EPTLate stage capitalism is terrifying
User was warned for this post.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2118
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
TentativePanda
United States800 Posts
Late stage capitalism is terrifying User was warned for this post. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9308 Posts
On February 14 2020 04:07 TentativePanda wrote: mobile.twitter.com Late stage capitalism is terrifying Did you miss that big white box right above your post? | ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
User was warned for this post. | ||
|
TentativePanda
United States800 Posts
On February 14 2020 04:17 Sent. wrote: Did you miss that big white box right above your post? Lmao no need to be a dick about it, and no, I didn’t | ||
|
TentativePanda
United States800 Posts
On February 14 2020 04:07 TentativePanda wrote: A lengthy post from Blake Zeff detailing at least *some* of the evidence of Bloomberg’s attempt to win with money. mobile.twitter.com Late stage capitalism is terrifying | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On February 14 2020 01:19 Vivax wrote: Skip the ad hominem, you don't know me. I disagree. 1. It's too circumstantial depending on what the patient needs. 2. Work is shared between specialists. A cardiologist is in the field of internal medicine. Internal medicine is pretty much the field where you're supposed to know about everything. Jack of all trades by choice so to say. Yes, the rest of the time they plan the surgery by reviewing the imaging and consider complications arising from the patients medication. Did I claim anything else or say something as gross as "just cut people up"? No argument there, doesn't mean a surgeon should have to know what a dermatologist does. The latter will perform skin surgeries. They need to have the knowledge because laws and economic circumstances demand it when it's those we are debating? That's almost like saying tobacco is bad but it's legal so it's alright. Good point. Every physician should be able to treat an immediate emergency that doesn't require special equipment. Still don't think you need to learn about every single field for that. You still demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of medical education. Medical education isn't "learning every specialty". It takes 4 years of medical school to just learn the barebone basics of being a physician, and even then fresh graduated medical students are completely incompetent providers. It takes a year of internship after medical school before you even start residency to be able to practice in any capacity. Residency is also not just your specialty. It's weeks or months of rotations in many different specialties, all of which is working and doing patient care. Also, a surgeon's non-operating time isn't just "planning the surgery". You are really not helping yourself here. Bringing up your ignorance isn't an ad hominem attack. It's very relevant to this discussion because you continue to display fundamental misunderstandings of the medical profession that prohibit you from providing informed contributions to the discussion. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
So gross. | ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12468 Posts
On February 14 2020 06:55 hunts wrote: If this was 2016 I wouldve been much more ok with Bloomberg being the potential runner up. Going into this primary I was mostly for Warren and was kind of ok with biden. After some more thought and after all that's happened though I've finally jumped on the bernie train. If Bloomberg does somehow win I will be very sad, as he isn't even a politician, or very liberal. Just another rich guy who claims to be slightly less conservative than the other rich conservatives. A pleasant surprise. Welcome on board! | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2020/feb/13/us-politics-donald-trump-roger-stone-case-live-updates?page=with:block-5e45c37c8f0811db2faf7579#block-5e45c37c8f0811db2faf7579 Bernie himself retweeted that union a few hours ago to support their fight, but no mention to his supporters of anything like "please don't do this". | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On February 14 2020 07:34 Nouar wrote: What do you make of this ? An union declined to endorse Sanders (or anyone, for that matter) after criticizing Medicare for All in a flyer sent to their members, in Nevada. Their members were doxxed and received dozens of threats from hardcore Bernie supporters. I do not believe this is what we should be aiming for, and again, it is counter-productive. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2020/feb/13/us-politics-donald-trump-roger-stone-case-live-updates?page=with:block-5e45c37c8f0811db2faf7579#block-5e45c37c8f0811db2faf7579 Bernie himself retweeted that union a few hours ago to support their fight, but no mention to his supporters of anything like "please don't do this". https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1227971693760700418 I think simply saying "I support them" is likely enough to prevent the bulk of people "defending" Bernie | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On February 14 2020 07:58 IgnE wrote: Is Bloomberg that different from Hillary though? Both tough on crime. Both wall streeters. Both coldblooded. Both seem like they are talking from behind a mask. Convince me he’s that much worse than Hillary. Hoarding a net worth anywhere near a billion dollars is an extreme ethical violation in my eyes. The amount of "choosing not to help" that goes into being a billionaire is insane. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On February 14 2020 08:03 Mohdoo wrote: Hoarding a net worth anywhere near a billion dollars is an extreme ethical violation in my eyes. The amount of "choosing not to help" that goes into being a billionaire is insane. uh have you seen hillary’s net worth? she’s less than one order of magnitude away | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12468 Posts
On February 14 2020 07:34 Nouar wrote: What do you make of this ? An union declined to endorse Sanders (or anyone, for that matter) after criticizing Medicare for All in a flyer sent to their members, in Nevada. Their members were doxxed and received dozens of threats from hardcore Bernie supporters. I do not believe this is what we should be aiming for, and again, it is counter-productive. From the Bernie side it looked like this: an union was deceptive in its description of platforms in a way that was intentional and designed to hurt Sanders (so the issue wasn't that they "declined to endorse Sanders" or "criticized M4A", that's just framing). Then people pointed out that someone at the top works for the Center for American Progress (CAP), which is Neera Tanden's organization. I'm not aware of legitimate doxxing happening and I know that sharing this type of information has been called doxxing in the past; of course if "true" doxxing has happened, that's wrong and I obviously don't support it. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On February 14 2020 08:08 IgnE wrote: uh have you seen hillary’s net worth? she’s less than one order of magnitude away Personally I think any net worth above 10M is grotesque, so it isn't much of a difference. Just pointing out that Bloomberg is "worse" even though they are both in what I consider "worst" in terms of hoarding. | ||
|
Introvert
United States4995 Posts
On February 14 2020 07:34 Nouar wrote: What do you make of this ? An union declined to endorse Sanders (or anyone, for that matter) after criticizing Medicare for All in a flyer sent to their members, in Nevada. Their members were doxxed and received dozens of threats from hardcore Bernie supporters. I do not believe this is what we should be aiming for, and again, it is counter-productive. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2020/feb/13/us-politics-donald-trump-roger-stone-case-live-updates?page=with:block-5e45c37c8f0811db2faf7579#block-5e45c37c8f0811db2faf7579 Bernie himself retweeted that union a few hours ago to support their fight, but no mention to his supporters of anything like "please don't do this". https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1227971693760700418 Seems about par for the course. From what I've seen Sanders rarely gets in the mud but lets his surrogates act however they want. Was like that in 2016 too. IIRC his campaign manager in 2016 (who also has a role in 2020?) in particular is/was knwn for being a nasty piece of work behind the scenes. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24033 Posts
On February 14 2020 08:14 Nebuchad wrote: From the Bernie side it looked like this: an union was deceptive in its description of platforms in a way that was intentional and designed to hurt Sanders (so the issue wasn't that they "declined to endorse Sanders" or "criticized M4A", that's just framing). Then people pointed out that someone at the top works for the Center for American Progress (CAP), which is Neera Tanden's organization. I'm not aware of legitimate doxxing happening and I know that sharing this type of information has been called doxxing in the past; of course if "true" doxxing has happened, that's wrong and I obviously don't support it. I keep hearing that there were these allegedly "vicious attacks" and doxxing but haven't been able to figure out what people are talking about. Looks like the Union leadership manufactured some Drama because they know they can't get their membership to back a bogus endorsement. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35173 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27004 Posts
On February 14 2020 08:14 Nebuchad wrote: From the Bernie side it looked like this: an union was deceptive in its description of platforms in a way that was intentional and designed to hurt Sanders (so the issue wasn't that they "declined to endorse Sanders" or "criticized M4A", that's just framing). Then people pointed out that someone at the top works for the Center for American Progress (CAP), which is Neera Tanden's organization. I'm not aware of legitimate doxxing happening and I know that sharing this type of information has been called doxxing in the past; of course if "true" doxxing has happened, that's wrong and I obviously don't support it. Well it’s not doxxing as I’d consider it if it’s ‘here’s the paper trail for what x individual has done or supported. If you want to influence the political process, then I think people knowing what pies your fingers are in is fair game. If we talking individual voters then no, if we’re talking lobbyists or people with influence in various domains, then why not have it be public record? | ||
| ||
