|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
United States44286 Posts
On December 04 2019 04:23 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2019 04:17 KwarK wrote:On December 04 2019 04:05 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
The overproduction of milk would suggest to me that milk production independence has long been achieved. I don't know why or where any of you guys have gotten the impression that USA, which exports vast amounts of food isn't entirely food sufficient. USA has been food sufficient since, well the creation of USA. There’s more to strategic independence than output. An example of this would be a shipbuilding industry that uses foreign steel. In any case I find your responses to echo the worst excesses of Thatcherism. If a community is no longer financially viable then it is cheaper for the government to provide a structured transition than to allow it to collapse, only to bail it out on the back end. This isn’t new information, this was tested, it took the entire North Sea oil windfall to bail out the north of England under Thatcher. As a Brit you should know better than this, as well as as a human being. I think you should step back a bit Kwark. You are clearly emotional and are attacking me as a person as well as ascribing Thatcherism to me for some bizarre reason.
I am not in the least bit emotional so cdf.
I am suggesting you are advocating for a repeat of the mistakes of Thatcherism because you are literally advocating for the government to abandon entire communities when the economic rationale for their existence ceases due to macroeconomic factors. When the small farms go so do all of the industries built on feeding their needs. This is the exact same situation as the pit towns.
|
Northern Ireland27343 Posts
On December 04 2019 04:28 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2019 04:19 Wombat_NI wrote:On December 04 2019 03:19 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
If energy independence will be maintained irregardless (we are talking about 2019 not 1919 right?), if steel production is the exact same due to improved processes that make steel workers redundant, if the military simply don't need so much boots ont he ground anymore and so forth, why should the apathy you have towards lawyers not extended to them as well? If productivity gains or deep learning makes 90% of lawyers unnecessary, and they start making news articles about a retracted news article on suicide rates, why do you not care for them?
People suicide. Resources are limited, even in countries with better mental healthcare. Farm labourers are not a special group. They are not children or elderly, that the state have a special duty of care towards but fully rational (hopefully) adults. Resources are better put in preventative care to change that formative development. It certainly seems selfish to me to kill yourself, as if to give up and to almost to spite your children who have chosen another way of life successfully. Retraining, re-education, not market subsidies. I agree with you on propping up markets that don’t need propping up, or are holding back progress in other ways. Quite to your outright callousness on suicide I 100% do not get it, both from my own particular point of view but also your general history of posting where you tend to be sympathetic to people and their problems in general. I'm not being callous, I am saying that the psychological reasons behind suicide should be addressed, rather than subsidizing a lifestyle that is no longer sustainable due to an oversaturated market. Retraining and re-education should be offered, suidide support too by a health service, rather than a government subsidy to buy a lake of milk. People who are starving should be fed, that is the real tragedy. If only the people in this thread gave as much thought to the starving as to the subsidies of the agriculture industry. People, not cows.
But you can make the same point without using callous language, or being seemingly dismissive of suicide.
‘Suicide is selfish’ is a line trotted out all the time by people who want to deflect any kind of societal blame for such an eventuality onto the perceived flaws of the individual, and diverts attention from the myriad of reasons that such a tragedy occurred.
|
On December 04 2019 04:28 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2019 04:19 Wombat_NI wrote:On December 04 2019 03:19 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
If energy independence will be maintained irregardless (we are talking about 2019 not 1919 right?), if steel production is the exact same due to improved processes that make steel workers redundant, if the military simply don't need so much boots ont he ground anymore and so forth, why should the apathy you have towards lawyers not extended to them as well? If productivity gains or deep learning makes 90% of lawyers unnecessary, and they start making news articles about a retracted news article on suicide rates, why do you not care for them?
People suicide. Resources are limited, even in countries with better mental healthcare. Farm labourers are not a special group. They are not children or elderly, that the state have a special duty of care towards but fully rational (hopefully) adults. Resources are better put in preventative care to change that formative development. It certainly seems selfish to me to kill yourself, as if to give up and to almost to spite your children who have chosen another way of life successfully. Retraining, re-education, not market subsidies. I agree with you on propping up markets that don’t need propping up, or are holding back progress in other ways. Quite to your outright callousness on suicide I 100% do not get it, both from my own particular point of view but also your general history of posting where you tend to be sympathetic to people and their problems in general. I'm not being callous, I am saying that the psychological reasons behind suicide should be addressed, rather than subsidizing a lifestyle that is no longer sustainable due to an oversaturated market. Retraining and re-education should be offered, suidide support too by a health service, rather than a government subsidy to buy a lake of milk. People who are starving should be fed, that is the real tragedy. If only the people in this thread gave as much thought to the starving as to the subsidies of the agriculture industry. People, not cows.
You started with:
On December 03 2019 22:31 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2019 09:17 KwarK wrote:On December 03 2019 09:07 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On December 03 2019 07:52 KwarK wrote:
We have American farmers killing themselves because the food supply is so over saturated that their labour now has negative value and their produce is less than worthless while we also have people starving. It’s a weird world we’ve created. Why would they kill themselves. It's not like they are enslaved to labour for an oversaturated market with no alternative. Because being a farmer on the farm your great great grandfather bought and living in the house he built and being the one in a long line of farmers to lose the farm is tough, especially when your kids aren’t interested in farming for a loss and you’re working 18 hours a day to try to keep it going but the bills just keep mounting and the price of milk has dropped below the price of feed to get that milk but it’s not like you can just stop getting milk because the farm is mortgaged and you can’t scale production to the market that way so you just ask if the feed store will give you credit which is humiliating but you gotta do it but they won’t because everyone is asking for credit and they know as well as you do that things aren’t getting better and this isn’t just a bad year, it’s that the economics don’t make sense. Farmers are killing themselves because within a capitalist economy that is the correct thing to do when the value of your labour goes negative. This is the market based solution. When enough of them kill themselves there will be less supply and we can reach the supply/suicide equilibrium as Adam Smith always wanted us to. https://www.npr.org/2018/02/27/586586267/as-milk-prices-decline-worries-about-dairy-farmer-suicides-rise It is as you say, this is a world with people starving. It shouldn't be the government's problem, or anybody else's if someone self indoctrinated themselves into a myth that when it is shattered they see no way out but to take the most selfish recourse when they are living a reasonable life. Their children they leave behind, will have to be the ones continuing living life.
So I think that led to the interpretation you were being callous. Regarding suicide prevention I think we have to address the elephant in the room. Getting people to accept the world as it is without feeling maladjusted (usually through drugs) might be the wrong approach.
The problem might be a sick society and the maladjustment a healthy reaction.
|
It was in response to Kwark's line about "when your kids aren’t interested in farming " as a reason for suicide. Your children's existence should be enough reason for you own continued existence. If all engineering jobs vanished overnight and the job I love is oversaturated, I will damn well persevere and get another job even if I hate every moment of it for the sake of my otherwise fatherless child.
If your children aren't interested in farming and want to go and study at university, or even open up another independent business, those children should damn well be supported.
|
Northern Ireland27343 Posts
On December 04 2019 04:37 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2019 04:28 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On December 04 2019 04:19 Wombat_NI wrote:On December 04 2019 03:19 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
If energy independence will be maintained irregardless (we are talking about 2019 not 1919 right?), if steel production is the exact same due to improved processes that make steel workers redundant, if the military simply don't need so much boots ont he ground anymore and so forth, why should the apathy you have towards lawyers not extended to them as well? If productivity gains or deep learning makes 90% of lawyers unnecessary, and they start making news articles about a retracted news article on suicide rates, why do you not care for them?
People suicide. Resources are limited, even in countries with better mental healthcare. Farm labourers are not a special group. They are not children or elderly, that the state have a special duty of care towards but fully rational (hopefully) adults. Resources are better put in preventative care to change that formative development. It certainly seems selfish to me to kill yourself, as if to give up and to almost to spite your children who have chosen another way of life successfully. Retraining, re-education, not market subsidies. I agree with you on propping up markets that don’t need propping up, or are holding back progress in other ways. Quite to your outright callousness on suicide I 100% do not get it, both from my own particular point of view but also your general history of posting where you tend to be sympathetic to people and their problems in general. I'm not being callous, I am saying that the psychological reasons behind suicide should be addressed, rather than subsidizing a lifestyle that is no longer sustainable due to an oversaturated market. Retraining and re-education should be offered, suidide support too by a health service, rather than a government subsidy to buy a lake of milk. People who are starving should be fed, that is the real tragedy. If only the people in this thread gave as much thought to the starving as to the subsidies of the agriculture industry. People, not cows. You started with: Show nested quote +On December 03 2019 22:31 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On December 03 2019 09:17 KwarK wrote:On December 03 2019 09:07 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On December 03 2019 07:52 KwarK wrote:
We have American farmers killing themselves because the food supply is so over saturated that their labour now has negative value and their produce is less than worthless while we also have people starving. It’s a weird world we’ve created. Why would they kill themselves. It's not like they are enslaved to labour for an oversaturated market with no alternative. Because being a farmer on the farm your great great grandfather bought and living in the house he built and being the one in a long line of farmers to lose the farm is tough, especially when your kids aren’t interested in farming for a loss and you’re working 18 hours a day to try to keep it going but the bills just keep mounting and the price of milk has dropped below the price of feed to get that milk but it’s not like you can just stop getting milk because the farm is mortgaged and you can’t scale production to the market that way so you just ask if the feed store will give you credit which is humiliating but you gotta do it but they won’t because everyone is asking for credit and they know as well as you do that things aren’t getting better and this isn’t just a bad year, it’s that the economics don’t make sense. Farmers are killing themselves because within a capitalist economy that is the correct thing to do when the value of your labour goes negative. This is the market based solution. When enough of them kill themselves there will be less supply and we can reach the supply/suicide equilibrium as Adam Smith always wanted us to. https://www.npr.org/2018/02/27/586586267/as-milk-prices-decline-worries-about-dairy-farmer-suicides-rise It is as you say, this is a world with people starving. It shouldn't be the government's problem, or anybody else's if someone self indoctrinated themselves into a myth that when it is shattered they see no way out but to take the most selfish recourse when they are living a reasonable life. Their children they leave behind, will have to be the ones continuing living life. So I think that led to the interpretation you were being callous. Regarding suicide prevention I think we have to address the elephant in the room. Getting people to accept the world as it is without feeling maladjusted (usually through drugs) might be the wrong approach. The problem might be a sick society and the maladjustment a healthy reaction.
100% agreed.
Marketing and advertising via mass media will be banned under my regime.
|
On December 04 2019 03:58 KwarK wrote:
In other news, as France tries to tax US companies Trump vows to retaliate with tariffs on French goods, again showing that he’s completely unaware of how the EU works. This is Merkel with her visual aids all over again.
What are you trying to say here? The tariffs can be focused on goods that are mainly exported by French producers, and it won't matter (to Trump) that they'll also harm a few smaller countries. That would be exactly like the EU targeting goods produced in red states with its tariffs in 2018, which was done in retaliation to American tarrifs imposed on imported steel and aluminum.
|
Most French goods have made in EU stickers on it for some odd reason. How would USA target French goods? but then again well know french goods like Champagne and not bulk commodity would be targeted I think.
|
United States44286 Posts
On December 04 2019 04:40 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
It was in response to Kwark's line about "when your kids aren’t interested in farming " as a reason for suicide. Your children's existence should be enough reason for you own continued existence. If all engineering jobs vanished overnight and the job I love is oversaturated, I will damn well persevere and get another job even if I hate every moment of it for the sake of my otherwise fatherless child.
If your children aren't interested in farming and want to go and study at university, or even open up another independent business, those children should damn well be supported.
You can’t see why being the end of the line might make people sad? It’s not one or the other, you can be happy for your children while still being sad about the family farm, with the labour of generations sunk into it, being lost. It’s a legacy.
You’re doing that thing where you pretend to be an idiot in order to defend making the stupidest possible interpretation of a post again. They’re not sad because they hate the success of their children, that’s a really stupid take. They’re sad because the family legacy is ending and they’re the last ones.
But you must know this. This is like the GH thing all over again.
|
On December 04 2019 04:49 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Most French goods have made in EU stickers on it for some odd reason. How would USA target French goods? but then again well know french goods like Champagne and not bulk commodity would be targeted I think.
I'm not an expect on French economy, but an obvious guess would tariffs on wine which shouldn't bother anyone in Northern Europe. Yeah, Italy and Spain also produce a lot of wine, but I'm pretty sure there are goods that are mainly French exports.
Like this weird thing:
In 2016, it was reported that France produces an estimated 75% of the world's foie gras and southwestern France produces approximately 70% of that total.
|
Northern Ireland27343 Posts
On December 04 2019 04:51 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2019 04:40 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
It was in response to Kwark's line about "when your kids aren’t interested in farming " as a reason for suicide. Your children's existence should be enough reason for you own continued existence. If all engineering jobs vanished overnight and the job I love is oversaturated, I will damn well persevere and get another job even if I hate every moment of it for the sake of my otherwise fatherless child.
If your children aren't interested in farming and want to go and study at university, or even open up another independent business, those children should damn well be supported. You can’t see why being the end of the line might make people sad? It’s not one or the other, you can be happy for your children while still being sad about the family farm, with the labour of generations sunk into it, being lost. It’s a legacy. You’re doing that thing where you pretend to be an idiot in order to defend making the stupidest possible interpretation of a post again. They’re not sad because they hate the success of their children, that’s a really stupid take. They’re sad because the family legacy is ending and they’re the last ones.
Yes, you don’t have to be some crazy conservative to like some form of lineage.
My grandad was an engineer, as was his father. My dad was an electronic engineer and subsequently I’m studying to be a software engineer currently.
My grandad (who outlived my dad by a good 7 years) always said he got a bit of a kick that his descendants choice of career path, while rooted in similar interests also reflected the changes of the world and emerging technologies.
Not quite the same as a family farm but it’s still a thing. You want your children to do better than you in life but you also want them to be a ‘better version’ of you, not something entirely different.
I think most parents if they’re being honest want that as the ideal, not to say they won’t support their children on going on different paths.
I’d support my son if he decided to be a professional drag queen and was gay, I’d still rather he was a heterosexual nerd who liked RTS games if given the choice.
|
United States44286 Posts
On December 04 2019 04:45 Sent. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2019 03:58 KwarK wrote:
In other news, as France tries to tax US companies Trump vows to retaliate with tariffs on French goods, again showing that he’s completely unaware of how the EU works. This is Merkel with her visual aids all over again. What are you trying to say here? The tariffs can be focused on goods that are mainly exported by French producers, and it won't matter (to Trump) that they'll also harm a few smaller countries. That would be exactly like the EU targeting goods produced in red states with its tariffs in 2018, which was done in retaliation to American tarrifs imposed on imported steel and aluminum.
My point here is that EU exports are precisely that, EU exports. You could target EU exports that are more likely to be French but you’ll be picking a fight with the EU as a whole. In terms of exports there is no France.
|
On December 04 2019 05:01 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2019 04:45 Sent. wrote:On December 04 2019 03:58 KwarK wrote:
In other news, as France tries to tax US companies Trump vows to retaliate with tariffs on French goods, again showing that he’s completely unaware of how the EU works. This is Merkel with her visual aids all over again. What are you trying to say here? The tariffs can be focused on goods that are mainly exported by French producers, and it won't matter (to Trump) that they'll also harm a few smaller countries. That would be exactly like the EU targeting goods produced in red states with its tariffs in 2018, which was done in retaliation to American tarrifs imposed on imported steel and aluminum. My point here is that EU exports are precisely that, EU exports. You could target EU exports that are more likely to be French but you’ll be picking a fight with the EU as a whole. In terms of exports there is no France.
What I enjoy is how Trump sees this situation as the EU being unfair by having so many people joining forces. He wanted to pick on individuals, but since modern societal philosophy strongly supports the idea that joining forces and working together ultimately makes each piece stronger, the EU was formed. Now, the US is seeing that when you try to strong arm people, they band together and overpower you.
Yummy yummy in my tummy
|
Harris dropping out seems to be a good thing. Hopefully it makes more candidates feel embarrassed sticking around and they also drop. Ideally everyone except Bernie drops out.
On that note, Bernie has been doing a really good job distinguishing himself from Warren lately.
Also, Biden sucks.
|
Still feeling the Bern here as well.
|
On December 04 2019 06:06 Mohdoo wrote:
Harris dropping out seems to be a good thing. Hopefully it makes more candidates feel embarrassed sticking around and they also drop. Ideally everyone except Bernie drops out.
On that note, Bernie has been doing a really good job distinguishing himself from Warren lately.
Also, Biden sucks.
It'd be nice.
Next problem on their plate is dealing with the debate and the billionaires. Bloomberg is probably going to have 2-3 times Klobuchar's national support but she'll be on the debate stage and not him.
Then there's the billionaire that will be on stage that's managed to get 200,000 people to donate money to his "I wanna be president" fund but is still polling worse than Yang and comparable to Gabbard nationally.
|
Northern Ireland27343 Posts
Bloomberg is a joke and I’m not sure what he thinks he’s doing.
|
On December 04 2019 06:21 Wombat_NI wrote:
Bloomberg is a joke and I’m not sure what he thinks he’s doing.
Positioning to be the Not-Sanders — Not-Trump centrist candidate and using the Dem primary for publicity and buying support in the consultant/pundit/media class. I trust he thinks he's got a shot at the nomination too, billionaires aren't exactly humble.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland27343 Posts
On December 04 2019 06:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2019 06:21 Wombat_NI wrote:
Bloomberg is a joke and I’m not sure what he thinks he’s doing. Positioning to be the Not-Sanders — Not-Trump centrist candidate and using the Dem primary for publicity and buying support in the consultant/pundit/media class. I trust he thinks he's got a shot at the nomination too, billionaires aren't exactly humble.
He doesn’t have a shot, maybe if he’d been in from the beginning but now?
Just bullshit vanity, completely pointless run
|
can someone ELI5 about the hearings tomorrow?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
