|
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 |
On December 07 2024 12:47 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 12:38 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 12:14 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 11:46 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 05:17 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 04:52 Biff The Understudy wrote:On December 07 2024 03:54 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 03:39 oBlade wrote:
Executing a CEO as a solution is equally the kind of stupid, incompetent thought that is not going to help anyone. Citation from a scientific paper, please. Honestly this kind of assassinations have never had very good consequences. The left wing terrorist groups in italy, germany or South America, or further back the assassinations carried by anarchists during the XIXth century only strengthened their conservative foes. You don’t build a better world by muttering people in the street, no matter how awful they are. If I have the choice between either A) a chance of saving a few people from becoming the casualties of a murderous psychopath or B) no chance of saving anyone by letting the murderous psycho live, I want to see the person arguing we should definitely pick B because reasons. In the meantime I'm glad a mass murderer is gone from the public eye. I consider this an act of self defense. How one election can change people  . I seem to recall trolley problem discussed in this thread. Seems to me you are perfectly happy pulling this lever... repeatedly... with a smile... I haven't changed my position. Self defense is not murder, I argued that exact point back then but people didn't understand what I said. In what world sneaking up on someone and putting 3 bullets in his back is self defence?? It's not the action that creates the distinction. The cause does. Sneaking up on Hitler and putting a few bullets in his back would be considered self-defense. How is that possible? Because protecting people from a mass murderer is self-defense.
No it literally wouldn't.
Also I believe we don't have established motive yet? If it will turn out that this shooting was carried on order of someone who just wanted this dude job, will you still consider it self defence? I am somewhat doubtful. Even if it was carried by someone whose loved one died due to treatment being denied, it will still be revenge kill, not self defence.
|
On December 07 2024 12:53 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 12:47 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 12:38 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 12:14 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 11:46 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 05:17 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 04:52 Biff The Understudy wrote:On December 07 2024 03:54 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 03:39 oBlade wrote:
Executing a CEO as a solution is equally the kind of stupid, incompetent thought that is not going to help anyone. Citation from a scientific paper, please. Honestly this kind of assassinations have never had very good consequences. The left wing terrorist groups in italy, germany or South America, or further back the assassinations carried by anarchists during the XIXth century only strengthened their conservative foes. You don’t build a better world by muttering people in the street, no matter how awful they are. If I have the choice between either A) a chance of saving a few people from becoming the casualties of a murderous psychopath or B) no chance of saving anyone by letting the murderous psycho live, I want to see the person arguing we should definitely pick B because reasons. In the meantime I'm glad a mass murderer is gone from the public eye. I consider this an act of self defense. How one election can change people . I seem to recall trolley problem discussed in this thread. Seems to me you are perfectly happy pulling this lever... repeatedly... with a smile... I haven't changed my position. Self defense is not murder, I argued that exact point back then but people didn't understand what I said. In what world sneaking up on someone and putting 3 bullets in his back is self defence?? It's not the action that creates the distinction. The cause does. Sneaking up on Hitler and putting a few bullets in his back would be considered self-defense. How is that possible? Because protecting people from a mass murderer is self-defense. No it literally wouldn't. Also I believe we don't have established motive yet? If it will turn out that this shooting was carried on order of someone who just wanted this dude job, will you still consider it self defence? I am somewhat doubtful. Even if it was carried by someone whose loved one died due to treatment being denied, it will still be revenge kill, not self defence.
Yes it would. You're legally allowed to kill someone to prevent a murder.
|
On December 07 2024 12:58 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 12:53 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 12:47 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 12:38 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 12:14 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 11:46 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 05:17 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 04:52 Biff The Understudy wrote:On December 07 2024 03:54 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 03:39 oBlade wrote:
Executing a CEO as a solution is equally the kind of stupid, incompetent thought that is not going to help anyone. Citation from a scientific paper, please. Honestly this kind of assassinations have never had very good consequences. The left wing terrorist groups in italy, germany or South America, or further back the assassinations carried by anarchists during the XIXth century only strengthened their conservative foes. You don’t build a better world by muttering people in the street, no matter how awful they are. If I have the choice between either A) a chance of saving a few people from becoming the casualties of a murderous psychopath or B) no chance of saving anyone by letting the murderous psycho live, I want to see the person arguing we should definitely pick B because reasons. In the meantime I'm glad a mass murderer is gone from the public eye. I consider this an act of self defense. How one election can change people . I seem to recall trolley problem discussed in this thread. Seems to me you are perfectly happy pulling this lever... repeatedly... with a smile... I haven't changed my position. Self defense is not murder, I argued that exact point back then but people didn't understand what I said. In what world sneaking up on someone and putting 3 bullets in his back is self defence?? It's not the action that creates the distinction. The cause does. Sneaking up on Hitler and putting a few bullets in his back would be considered self-defense. How is that possible? Because protecting people from a mass murderer is self-defense. No it literally wouldn't. Also I believe we don't have established motive yet? If it will turn out that this shooting was carried on order of someone who just wanted this dude job, will you still consider it self defence? I am somewhat doubtful. Even if it was carried by someone whose loved one died due to treatment being denied, it will still be revenge kill, not self defence. Yes it would. You're legally allowed to kill someone to prevent a murder.
Well, well, well, for someone cheering for assassination, you very quick to go all "legally". And no it wouldn't be self defence - unless you happen to shoot him when he jumps at you/someone with a knife, or is personally releasing Zyklon B... Such a situation would be somewhat unlikely.
|
On December 07 2024 12:58 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 12:53 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 12:47 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 12:38 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 12:14 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 11:46 Razyda wrote:On December 07 2024 05:17 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 04:52 Biff The Understudy wrote:On December 07 2024 03:54 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 03:39 oBlade wrote:
Executing a CEO as a solution is equally the kind of stupid, incompetent thought that is not going to help anyone. Citation from a scientific paper, please. Honestly this kind of assassinations have never had very good consequences. The left wing terrorist groups in italy, germany or South America, or further back the assassinations carried by anarchists during the XIXth century only strengthened their conservative foes. You don’t build a better world by muttering people in the street, no matter how awful they are. If I have the choice between either A) a chance of saving a few people from becoming the casualties of a murderous psychopath or B) no chance of saving anyone by letting the murderous psycho live, I want to see the person arguing we should definitely pick B because reasons. In the meantime I'm glad a mass murderer is gone from the public eye. I consider this an act of self defense. How one election can change people . I seem to recall trolley problem discussed in this thread. Seems to me you are perfectly happy pulling this lever... repeatedly... with a smile... I haven't changed my position. Self defense is not murder, I argued that exact point back then but people didn't understand what I said. In what world sneaking up on someone and putting 3 bullets in his back is self defence?? It's not the action that creates the distinction. The cause does. Sneaking up on Hitler and putting a few bullets in his back would be considered self-defense. How is that possible? Because protecting people from a mass murderer is self-defense. No it literally wouldn't. Also I believe we don't have established motive yet? If it will turn out that this shooting was carried on order of someone who just wanted this dude job, will you still consider it self defence? I am somewhat doubtful. Even if it was carried by someone whose loved one died due to treatment being denied, it will still be revenge kill, not self defence. Yes it would. You're legally allowed to kill someone to prevent a murder.
It’s going to be awkward for you when they catch this guy and charge him with murder instead of giving him a medal. But I’m certain you will still insist you are right and everyone else is wrong. Can we just fast forward to the part where everyone else agrees that you’re making up your own definitions for words and then you get upset with everyone for not adopting the Magic Powers lexicon and threaten to leave the site?
|
Dudes a hero, I've never seen so much general nonchalance over a murder lmao, no amount of charging him for what he did is going to lessen that fact that people hate US healthcare, they hate the people in charge of it, and the vast majority of people don't feel bad that this douche got killed for heading the most claims-denying healthcare company we have.
|
On December 07 2024 16:06 Zambrah wrote:
Dudes a hero, I've never seen so much general nonchalance over a murder lmao, no amount of charging him for what he did is going to lessen that fact that people hate US healthcare, they hate the people in charge of it, and the vast majority of people don't feel bad that this douche got killed for heading the most claims-denying healthcare company we have.
bolded - For sure, one can hardly imagine anything more heroic than shooting someone in the back...
|
They're going to charge him with a crime but I would not like the odds on him being convicted with murder in the first. It's going to be hard to find a jury filled with people with none that will see justification with the likely story behind this person's actions.
Also walz should get a pass for posting sympathy for the guy, he was from the state and we've got a massive medical tech industry and are now sitting on the world's most valuable supply of helium. If Elons parents didn't move from the state we'd be in a lot different place about him as well.
|
Calling someone shooting people a hero goes too far.
There‘s a lot of different ways to show discontent aside from outright taking lives.
|
I dunno, we had like, a whole big war where we called people who shot other people heroes, personally I think shooting nazis is a heroic act, I can also see why people who have been repeatedly and gratuitously wronged by the healthcare industry may consider someone who killed one of their top executives, probably instilling fear into the class of people who wronged them, as a hero
If they didn't want this to happen to them they should probably stop enacting evil on the populace, I'm not going to feel any sympathy for them nor am I going to blame anyone for cheering the death of someone whose legacy is, let me check my notes, letting people suffer and/or die for money
|
On December 07 2024 17:54 Vivax wrote:
Calling someone shooting people a hero goes too far.
There‘s a lot of different ways to show discontent aside from outright taking lives.
A lot of different ways to make a profit aside from outright letting people suffer and die from preventable diseases, too, yet here we are.
|
On December 07 2024 18:05 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 17:54 Vivax wrote:
Calling someone shooting people a hero goes too far.
There‘s a lot of different ways to show discontent aside from outright taking lives. A lot of different ways to make a profit aside from outright letting people suffer and die from preventable diseases, too, yet here we are.
There‘s plenty of jobs that generate income in questionable ways.
The root cause is dysfunctional money and bad policies. It‘s easy to slap a face on something and make it the scapegoat that deserves to die. It‘s hard to trace it back to the reason they exist in the first place.
Ie privatized and competitive health insurance in an economy at the mercy of shareholders.
Don‘t hate the player hate the game is a thing.
Someone will replace the man but have a bodyguard and nothing good will have come out of it.
The man might have had good personal reasons to do it but what does he accomplish besides ruining two lives.
|
On December 07 2024 18:42 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 18:05 Salazarz wrote:On December 07 2024 17:54 Vivax wrote:
Calling someone shooting people a hero goes too far.
There‘s a lot of different ways to show discontent aside from outright taking lives. A lot of different ways to make a profit aside from outright letting people suffer and die from preventable diseases, too, yet here we are. There‘s plenty of jobs that generate income in questionable ways. The root cause is dysfunctional money and bad policies. It‘s easy to slap a face on something and make it the scapegoat that deserves to die. It‘s hard to trace it back to the reason they exist in the first place. Ie privatized and competitive health insurance in an economy at the mercy of shareholders. Don‘t hate the player hate the game is a thing. Someone will replace the man but have a bodyguard and nothing good will have come out of it. The man might have had good personal reasons to do it but what does he accomplish besides ruining two lives.
I don't completely disagree with you, but uh, when a guy from a ghetto gets put behind bars for jacking cars or something you don't see anyone saying it's just slapping a face on something and making it a scapegoat, never mind that vast majority of criminal activities can be traced back to societal problems and crappy environment in a much more obvious and straightforward way than the same can be done for asshole CEOs running shitty companies doing vastly greater damage to those around them than any criminal could ever do in a hundred lifetimes.
I don't think shooting one asshole CEO achieves much of anything, but likewise I can see why people think it's not a bad thing, all things considered. I also find it weird that you're so concerned with two lives being ruined, when the company this particular asshole CEO was running has ruined millions. Where were your concerns then?
Eat the rich is a bit of a meme, but as a regular citizen, how else do you even show that you're just about done with it all?
|
On December 07 2024 16:41 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 16:06 Zambrah wrote:
Dudes a hero, I've never seen so much general nonchalance over a murder lmao, no amount of charging him for what he did is going to lessen that fact that people hate US healthcare, they hate the people in charge of it, and the vast majority of people don't feel bad that this douche got killed for heading the most claims-denying healthcare company we have. bolded - For sure, one can hardly imagine anything more heroic than shooting someone in the back...
Haha, yep
|
On December 07 2024 16:06 Zambrah wrote:
Dudes a hero, I've never seen so much general nonchalance over a murder lmao, no amount of charging him for what he did is going to lessen that fact that people hate US healthcare, they hate the people in charge of it, and the vast majority of people don't feel bad that this douche got killed for heading the most claims-denying healthcare company we have.
I've never seen such a consensus on social media as I have about this killing.
Ben Shapiro even tried to spin it that it was outrageous that "left wing radicals" are celebrating the assassin, but his own comment section roasted him HARD for it.
|
On December 07 2024 19:24 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 18:42 Vivax wrote:On December 07 2024 18:05 Salazarz wrote:On December 07 2024 17:54 Vivax wrote:
Calling someone shooting people a hero goes too far.
There‘s a lot of different ways to show discontent aside from outright taking lives. A lot of different ways to make a profit aside from outright letting people suffer and die from preventable diseases, too, yet here we are. There‘s plenty of jobs that generate income in questionable ways. The root cause is dysfunctional money and bad policies. It‘s easy to slap a face on something and make it the scapegoat that deserves to die. It‘s hard to trace it back to the reason they exist in the first place. Ie privatized and competitive health insurance in an economy at the mercy of shareholders. Don‘t hate the player hate the game is a thing. Someone will replace the man but have a bodyguard and nothing good will have come out of it. The man might have had good personal reasons to do it but what does he accomplish besides ruining two lives. I don't completely disagree with you, but uh, when a guy from a ghetto gets put behind bars for jacking cars or something you don't see anyone saying it's just slapping a face on something and making it a scapegoat, never mind that vast majority of criminal activities can be traced back to societal problems and crappy environment in a much more obvious and straightforward way than the same can be done for asshole CEOs running shitty companies doing vastly greater damage to those around them than any criminal could ever do in a hundred lifetimes. I don't think shooting one asshole CEO achieves much of anything, but likewise I can see why people think it's not a bad thing, all things considered. I also find it weird that you're so concerned with two lives being ruined, when the company this particular asshole CEO was running has ruined millions. Where were your concerns then? Eat the rich is a bit of a meme, but as a regular citizen, how else do you even show that you're just about done with it all?
If his company didn‘t exist then nobody would get medication from it. The only way to get back at it is to get insurance elsewhere and stop giving them money.
Maybe the reason they don‘t hand out enough money is that they already don‘t earn enough for that same reason.
Was it one of the larger companies or more of a niche one ? I‘d bet the latter. Deprivatizing healthcare and education is what the US needs. Or at least not just have private variants.
|
Norway28701 Posts
For the people supporting this, feel like compiling a list of jobs/positions in companies that are bad enough to justify being shot for doing?
*note that i recognize that being indifferent (this was just one guy being murdered and 170k people die every day and many of those deaths are certainly more tragic than this one) is an entirely different beast from being supportive.
|
On December 07 2024 20:41 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 19:24 Salazarz wrote:On December 07 2024 18:42 Vivax wrote:On December 07 2024 18:05 Salazarz wrote:On December 07 2024 17:54 Vivax wrote:
Calling someone shooting people a hero goes too far.
There‘s a lot of different ways to show discontent aside from outright taking lives. A lot of different ways to make a profit aside from outright letting people suffer and die from preventable diseases, too, yet here we are. There‘s plenty of jobs that generate income in questionable ways. The root cause is dysfunctional money and bad policies. It‘s easy to slap a face on something and make it the scapegoat that deserves to die. It‘s hard to trace it back to the reason they exist in the first place. Ie privatized and competitive health insurance in an economy at the mercy of shareholders. Don‘t hate the player hate the game is a thing. Someone will replace the man but have a bodyguard and nothing good will have come out of it. The man might have had good personal reasons to do it but what does he accomplish besides ruining two lives. I don't completely disagree with you, but uh, when a guy from a ghetto gets put behind bars for jacking cars or something you don't see anyone saying it's just slapping a face on something and making it a scapegoat, never mind that vast majority of criminal activities can be traced back to societal problems and crappy environment in a much more obvious and straightforward way than the same can be done for asshole CEOs running shitty companies doing vastly greater damage to those around them than any criminal could ever do in a hundred lifetimes. I don't think shooting one asshole CEO achieves much of anything, but likewise I can see why people think it's not a bad thing, all things considered. I also find it weird that you're so concerned with two lives being ruined, when the company this particular asshole CEO was running has ruined millions. Where were your concerns then? Eat the rich is a bit of a meme, but as a regular citizen, how else do you even show that you're just about done with it all? If his company didn‘t exist then nobody would get medication from it. The only way to get back at it is to get insurance elsewhere and stop giving them money. Maybe the reason they don‘t hand out enough money is that they already don‘t earn enough for that same reason. Was it one of the larger companies or more of a niche one ? I‘d bet the latter. Deprivatizing healthcare and education is what the US needs. Or at least not just have private variants.
Well, you'd lose that bet. It's literally the largest US health insurance company. And you can be sure companies like this are a key reason for why healthcare in US remains what it is. To pretend they are just innocent players in the capitalism game is beyond naive, given the prevalence of lobbyism and straight up corruption in politics.
|
On December 07 2024 20:44 Liquid`Drone wrote:
For the people supporting this, feel like compiling a list of jobs/positions in companies that are bad enough to justify being shot for doing?
*note that i recognize that being indifferent (this was just one guy being murdered and 170k people die every day and many of those deaths are certainly more tragic than this one) is an entirely different beast from being supportive.
Yeah that’s quite a few people that need murdering i would day.
I think there are two separate issues that are being conflated: whether we should feel sad about the guy and if he had it coming, and whether the assassination of terrible people in the street by vigilantes is a good thing.
|
On December 07 2024 20:44 Liquid`Drone wrote:
For the people supporting this, feel like compiling a list of jobs/positions in companies that are bad enough to justify being shot for doing?
*note that i recognize that being indifferent (this was just one guy being murdered and 170k people die every day and many of those deaths are certainly more tragic than this one) is an entirely different beast from being supportive.
People that profit off of the suffering or deaths of others but that can't be brought down legally due to their outsized influence in the political system.
When you take away people's ability to enact change, reform or even basic self defense through legitimate channels, you make it all but inevitable that people will take the law into their own hands.
We've seen it all throughout history.
|
On December 07 2024 20:44 Liquid`Drone wrote:
For the people supporting this, feel like compiling a list of jobs/positions in companies that are bad enough to justify being shot for doing?
*note that i recognize that being indifferent (this was just one guy being murdered and 170k people die every day and many of those deaths are certainly more tragic than this one) is an entirely different beast from being supportive.
Yeah I'm indifferent but I'm sure there is definitely criteria to remove my horror at someone being assassinated like this. The Healthcare industry is special for being a particularly American form of valuing the suffering and death of the American people. You do not last this long in the business without reflecting the very real cruelty you are inflicting on others in the pursuit of profit.
I would think gh has a list of greatest evil corporations ready to fire for this occasion, but nestle ofc tobacco execs who knew the cancer causing of their products. Oil executives I'm on the fence, some definitely who have done damage in other countries like we've seen but your run of the mill Texan south Dakota middle east I don't know.
If you've engineered a coup or hired death squads you shouldn't get off with a fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
