09:03 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:48 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 08:43 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 28 2017 08:08 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 04:14 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me.
The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them. And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied. What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react? On November 28 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships. I have grown up in rural America and there was definitely racism and homophobia. There were times when people refused to serve my mom because she was Asian and we had gay people who were bullied and eventually committed suicide. And the anti-Muslim sentiment was there, but on a personal level, most Muslims were integrated for the most part. But the Islamphobia is pretty bad and it is getting worse. However, with people like Jon Stewart and shows like Glee, that all changed so fast for the better. Rural America, although not San Francisco or New York is definitely way much friendly and livable than it used to be. When I moved to California, it was even better, especially for someone like me, but one thing that irks me is when I see people who have never experienced racism claiming oppression like some reward. I know what bigotry was like in action and there is nothing more infuriating when people in liberal bubbles LARP as a minority in their fictionalized view of suburban/rural America and use it to cynically promote their worldview. My problem with 'Rural Americans voted for Trump 'because the country left them behind' is that Trump in no way represents their interests. They fell for the same con they have fallen for for decades and after Trump disappointing them they will run off to the next conman who promises them everything they want to hear. I get that people don't want to accept the truth, yes the country failed them by not restructuring the economy decades ago away from failing industries, yes its shit, it sucks and there is no easy way forward. But going 'My dad worked in a coal mine, I want to work in a coal mine' , 'no one wants coal anymore' , 'well, make them use it' doesn't do anything. When offered a choice between a conman promising them the world and a shady politician with a plan she might not follow through on, the voted for the conman. Sorry that I don't feel more sympathy for believing in the impossible. The entire idea of "We're a coal family and we're proud" is a great example of how prone to tribalism humans are. How in the world do you actually positively identify with manual labor. god damn. These people are just so easily manipulated it drives me insane. Coal mining was a well enough paying job to pay for a nice house and develop a nice neighborhood. So people wanting the old life back is expected, it was a good job back then. The problem now is that coal mining is dangerous, unhealthy, increasingly automated and suffering from competition like natural gas and renewable resources. That's the reality of the situation. Unless the USA subsidies coal, they aren't getting their quality of living they once had back. And if we're subsiding (white) coal miners, that's basically welfare to prop up a shrinking industry that even China and India aren't too fond of because its dirty as heck. Subsidizing coal doesn't even work since, as you said, automation means that new and bigger mines won't even meet the demand for work and the work that is offered would require more and more education. That's actually the funny thing about Trump's campaign promise towards coal miners. If you stopped for a second and thought about why coal was dying, the economic and environmental reasons are dead obvious. But that would require some people over there to finally accept the hard truth instead of blaming China/regulations/left wing environmentalists/Democrats/RINOs/globalists/etc. You don't think coal miners have a legitimate grievance against pretty much all of those groups? All of them essentially worked to put coal miners out of business without any concern for what the coal miners would actually do after they succeeded. I'm obviously an unabashed advocate of both the free market and free trade but it doesn't take a genius to realize low-skilled coal miners can't easily transfer their skills and tend not to be the type to have both the foresight and requisite character traits to proactively learn a new skillset in preparation for the demise of the coal industry. If you're a 55 year old ex-coal miner without adequate retirement savings (like most Americans) in 2017, what do you even do? A mass retaining program starting 10-20 years ago for half of Trump's base probably would have easily paid for itself by now. If that had been available and these workers had turned it down, I'd have a lot less sympathy for them but, pragmatically speaking, I expect foresight and good planning to be a trait of the political class--not the working class--thus the much of the onus for the current mess falls on said political class. To be clear, I'm not saying it justifies Trumpism and total/utter mistrust of elites, but the elites really did fuck up as far as America's working class is concerned. And some of the sneering around here at coal miners is pretty gross. It's easy to say "lol learn a new profession" when you're a software engineer who has to learn new things for their job everyday and is mentally used to it, but when you're a union worker for 30 years where various career filters have been applied and you probably don't have personality traits that are particularly amenable for learning, the union structure provides no incentive to learn anything new so you haven't done it for 30 years, and you're 55 so your time to profit from your educational investment is 10 years (rather than 40 as for a student), the whole "learn a new profession" thing sounds a lot more daunting and a lot less worth it. Yes, I don't think they have a legitimate grievance against any of those groups. The "job killing" regulation mostly just prevents their employers from shifting externalities directly onto the workers themselves. If mining a unit of coal generates $100 in wealth and causes $150 in long term health problems to the miner then the miner wouldn't have an economic incentive to mine it. But if it's a mining company then it's still economically rational, as long as the long term health problems can be viewed as an externality, an expense a third party has to pay. One party makes $100, another loses $150, but it's economically rational to for the first party to continue. That's how the coal mines used to run, they made the communities they operated in poorer by operating and then, when forced to make payments into plans to offset future health costs for their employees, blamed the big government for interfering. But by far the number one reason coal jobs have declined is nothing to do with regulation, China, globalists, environmentalists, leftists, or anything else. It's technology. It's the same issue horses have with the internal combustion engine. The problem isn't with the coal industry, any more than it is with domestic manufacturing (which is at an all time high), it's that output has gone up while blue collar jobs have fallen. The US manufactured over twice as many automobiles in 2017 as in 2009, but I'll bet you anything they didn't employ twice the workforce. Are not environmentalists the ones advocating for the research behind the technology that is pushing coal miners out of jobs though? And didn't the political class push for free trade, which helps the economy overall but increases the supply of working class labor? I should say, I agree with both environmentalists and free trade proponents and don't believe they were wrong to push the policies they did. But that doesn't change the fact they didn't have a plan in place to help the American worker adapt. NAFTA was signed in the 90s, China was accepted to the WTO in 2001 (?). Green energy has been a goal since at least the 90s. Yet there wasn't a retraining fund until late enough in Obama's presidency (2013+ ?) where Trump could kill the fund before there were final plans to utilize them. I don't know whether the effects of such policies were misunderstood or if there political class didn't care, but either way the total lack of a remedy plan for the working class points to some large mistakes made by the political class. I'm even saying that as something who cares relatively little about wealth/income inequality--a maladapted workforce is straight-up bad for growth. To your point, I don't believe it's the government's role to be predicting where the market will bring technology advancement and to attempt to shape the labor force for it. On the other hand, when the government is the actor actively driving shifts in the labor force, the losers of those shifts are those least prepared and least able to deal with it (i.e. the working class), and the government has no plan to help them get back on their feet, I think it's fair to say that the government decision-makers (i.e. those from the political class) have made a mistake somewhere.
No, the environmentalists are not the ones funding bigger and more efficient mechanised ways to get coal out of the ground. That should be quite obvious. The coal industry is funding those. Just like it's the car industry that is funding the machines that make cars, and not big horse or whatever. Think about it for just a second, environmentalists would like it if mining was more low tech, not less, because then it'd be less economically rational to do it. The coal output to manhours input would be too low. It's mining companies that like the tech.
Free trade doesn't increase the supply of labour, that'd be free movement of labour. Different thing. Free trade between NAFTA nations allows coal to be imported without tariffs. Imported Mexican coal isn't what is killing the coal industry though.
The Appalachian Regional Commission has been around for about six decades now, that's a little before the Obama presidency. So 0/3 so far.
If the free market is allowed to do whatever the hell it wants then it'll engage in happy feedback loops where the tech jobs go to where the tech workforce is and the tech workforce grows where the tech jobs are, with all the related tertiary infrastructure building up there. That's fine from a free market perspective, but it's basically writes off Appalachia. The government is the only entity able to pay the up front costs of priming the pump. It's an extremely established economic policy, you ought to have heard of it.
|
On November 28 2017 13:58 Doodsmack wrote:One wonders if those who claim that Trump does not make any racist statements will ever come to terms with the quantity of quotes with double meaning where if you give it 100% charity, it's not racist, but if you view it in another light, it is. Show nested quote +At a Monday event honoring the Native American Code Talkers, President Trump revived one of his favorite lines of attack against Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., questioning her claim that she’s part Native American and calling her “Pocahontas.”
...
Trump made his remarks standing beneath a portrait of Andrew Jackson, whose military campaigns against Native American tribes in the early 1800s earned him the nickname “Indian Killer.” www.yahoo.com
In case you had thought that Donald Trump had already managed to be disrespectful to every single minority in this country, we bring you "NOW! That's What I Call A Stupid Remark! Volume: Native Americans."
|
This was by far the best take I've seen.
|
On November 28 2017 10:34 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 08:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
Wow, that Danglars diatribe about how sad it is people wont be his friend was intense.
ProTip: Don't want people to treat you like a racist douche, don't act like a racist douche, support a racist douche, then complain when people don't want to hang out with a racist douche.
It actually kind of blows my mind people think there's nothing friendship ruining about supporting Trump. He's a terrible human being, beyond his policy, Trump is actually a trash person all around.
If you're friends with Cernovich, you aren't my friend. If you support Trump you aren't my friend. Let me be clear, this isn't a personal thing, this is a "regardless of how much I try to make you my friend, you can't be my friend and be friends with Cernovich, they are mutually exclusive" thing.
You are bad at choosing friends if your friend can also support the destruction of you and/or your family's life. And sure you can call them "friend" but you obviously wouldn't understand the intent of the term.
That doesn't mean I couldn't have a beer with Danglars, just means it would probably end with me punching him in the throat if he tried to talk politics. I would never be foolish enough to consider him a friend either. Ouch. I thought you were more civilized than to presume a political discussion would turn to blows. But yes, we've heard your defense of screaming racist at everything because everything is racist before.
Well we have mutual combat laws here so I figured it would go something like you say something repugnant, I say you can't say that, you say you can, I challenge you to combat to settle whether you can say it in my presence or not, you don't like those choices and object. I assure you your choices are 1. not say it 2.fight 3. get ostrasized and not be a part of the conversation. You pick fight and get punched in the throat.
I suppose you could just walk away or stop, but you seem far too stubborn to do something like that.
Seems perfectly civilized to me, but you also can't tell the difference between everything being racist and racism being a part of pretty much everything in this country so we clearly have trouble agreeing on the meaning of words.
|
|
|
On November 28 2017 12:31 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 10:43 Plansix wrote:On November 28 2017 10:33 mozoku wrote:On November 28 2017 09:03 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:48 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 08:43 doomdonker wrote:On November 28 2017 08:18 Mohdoo wrote:On November 28 2017 08:08 Gorsameth wrote:On November 28 2017 04:14 Shiragaku wrote:On November 28 2017 03:57 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
A Hillary supporter whose support of Hillary was predicated on her covering up of sexual abuse (as in that's why they liked her) would be morally unacceptable to me. A Hillary supporter who supported her in spite of that because there was no better alternative would be fine for me.
The problem is that Trump supporters don't get to claim that there wasn't a less racist alternative to Trump. They can only say that the racism wasn't a significant factor to them. And when racism in the 21st century seems to be defined as not giving disrespect to certain people, is that the worst thing that someone can believe in? Whenever I hear people use that argument, it really sounds like they are crying wolf at this point. Racism really doesn't mean anything to most people anymore when it is constantly being applied. What people fail to see is that Trump's campaign was not built upon racism, it was in reaction to the people left behind with globalization and many of them live in a worst situation than they did years or decades ago and when they have to pay respect to groups of people or use phrases they have never even heard of years ago, how do you expect them to react? On November 28 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
I also hear that a lot of gays don’t want to move out of MA or RI because the rest of the country is so unfriendly to them. I know people who have come back to the area because the rest of the country treated them like this. I have had Muslim friends who straight up left this country because it treated them so poorly. You don’t seem that interested in believe these folks, so I would argue that you value your political views more than their friendships. I have grown up in rural America and there was definitely racism and homophobia. There were times when people refused to serve my mom because she was Asian and we had gay people who were bullied and eventually committed suicide. And the anti-Muslim sentiment was there, but on a personal level, most Muslims were integrated for the most part. But the Islamphobia is pretty bad and it is getting worse. However, with people like Jon Stewart and shows like Glee, that all changed so fast for the better. Rural America, although not San Francisco or New York is definitely way much friendly and livable than it used to be. When I moved to California, it was even better, especially for someone like me, but one thing that irks me is when I see people who have never experienced racism claiming oppression like some reward. I know what bigotry was like in action and there is nothing more infuriating when people in liberal bubbles LARP as a minority in their fictionalized view of suburban/rural America and use it to cynically promote their worldview. My problem with 'Rural Americans voted for Trump 'because the country left them behind' is that Trump in no way represents their interests. They fell for the same con they have fallen for for decades and after Trump disappointing them they will run off to the next conman who promises them everything they want to hear. I get that people don't want to accept the truth, yes the country failed them by not restructuring the economy decades ago away from failing industries, yes its shit, it sucks and there is no easy way forward. But going 'My dad worked in a coal mine, I want to work in a coal mine' , 'no one wants coal anymore' , 'well, make them use it' doesn't do anything. When offered a choice between a conman promising them the world and a shady politician with a plan she might not follow through on, the voted for the conman. Sorry that I don't feel more sympathy for believing in the impossible. The entire idea of "We're a coal family and we're proud" is a great example of how prone to tribalism humans are. How in the world do you actually positively identify with manual labor. god damn. These people are just so easily manipulated it drives me insane. Coal mining was a well enough paying job to pay for a nice house and develop a nice neighborhood. So people wanting the old life back is expected, it was a good job back then. The problem now is that coal mining is dangerous, unhealthy, increasingly automated and suffering from competition like natural gas and renewable resources. That's the reality of the situation. Unless the USA subsidies coal, they aren't getting their quality of living they once had back. And if we're subsiding (white) coal miners, that's basically welfare to prop up a shrinking industry that even China and India aren't too fond of because its dirty as heck. Subsidizing coal doesn't even work since, as you said, automation means that new and bigger mines won't even meet the demand for work and the work that is offered would require more and more education. That's actually the funny thing about Trump's campaign promise towards coal miners. If you stopped for a second and thought about why coal was dying, the economic and environmental reasons are dead obvious. But that would require some people over there to finally accept the hard truth instead of blaming China/regulations/left wing environmentalists/Democrats/RINOs/globalists/etc. You don't think coal miners have a legitimate grievance against pretty much all of those groups? All of them essentially worked to put coal miners out of business without any concern for what the coal miners would actually do after they succeeded. I'm obviously an unabashed advocate of both the free market and free trade but it doesn't take a genius to realize low-skilled coal miners can't easily transfer their skills and tend not to be the type to have both the foresight and requisite character traits to proactively learn a new skillset in preparation for the demise of the coal industry. If you're a 55 year old ex-coal miner without adequate retirement savings (like most Americans) in 2017, what do you even do? A mass retaining program starting 10-20 years ago for half of Trump's base probably would have easily paid for itself by now. If that had been available and these workers had turned it down, I'd have a lot less sympathy for them but, pragmatically speaking, I expect foresight and good planning to be a trait of the political class--not the working class--thus the much of the onus for the current mess falls on said political class. To be clear, I'm not saying it justifies Trumpism and total/utter mistrust of elites, but the elites really did fuck up as far as America's working class is concerned. And some of the sneering around here at coal miners is pretty gross. It's easy to say "lol learn a new profession" when you're a software engineer who has to learn new things for their job everyday and is mentally used to it, but when you're a union worker for 30 years where various career filters have been applied and you probably don't have personality traits that are particularly amenable for learning, the union structure provides no incentive to learn anything new so you haven't done it for 30 years, and you're 55 so your time to profit from your educational investment is 10 years (rather than 40 as for a student), the whole "learn a new profession" thing sounds a lot more daunting and a lot less worth it. The policies put in place by Obama that limited coal production had a whole bunch of money for retraining and systems in place to help the transition. Trump ended those. The working class of America is really good at shooting itself in the foot because they keep electing Republicans. Because Republican keep telling them government is the one destroying their jobs and then turning around ending the services that would help people find new jobs. Much like immigration, the Republicans will never address this problem because then they couldn't get re-elected by railing against it. What does a "a whole bunch of money put aside" actually mean in practice? Clearly, the program was a failure as there's a bunch of unemployable manufacturers and coal miners that got Trump elected. Furthermore, if the program was at all popular, why wasn't there a backlash when Trump cut it? Something doesn't add up here.
People often don't show up to the job training, or don't like the jobs on offer.
Retraining is hard. Culturally people want to have their dad's / grand-dad's manly mining job. New jobs are in things like healthcare.
|
Working the same job as your father? What is this, the 19th century?
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure Moore didn't know anything, he was just trying to pull a Trump and muddy the waters. See: Obama birth certificate.
Project Veritas have always seemed more like some generically bankrolled sting asshats than people actual politicians get in touch with-after all, their videos inevitably get shown to be trash within weeks, which is enough time for it to backfire tremendously for Moore (even if it worked, the headline "you hired someone to falsely accuse you of sexual assault to show how easy it was" doesn't seem like it would really play well for people who already don't trust him)
|
He doesn't need to change the minds of the people that don't trust him, he needs to keep the people that did, which overlap with the "Fake News" morons... On these it would most likely have worked like a charm.
|
On November 28 2017 23:48 Velr wrote:
He doesn't need to change the minds of the people that don't trust him, he needs to keep the people that did, which overlap with the "Fake News" morons... On these it would most likely have worked like a charm.
exactly. Just look at all the people who still believe the PP stuff. He's not trying to convince the smart people but the dumb idiots.
|
So rumors that Trump won't be invited to the Royal Wedding but the Obama's will. Now imagine if the Clinton's, and Bush family also attend.
God help us all...
|
On November 29 2017 00:23 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
So rumors that Trump won't be invited to the Royal Wedding but the Obama's will. Now imagine if the Clinton's, and Bush family also attend.
God help us all...
I can only imagine the passive-aggressive tweets that would be sent if this is true.
"Never wanted to be invited anyways, sorry!"
|
On November 28 2017 17:41 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 10:34 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 08:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
Wow, that Danglars diatribe about how sad it is people wont be his friend was intense.
ProTip: Don't want people to treat you like a racist douche, don't act like a racist douche, support a racist douche, then complain when people don't want to hang out with a racist douche.
It actually kind of blows my mind people think there's nothing friendship ruining about supporting Trump. He's a terrible human being, beyond his policy, Trump is actually a trash person all around.
If you're friends with Cernovich, you aren't my friend. If you support Trump you aren't my friend. Let me be clear, this isn't a personal thing, this is a "regardless of how much I try to make you my friend, you can't be my friend and be friends with Cernovich, they are mutually exclusive" thing.
You are bad at choosing friends if your friend can also support the destruction of you and/or your family's life. And sure you can call them "friend" but you obviously wouldn't understand the intent of the term.
That doesn't mean I couldn't have a beer with Danglars, just means it would probably end with me punching him in the throat if he tried to talk politics. I would never be foolish enough to consider him a friend either. Ouch. I thought you were more civilized than to presume a political discussion would turn to blows. But yes, we've heard your defense of screaming racist at everything because everything is racist before. Well we have mutual combat laws here so I figured it would go something like you say something repugnant, I say you can't say that, you say you can, I challenge you to combat to settle whether you can say it in my presence or not, you don't like those choices and object. I assure you your choices are 1. not say it 2.fight 3. get ostrasized and not be a part of the conversation. You pick fight and get punched in the throat. I suppose you could just walk away or stop, but you seem far too stubborn to do something like that. Seems perfectly civilized to me, but you also can't tell the difference between everything being racist and racism being a part of pretty much everything in this country so we clearly have trouble agreeing on the meaning of words.
Your evaluation of what’s repugnant lol. You’re way too willing to settle things with violence for me. Go find a police officer or something to get your rocks off.
You’ve always seen racism in everything and I don’t expect it to change soon.
|
Apparently Trump broke Olbermann. He’s retiring from political commentary in all media venues.
|
Yeah.... just saw that, can't believe!
|
|
|
On November 29 2017 00:28 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2017 17:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 28 2017 10:34 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 08:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
Wow, that Danglars diatribe about how sad it is people wont be his friend was intense.
ProTip: Don't want people to treat you like a racist douche, don't act like a racist douche, support a racist douche, then complain when people don't want to hang out with a racist douche.
It actually kind of blows my mind people think there's nothing friendship ruining about supporting Trump. He's a terrible human being, beyond his policy, Trump is actually a trash person all around.
If you're friends with Cernovich, you aren't my friend. If you support Trump you aren't my friend. Let me be clear, this isn't a personal thing, this is a "regardless of how much I try to make you my friend, you can't be my friend and be friends with Cernovich, they are mutually exclusive" thing.
You are bad at choosing friends if your friend can also support the destruction of you and/or your family's life. And sure you can call them "friend" but you obviously wouldn't understand the intent of the term.
That doesn't mean I couldn't have a beer with Danglars, just means it would probably end with me punching him in the throat if he tried to talk politics. I would never be foolish enough to consider him a friend either. Ouch. I thought you were more civilized than to presume a political discussion would turn to blows. But yes, we've heard your defense of screaming racist at everything because everything is racist before. Well we have mutual combat laws here so I figured it would go something like you say something repugnant, I say you can't say that, you say you can, I challenge you to combat to settle whether you can say it in my presence or not, you don't like those choices and object. I assure you your choices are 1. not say it 2.fight 3. get ostrasized and not be a part of the conversation. You pick fight and get punched in the throat. I suppose you could just walk away or stop, but you seem far too stubborn to do something like that. Seems perfectly civilized to me, but you also can't tell the difference between everything being racist and racism being a part of pretty much everything in this country so we clearly have trouble agreeing on the meaning of words. Your evaluation of what’s repugnant lol. You’re way too willing to settle things with violence for me. Go find a police officer or something to get your rocks off. You’ve always seen racism in everything and I don’t expect it to change soon.
It's pretty simple really. We both see a Nazi advocating for my genocide I go to punch him, you defend his right to advocate genocide, and get punched too.
You act like your positions aren't antithetical to polite discourse on their face. You seem to think you're entitled to the floor to say whatever you want, well, you can't say fire in a crowded theater and you can't advocate for my genocide in my presence. You want to think that makes me the uncivilized one, you go right ahead.
I do have to give you points for the clever "Kill yourself" line you slipped in there though.
|
On November 29 2017 01:05 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2017 00:28 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 17:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 28 2017 10:34 Danglars wrote:On November 28 2017 08:57 GreenHorizons wrote:
Wow, that Danglars diatribe about how sad it is people wont be his friend was intense.
ProTip: Don't want people to treat you like a racist douche, don't act like a racist douche, support a racist douche, then complain when people don't want to hang out with a racist douche.
It actually kind of blows my mind people think there's nothing friendship ruining about supporting Trump. He's a terrible human being, beyond his policy, Trump is actually a trash person all around.
If you're friends with Cernovich, you aren't my friend. If you support Trump you aren't my friend. Let me be clear, this isn't a personal thing, this is a "regardless of how much I try to make you my friend, you can't be my friend and be friends with Cernovich, they are mutually exclusive" thing.
You are bad at choosing friends if your friend can also support the destruction of you and/or your family's life. And sure you can call them "friend" but you obviously wouldn't understand the intent of the term.
That doesn't mean I couldn't have a beer with Danglars, just means it would probably end with me punching him in the throat if he tried to talk politics. I would never be foolish enough to consider him a friend either. Ouch. I thought you were more civilized than to presume a political discussion would turn to blows. But yes, we've heard your defense of screaming racist at everything because everything is racist before. Well we have mutual combat laws here so I figured it would go something like you say something repugnant, I say you can't say that, you say you can, I challenge you to combat to settle whether you can say it in my presence or not, you don't like those choices and object. I assure you your choices are 1. not say it 2.fight 3. get ostrasized and not be a part of the conversation. You pick fight and get punched in the throat. I suppose you could just walk away or stop, but you seem far too stubborn to do something like that. Seems perfectly civilized to me, but you also can't tell the difference between everything being racist and racism being a part of pretty much everything in this country so we clearly have trouble agreeing on the meaning of words. Your evaluation of what’s repugnant lol. You’re way too willing to settle things with violence for me. Go find a police officer or something to get your rocks off. You’ve always seen racism in everything and I don’t expect it to change soon. It's pretty simple really. We both see a Nazi advocating for my genocide I go to punch him, you defend his right to advocate genocide, and get punched too. You act like your positions aren't antithetical to polite discourse on their face. You seem to think you're entitled to the floor to say whatever you want, well, you can't say fire in a crowded theater and you can't advocate for my genocide in my presence. You want to think that makes me the uncivilized one, you go right ahead. I do have to give you points for the clever "Kill yourself" line you slipped in there though.
First amendment free speech rights, who needs them? I should frame those first two sentences. But don’t worry, bro, if they shout to start lynching blacks in such and such neighborhood, that’s inciting imminent unlawful activity. I won’t let your base stupidity on the free speech rights of citizens interfere with the historical crossing of the line.
You wish everybody thought like you, but they don’t. If you’re perpetually aggrieved, and say that gives you the right to punch someone talking politics, you construct your own law. Just excuse your own mischief.
Here’s a thought: If you’re sharing beers and a political topic comes up, and you’re willing to punch him or her over it, just tell them to not discuss politics. It’ll work out better for both, and you get the bonus of not appearing to be a man itching for a fight. Given your tendency to call conservatives here advocates of white supremacy, and topics not unique to the black community expose white fragility, you’re just telling everyone to expect violence for their politics. And anyone not in full agreement with your political theory will have the good sense to stay away from those threats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
