|
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 May 29 2026 01:17 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 00:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 29 2026 00:38 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 12:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 28 2026 10:21 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 10:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 28 2026 09:19 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 02:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 27 2026 00:08 WombaT wrote:On May 26 2026 08:16 Razyda wrote:
[quote]
You putting cart in front of the horse, once critical threshold is reached people will organise just fine. Organising before would be actually detrimental to your cause.
[quote]
I think you make rather wild assumption here. This 90% may support more equitable wealth distribution, but that doesnt mean their solution is the same, so it is rather hard to organise them. I mean, there may be KKK members or neo nazis supporting "A far more equitable wealth distribution", however their solution is probably drastically different than yours. I actually agree with you for once! I kid, I do sometimes on other occasions :p If I were to hazard a guess a lot of people would love a better distribution, but for them. Pensioners in the UK love the pension triple lock that safeguards them against economic shocks, it doesn’t mean many don’t consistently vote for tickets that say theyre going to cut welfare/benefits for other groups Then there’s the mechanisms. My personal position is capitalism gonna capitalism, especially in a culture that broadly buys in wholesale. However, I imagine many respondents wanna keep it, just with the rough edges filed off. Considering the first anti-organizing part is completely asinine and nonsensical, and you didn't mention it specifically, I have to believe you ignored it so you could say you agreed with the rest of Razyda's post. As for the reality that people vote against their own interests because they have been propagandized to believe that's their best/only choice, that is part of what organizing is meant to address. As for racists and bigots being selfishly motivated, that's what got us "The New Deal", which iirc is the biggest accomplishment Democrats can claim. Republican voters want a far more equitable wealth distribution than the US has but they have no idea how to make it happen, same goes for Democrat voters (neither realize how bad it actually is). What is clear is that voting for them isn't going to get it, and it's only getting worse until it finally breaks. Without organization at the community level, it'll be a chaotic mess where those that are still holding wealth and power will reconsolidate under a new (likely worse) regime. This all isn't unrelated to the description lightspectra just provided about both parties' fixation on Europe as a model or warning sign depending on the topic/country. It’s all fanciful bollocks tbh, projecting that the US is ripe for genuine left wing politics based on one poll is about as sensible as predicting that OnlyFans users will become models of chastity You don’t seem to actually live on this planet, or if you do you certainly don’t understand it very well Your assertion that I'm "projecting that the US is ripe for genuine left wing politics based on one poll" is certainly "fanciful bollocks". FWIW wanting a far more equitable society than the US currently is isn't unique to party, time, or even country. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5233831https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/asap.12397https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287000663_American's_desire_for_less_wealth_inequality_does_not_depend_on_how_you_ask_themIt's quite literally an issue of organizing the people that want it (~90%+ of the country) around an actual way to do it despite the other ~10%'s best efforts to stop them. Which includes but is not limited to: Amplifying our disagreements and idiocies among and against each other. The ratchet effect. Nihilism/hopelessness/"pragmatism" Bread and Circus etc... + Show Spoiler +It’s utter nonsense and you don’t live in reality. You don’t seem to understand how politics well, actually functions. Good luck with that
How much of that 90% voted to aid and abet genocide I wonder? Is it ok to bring them into the tent for the greater good now? Even though there is big support for this, it’s very diffuse and you’re going to have to make compromises with such a coalition. So much unnecessary hostility baked into that spoiler. Correct. On May 28 2026 11:12 Fleetfeet wrote:On May 28 2026 10:29 Turbovolver wrote:
"Want it" and "want to fight/sacrifice for it" are very different things, though. Agreed. I read the 90% of people wanting it with the same gravity as 90% of people wanting to learn to play guitar or 90% of people wanting to be fitter. Sure, people (say they) want it, but if they don't want it enough to get callouses and do boring practice, or stick to a workout routine and somewhat mindful diet, then how much does them 'wanting it' matter? It matters with regard to selling those people the thing they say they want, I suppose. Are either of you under the impression that people want the current inequality (that they expressly say they don't want whenever asked) bad enough to fight and sacrifice to keep it over the more equitable society they expressly say they want? Who’s in the White House currently? Did they especially run on addressing these concerns? Of that 90%, you can wipe out a big chunk by considering 2 cohorts: 1. Resolve inequity for me but not for thee 2. I love capitalism and would like less inequity, but I don’t want to reform capitalism fundamentally or switch to an alternative. So effectively people who are dissatisfied but believe in magic and trends that run for decades and decades aren’t evidence enough that this won’t work In a crude sense, people love the government to give them money. For a society to actualise that, said people also have to be OK with them giving other people money. You tend to get way higher favourability on the former, but you need buyin on the latter to actually construct functional systems. I think there’s sufficient appetite for pretty significant improvement in certain areas, but I think that appetite is in a more distributive capitalism and a fairer tax regime etc and nothing all that radical Trump is and yes he did. Meanwhile Biden insisted people were hallucinating their economic conditions being bad. Now it's Trump's turn to pretend things aren't bad and Democrats to make empty promises about fixing them. Those two cohorts are functionally the only people that got to participate in crafting The New Deal, which iirc is the best accomplishment the Democrats have on record. So that's a baseline of sorts of what capitalism needs again. Getting back to the original premise: DanHH said: The main issue with fixing inequality / the tax burden on regular people is the lack of will and urgency, rather than a lack of potential solutions that are better and more predictable than flat tax and inshallah. I said: I believe it is increasingly becoming a lack of functional organization. I believe the number of people with the will and that are feeling the urgency is reaching a critical mass, but I also believe organizing is a critical factor in where that threshold ends up being. What is it you are trying to say you believe it is? EDIT: Forgot to include an obligatory Republicans are worse than Democrats for lightspectra I wasn’t clear enough there? I genuinely don’t know how much clearer I can make it
Maybe someone else could articulate it?
|
On May 29 2026 01:12 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 00:48 dyhb wrote:On May 29 2026 00:24 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 11:33 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 09:24 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. That right wing ideological take is utterly fucking stupid though, it’s beyond asinine. It’s not even worth entertaining European states choose to enact welfare states of various forms. That’s all there is to it The US has more than enough fucking money to do it and doesn’t, where there’s a will there’s a way + Show Spoiler +On May 28 2026 11:16 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Okay but that literally isn’t true. That's where I differ from you and others. I want to examine what people believe and why they believe it. This is not only to understand my fellow Americans and their political beliefs, but also to see where they went wrong or overstated something true into something wacko. That takes empathy and a very non-judgmental approach. Trump didn't occur in a vacuum, and he wasn't re-elected in a second moment of temporary majority moral madness. Europe has a similar issue of the rise of far-right and alt-right parties that aren't close to being handled by the political mainstreams, with some exceptions like Sweden with the Sweden Democrats. I know it's kind of in vogue to treat every right wing view as another flat earth, or stolen 2020 election, or Hitler was right, but I'm taking pains to separate the fringiest of the fringe out. I also try to take this same stance on the extremist left-wing views on this forum, especially from European posters, as offered in good faith and potentially defensible despite looking like ramblings from politically-ignorant insane people at first blush. This appears to be a forum heavily dominated by left-wing politics (American perspective) that doesn't have much moderate pushback, and a dozen people devoted to labeling any pushback as secretly motivated by MAGA and Trumpist and all that. On May 28 2026 09:30 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Don't forget mass migration. Of course. Believing in utter nonsense and more importantly, being almost unable to be shifted from that position and being criticised for that isn’t a criticism of right wing views, but those particular ones Indeed, as I’m keen to stress and may have done 50-100 times in this thread over the years in this thread, there’s functional overlap but right wing positions and bumming Donald Trump don’t actually have to be interlinked so intimately. That doesn’t preclude some empathy and trying to understand what drives people as well. I think in part what we’re seeing is American exceptionalism colliding with the American experience, and people will parse it in different ways. In a crude sense ‘America is the best’ and ‘man this healthcare system sucks’ end up colliding, and some can only reconcile this with ‘we can’t afford this because we’re propping up those Euros’ and other variants. I mean it’s not remotely true, but I can see how people grasp to that kind of narrative. You’re correct to raise the right making gains all over Europe, although I think it’s slightly different to what we see in the States. Immigration is a big driver of the pie in both continents, but in Europe it’s a much bigger chunk of the overall pie. I’d say part of some of these differences is much of Europe has either never been a global superpower, or was so so long ago that this has less of a pull, even with right populists. Whereas the States is still such a power, and people’s attitudes are shaped somewhat by this. Not exclusively mind. I think part of the pull of Brexit over in my neck of the woods was this conception that we’re still a great power and it’s just those pesky Euros holding us back, so it does exist this side of the Atlantic as well That right wing ideological take is utterly fucking stupid though, it’s beyond asinine. It’s not even worth entertaining
I fail to see why you care about alleged " hyperfixation on Europe", and if its "getting worse", and whether or not you all are "living rent free in the heads of MAGA" if you're so closed off to such views as to never intend to entertain them in the first place. At no point have I ever used those phrases, or anything close to them, so I’m not sure why you’re levying them against me. MAGA want their cake and to eat it too, they want to be the global hegemon but not what it actually entails. They want to destabilise a shift to a more multilateral world that has broadly kind of worked, which as a European is really my main concern with this movement. Understanding certain motivations and rejecting them as false aren’t mutually exclusive, they can co-exist. ‘We can’t have universal healthcare like the Europeans because we subsidise their programs’ is one such claim. I can empathise with people who are suffering because of the former, while thinking their conclusion is ultimately incorrect. Placating people who are wrong only brings bad policy. The dissatisfaction existing may be entirely reasonable, and responsible governance would dictate one addresses it as best as can be realistically achieved. That is the job of government, not fanning the flames yet further. Joe American may not be the brightest spark, or know shit about macroeconomics or European social programs, but he’s a good lad, he works hard and he’s frustrated that seems to go less far than it previously did. Saying that he can’t have nice things because we’re subsidising Europe is just lying to the guy You should know what the question was that I was answering before responding to my post. Since quoting the question led you to say that you didn't use the phrase, perhaps you never read it. I don't play this stupid forum game where every discussion quickly collapses into why right wing bad or Trump bad or why sudden onset fascism is to blame.We want to know about existence of, or reasons behind, a sudden surge of association football interest in Northern Ireland, so we asked the opinion of a guy that thinks the sport is asinine and views on it are not worth entertaining. He said the newfound interest is due to Pluto being in retrograde, and he'll be sure to tell you why the sport itself sucks if you disagree with his reasoning. You've already said that you won't entertain the political viewpoints at all, so I am leaning towards respecting your wish.
|
United States44245 Posts
On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist.
Objectively false. Question is ignorance or bad faith.
The US defence budget, which was vastly higher than any potential rival, was 880b when Trump took over. He’s moving it to 1500b, an increase of 620b. There are about 75m taxpayers in the US after we exclude minors and people who earn too little to pay (retirees, stay home parents etc.). That’s another $8,300 per taxpayer to cover the military costs of Trump’s vanity. It’s a vast increase at a time when taxes are being cut.
Please point to the Federal social service program that had a $620b budget increase.
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
On May 29 2026 01:56 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 01:12 WombaT wrote:On May 29 2026 00:48 dyhb wrote:On May 29 2026 00:24 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 11:33 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 09:24 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. That right wing ideological take is utterly fucking stupid though, it’s beyond asinine. It’s not even worth entertaining European states choose to enact welfare states of various forms. That’s all there is to it The US has more than enough fucking money to do it and doesn’t, where there’s a will there’s a way + Show Spoiler +On May 28 2026 11:16 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Okay but that literally isn’t true. That's where I differ from you and others. I want to examine what people believe and why they believe it. This is not only to understand my fellow Americans and their political beliefs, but also to see where they went wrong or overstated something true into something wacko. That takes empathy and a very non-judgmental approach. Trump didn't occur in a vacuum, and he wasn't re-elected in a second moment of temporary majority moral madness. Europe has a similar issue of the rise of far-right and alt-right parties that aren't close to being handled by the political mainstreams, with some exceptions like Sweden with the Sweden Democrats. I know it's kind of in vogue to treat every right wing view as another flat earth, or stolen 2020 election, or Hitler was right, but I'm taking pains to separate the fringiest of the fringe out. I also try to take this same stance on the extremist left-wing views on this forum, especially from European posters, as offered in good faith and potentially defensible despite looking like ramblings from politically-ignorant insane people at first blush. This appears to be a forum heavily dominated by left-wing politics (American perspective) that doesn't have much moderate pushback, and a dozen people devoted to labeling any pushback as secretly motivated by MAGA and Trumpist and all that. On May 28 2026 09:30 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Don't forget mass migration. Of course. Believing in utter nonsense and more importantly, being almost unable to be shifted from that position and being criticised for that isn’t a criticism of right wing views, but those particular ones Indeed, as I’m keen to stress and may have done 50-100 times in this thread over the years in this thread, there’s functional overlap but right wing positions and bumming Donald Trump don’t actually have to be interlinked so intimately. That doesn’t preclude some empathy and trying to understand what drives people as well. I think in part what we’re seeing is American exceptionalism colliding with the American experience, and people will parse it in different ways. In a crude sense ‘America is the best’ and ‘man this healthcare system sucks’ end up colliding, and some can only reconcile this with ‘we can’t afford this because we’re propping up those Euros’ and other variants. I mean it’s not remotely true, but I can see how people grasp to that kind of narrative. You’re correct to raise the right making gains all over Europe, although I think it’s slightly different to what we see in the States. Immigration is a big driver of the pie in both continents, but in Europe it’s a much bigger chunk of the overall pie. I’d say part of some of these differences is much of Europe has either never been a global superpower, or was so so long ago that this has less of a pull, even with right populists. Whereas the States is still such a power, and people’s attitudes are shaped somewhat by this. Not exclusively mind. I think part of the pull of Brexit over in my neck of the woods was this conception that we’re still a great power and it’s just those pesky Euros holding us back, so it does exist this side of the Atlantic as well That right wing ideological take is utterly fucking stupid though, it’s beyond asinine. It’s not even worth entertaining
I fail to see why you care about alleged " hyperfixation on Europe", and if its "getting worse", and whether or not you all are "living rent free in the heads of MAGA" if you're so closed off to such views as to never intend to entertain them in the first place. At no point have I ever used those phrases, or anything close to them, so I’m not sure why you’re levying them against me. MAGA want their cake and to eat it too, they want to be the global hegemon but not what it actually entails. They want to destabilise a shift to a more multilateral world that has broadly kind of worked, which as a European is really my main concern with this movement. Understanding certain motivations and rejecting them as false aren’t mutually exclusive, they can co-exist. ‘We can’t have universal healthcare like the Europeans because we subsidise their programs’ is one such claim. I can empathise with people who are suffering because of the former, while thinking their conclusion is ultimately incorrect. Placating people who are wrong only brings bad policy. The dissatisfaction existing may be entirely reasonable, and responsible governance would dictate one addresses it as best as can be realistically achieved. That is the job of government, not fanning the flames yet further. Joe American may not be the brightest spark, or know shit about macroeconomics or European social programs, but he’s a good lad, he works hard and he’s frustrated that seems to go less far than it previously did. Saying that he can’t have nice things because we’re subsidising Europe is just lying to the guy You should know what the question was that I was answering before responding to my post. Since quoting the question led you to say that you didn't use the phrase, perhaps you never read it. I don't play this stupid forum game where every discussion quickly collapses into why right wing bad or Trump bad or why sudden onset fascism is to blame. Show nested quote +We want to know about existence of, or reasons behind, a sudden surge of association football interest in Northern Ireland, so we asked the opinion of a guy that thinks the sport is asinine and views on it are not worth entertaining. He said the newfound interest is due to Pluto being in retrograde, and he'll be sure to tell you why the sport itself sucks if you disagree with his reasoning. You've already said that you won't entertain the political viewpoints at all, so I am leaning towards respecting your wish.
I haven’t advocated for that, I’ve advocated against bullshit.
I may disagree with others in say, how to treat illegal migration into the United States, but I can’t in any kind of good faith deny there is rather a lot of it. We also see this in Europe as well, and I think there’s validity to some of those concerns. If we remove general macroeconomics for a second, the poorest ‘natives’ tend to bear the brunt of problems caused by immigration and benefit less (visibly), so there is a reason that sentiment can be so strong. Those communities tend to, for example have a much higher strain on resources and provisions from immigrants who haven’t fully integrated yet, than middle and upper classes tend to be exposed to. It’s an asymmetric phenomenon at its core, and there’s a reason it’s such a perpetual hot button issue.
For the record I’m not anti-migration, but I think this asymmetry is really sidestepped in a lot of discourse on the topic.
If, however the position is ‘the US can’t afford universal healthcare because it subsidies Europe’, I will push back against that position because it’s errant nonsense. The US’ state healthcare spend per capita alone is roughly that of the UK’s NHS, which has flaws but is a universal system. If we factor in the private sector spend, the US pumps about double what we do into healthcare. So the idea that there’s not the money in the kitty is fanciful
There are limits to what can be entertained IMO, that is all. What is the initial grievance? Is it reasonable? And in most cases it probably is. Then you get to the causes of said grievance. Well you’ll probably get a decent chunk of valid perceptions, but less than the last step. And finally you get ‘how do we fix said grievance?’
Well if the causes people believe are bullshit, the fixes based on them simply aren’t going to work are they? Which ultimately results in the actual initial (often valid) grievance being unresolved
To cut an increasingly long post short, I believe many of these grievances are legitimate, but indulging bullshit doesn’t ultimately resolve them. It’ll maybe make a bunch of folks feel a bit better for a while but it doesn’t do anything.
MAGA is almost entirely predicated on bullshit, with some exceptions existing. I think people deserve better, I think the policy prescriptions of this movement are ludicrous (with some exceptions perhaps) and I wholly reject the idea that I’m some ivory tower elitist who hates the small folk and won’t hear them out.
|
The president can call for a $50 trillion defense budget for Space Force to build a Death Star, it does not matter if Congress doesn't pass it. Unless that budget passes, there is no increase, because there isn't even a budget, so there isn't any spending to begin with. The US doesn't have $39 trillion in debt because of a proposed FY2027 620b increase that has almost no chance of happening. There's $39 trillion in debt because revenue hasn't been enough to cover entitlements and discretionary spending, and entitlements being much larger at over $4 trillion a year, the budget cannot be balanced simply via defense spending.
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
On May 29 2026 01:57 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist. Objectively false. Question is ignorance or bad faith. The US defence budget, which was vastly higher than any potential rival, was 880b when Trump took over. He’s moving it to 1500b, an increase of 620b. There are about 75m taxpayers in the US after we exclude minors and people who earn too little to pay (retirees, stay home parents etc.). That’s another $8,300 per taxpayer to cover the military costs of Trump’s vanity. It’s a vast increase at a time when taxes are being cut. Please point to the Federal social service program that had a $620b budget increase.
Ok but surely DOGE saved that 620 billion right?
The fact that a government agency could have been named after a meme/slang, and headed by a South African fraud, given the effective keys to the kingdom really tells a lot about how fundamentally unserious this lot are in governing competently
|
On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist.
I've learned about a stabbing in Switzerland from conservative message boards and not from Swedish news. And it's not that they don't cover things that happens in Europe, the school bus that got hit by a train in Belgium 2 days ago was major headline news everywhere. But no muslims involved so 0 zero response on US sites.
Of course it's only my opinion it's getting "worse". Migrant crisis was 2015 so you might be correct in the timeline, it's a big political shift in Europe as well.
But there are other things that aren't answered. Like where does the frequent claim that the US is subsidizing EU welfare states by allowing us to have lower defense spending come from? The numbers doesn't support that at all.
We for sure reduced defense spending *a lot* after the cold war and are increasing it now but we had welfare states before, during, and after that time period as well.
It's not only news about crime and migration there is also a big focus on (certain types) of political news from Europe, and an even bigger focus on US policy moves towards Europe.
My personal take is that there is an ongoing information campaign against conservative voters in the US based on the content I've been seeing. I might be wrong it's not a wild take.
As for social spending, military spending and debt. You absolutely have to take on social spending, especially social security which is otherwise going to be the world's biggest ponzi scheme in the not so distant future. Especially since that's $73tn not in the current debt.
But if was any other country you would be broke right now. And make no mistake, you will be soon if you don't fix this. You can't afford a 1500bn military budget right now. It should never have been increased and you should probably look to cut some spending.
Ideally almost everything in the budget that doesn't severely impact consumer spending should be shaved and taxes should go up.
I would very much like for the current form of the US to continue for a long time, and not reducing the deficit is a far greater threat to that than keeping your current pre-Trump military budget.
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
On May 29 2026 01:45 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 01:17 WombaT wrote:On May 29 2026 00:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 29 2026 00:38 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 12:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 28 2026 10:21 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 10:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 28 2026 09:19 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 02:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 27 2026 00:08 WombaT wrote:
[quote]
I actually agree with you for once! I kid, I do sometimes on other occasions :p
If I were to hazard a guess a lot of people would love a better distribution, but for them. Pensioners in the UK love the pension triple lock that safeguards them against economic shocks, it doesn’t mean many don’t consistently vote for tickets that say theyre going to cut welfare/benefits for other groups
Then there’s the mechanisms. My personal position is capitalism gonna capitalism, especially in a culture that broadly buys in wholesale. However, I imagine many respondents wanna keep it, just with the rough edges filed off. Considering the first anti-organizing part is completely asinine and nonsensical, and you didn't mention it specifically, I have to believe you ignored it so you could say you agreed with the rest of Razyda's post. As for the reality that people vote against their own interests because they have been propagandized to believe that's their best/only choice, that is part of what organizing is meant to address. As for racists and bigots being selfishly motivated, that's what got us "The New Deal", which iirc is the biggest accomplishment Democrats can claim. Republican voters want a far more equitable wealth distribution than the US has but they have no idea how to make it happen, same goes for Democrat voters (neither realize how bad it actually is). What is clear is that voting for them isn't going to get it, and it's only getting worse until it finally breaks. Without organization at the community level, it'll be a chaotic mess where those that are still holding wealth and power will reconsolidate under a new (likely worse) regime. This all isn't unrelated to the description lightspectra just provided about both parties' fixation on Europe as a model or warning sign depending on the topic/country. It’s all fanciful bollocks tbh, projecting that the US is ripe for genuine left wing politics based on one poll is about as sensible as predicting that OnlyFans users will become models of chastity You don’t seem to actually live on this planet, or if you do you certainly don’t understand it very well Your assertion that I'm "projecting that the US is ripe for genuine left wing politics based on one poll" is certainly "fanciful bollocks". FWIW wanting a far more equitable society than the US currently is isn't unique to party, time, or even country. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5233831https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/asap.12397https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287000663_American's_desire_for_less_wealth_inequality_does_not_depend_on_how_you_ask_themIt's quite literally an issue of organizing the people that want it (~90%+ of the country) around an actual way to do it despite the other ~10%'s best efforts to stop them. Which includes but is not limited to: Amplifying our disagreements and idiocies among and against each other. The ratchet effect. Nihilism/hopelessness/"pragmatism" Bread and Circus etc... + Show Spoiler +It’s utter nonsense and you don’t live in reality. You don’t seem to understand how politics well, actually functions. Good luck with that
How much of that 90% voted to aid and abet genocide I wonder? Is it ok to bring them into the tent for the greater good now? Even though there is big support for this, it’s very diffuse and you’re going to have to make compromises with such a coalition. So much unnecessary hostility baked into that spoiler. Correct. On May 28 2026 11:12 Fleetfeet wrote:On May 28 2026 10:29 Turbovolver wrote:
"Want it" and "want to fight/sacrifice for it" are very different things, though. Agreed. I read the 90% of people wanting it with the same gravity as 90% of people wanting to learn to play guitar or 90% of people wanting to be fitter. Sure, people (say they) want it, but if they don't want it enough to get callouses and do boring practice, or stick to a workout routine and somewhat mindful diet, then how much does them 'wanting it' matter? It matters with regard to selling those people the thing they say they want, I suppose. Are either of you under the impression that people want the current inequality (that they expressly say they don't want whenever asked) bad enough to fight and sacrifice to keep it over the more equitable society they expressly say they want? Who’s in the White House currently? Did they especially run on addressing these concerns? Of that 90%, you can wipe out a big chunk by considering 2 cohorts: 1. Resolve inequity for me but not for thee 2. I love capitalism and would like less inequity, but I don’t want to reform capitalism fundamentally or switch to an alternative. So effectively people who are dissatisfied but believe in magic and trends that run for decades and decades aren’t evidence enough that this won’t work In a crude sense, people love the government to give them money. For a society to actualise that, said people also have to be OK with them giving other people money. You tend to get way higher favourability on the former, but you need buyin on the latter to actually construct functional systems. I think there’s sufficient appetite for pretty significant improvement in certain areas, but I think that appetite is in a more distributive capitalism and a fairer tax regime etc and nothing all that radical Trump is and yes he did. Meanwhile Biden insisted people were hallucinating their economic conditions being bad. Now it's Trump's turn to pretend things aren't bad and Democrats to make empty promises about fixing them. Those two cohorts are functionally the only people that got to participate in crafting The New Deal, which iirc is the best accomplishment the Democrats have on record. So that's a baseline of sorts of what capitalism needs again. Getting back to the original premise: DanHH said: The main issue with fixing inequality / the tax burden on regular people is the lack of will and urgency, rather than a lack of potential solutions that are better and more predictable than flat tax and inshallah. I said: I believe it is increasingly becoming a lack of functional organization. I believe the number of people with the will and that are feeling the urgency is reaching a critical mass, but I also believe organizing is a critical factor in where that threshold ends up being. What is it you are trying to say you believe it is? EDIT: Forgot to include an obligatory Republicans are worse than Democrats for lightspectra I wasn’t clear enough there? I genuinely don’t know how much clearer I can make it Maybe someone else could articulate it?
What don’t you understand in my position? Like I really don’t think I can make it much clearer, what are your quibbles?
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
On May 29 2026 01:57 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist. Objectively false. Question is ignorance or bad faith. The US defence budget, which was vastly higher than any potential rival, was 880b when Trump took over. He’s moving it to 1500b, an increase of 620b. There are about 75m taxpayers in the US after we exclude minors and people who earn too little to pay (retirees, stay home parents etc.). That’s another $8,300 per taxpayer to cover the military costs of Trump’s vanity. It’s a vast increase at a time when taxes are being cut. Please point to the Federal social service program that had a $620b budget increase.
Never mind the inflationary pressures caused by this excursion
|
I love how the defense that our Fascist friends have to offer regarding the DoD budget is "akshualy, it's not the biggest spend" and "akshualy, they still need to vote on it".
First one is the classic case of the famous meme "My wife is giving me shit for buying a $300 sword while she spends that on groceries every month" rhetoric that is honestly shocking to see coming from someone who likes to use big words and likes to present themselves as a highbrow nuanced political thinker.
The other one is also incredibly dumb, along the line "well, if DOJ doesn't find anything on the rape victim then it's OK", pretending as if the same congress that voted for BBB a year ago, the same bill that got even this guy to say how it might bring "financial ruin" to the USA might be voted down.
Your party, the party you goons are supporting and defending here, even more then your orange turd president will happily vote for this increase as long as they can carve out something for themselves, like the famous whale hunting-related expenses write off that sealed the deal on it.
|
On May 29 2026 02:32 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 01:56 dyhb wrote:On May 29 2026 01:12 WombaT wrote:On May 29 2026 00:48 dyhb wrote:On May 29 2026 00:24 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 11:33 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 09:24 WombaT wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. That right wing ideological take is utterly fucking stupid though, it’s beyond asinine. It’s not even worth entertaining European states choose to enact welfare states of various forms. That’s all there is to it The US has more than enough fucking money to do it and doesn’t, where there’s a will there’s a way + Show Spoiler +On May 28 2026 11:16 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Okay but that literally isn’t true. That's where I differ from you and others. I want to examine what people believe and why they believe it. This is not only to understand my fellow Americans and their political beliefs, but also to see where they went wrong or overstated something true into something wacko. That takes empathy and a very non-judgmental approach. Trump didn't occur in a vacuum, and he wasn't re-elected in a second moment of temporary majority moral madness. Europe has a similar issue of the rise of far-right and alt-right parties that aren't close to being handled by the political mainstreams, with some exceptions like Sweden with the Sweden Democrats. I know it's kind of in vogue to treat every right wing view as another flat earth, or stolen 2020 election, or Hitler was right, but I'm taking pains to separate the fringiest of the fringe out. I also try to take this same stance on the extremist left-wing views on this forum, especially from European posters, as offered in good faith and potentially defensible despite looking like ramblings from politically-ignorant insane people at first blush. This appears to be a forum heavily dominated by left-wing politics (American perspective) that doesn't have much moderate pushback, and a dozen people devoted to labeling any pushback as secretly motivated by MAGA and Trumpist and all that. On May 28 2026 09:30 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Don't forget mass migration. Of course. Believing in utter nonsense and more importantly, being almost unable to be shifted from that position and being criticised for that isn’t a criticism of right wing views, but those particular ones Indeed, as I’m keen to stress and may have done 50-100 times in this thread over the years in this thread, there’s functional overlap but right wing positions and bumming Donald Trump don’t actually have to be interlinked so intimately. That doesn’t preclude some empathy and trying to understand what drives people as well. I think in part what we’re seeing is American exceptionalism colliding with the American experience, and people will parse it in different ways. In a crude sense ‘America is the best’ and ‘man this healthcare system sucks’ end up colliding, and some can only reconcile this with ‘we can’t afford this because we’re propping up those Euros’ and other variants. I mean it’s not remotely true, but I can see how people grasp to that kind of narrative. You’re correct to raise the right making gains all over Europe, although I think it’s slightly different to what we see in the States. Immigration is a big driver of the pie in both continents, but in Europe it’s a much bigger chunk of the overall pie. I’d say part of some of these differences is much of Europe has either never been a global superpower, or was so so long ago that this has less of a pull, even with right populists. Whereas the States is still such a power, and people’s attitudes are shaped somewhat by this. Not exclusively mind. I think part of the pull of Brexit over in my neck of the woods was this conception that we’re still a great power and it’s just those pesky Euros holding us back, so it does exist this side of the Atlantic as well That right wing ideological take is utterly fucking stupid though, it’s beyond asinine. It’s not even worth entertaining
I fail to see why you care about alleged " hyperfixation on Europe", and if its "getting worse", and whether or not you all are "living rent free in the heads of MAGA" if you're so closed off to such views as to never intend to entertain them in the first place. At no point have I ever used those phrases, or anything close to them, so I’m not sure why you’re levying them against me. MAGA want their cake and to eat it too, they want to be the global hegemon but not what it actually entails. They want to destabilise a shift to a more multilateral world that has broadly kind of worked, which as a European is really my main concern with this movement. Understanding certain motivations and rejecting them as false aren’t mutually exclusive, they can co-exist. ‘We can’t have universal healthcare like the Europeans because we subsidise their programs’ is one such claim. I can empathise with people who are suffering because of the former, while thinking their conclusion is ultimately incorrect. Placating people who are wrong only brings bad policy. The dissatisfaction existing may be entirely reasonable, and responsible governance would dictate one addresses it as best as can be realistically achieved. That is the job of government, not fanning the flames yet further. Joe American may not be the brightest spark, or know shit about macroeconomics or European social programs, but he’s a good lad, he works hard and he’s frustrated that seems to go less far than it previously did. Saying that he can’t have nice things because we’re subsidising Europe is just lying to the guy You should know what the question was that I was answering before responding to my post. Since quoting the question led you to say that you didn't use the phrase, perhaps you never read it. I don't play this stupid forum game where every discussion quickly collapses into why right wing bad or Trump bad or why sudden onset fascism is to blame. We want to know about existence of, or reasons behind, a sudden surge of association football interest in Northern Ireland, so we asked the opinion of a guy that thinks the sport is asinine and views on it are not worth entertaining. He said the newfound interest is due to Pluto being in retrograde, and he'll be sure to tell you why the sport itself sucks if you disagree with his reasoning. You've already said that you won't entertain the political viewpoints at all, so I am leaning towards respecting your wish. I haven’t advocated for that, I’ve advocated against bullshit. I may disagree with others in say, how to treat illegal migration into the United States, but I can’t in any kind of good faith deny there is rather a lot of it. We also see this in Europe as well, and I think there’s validity to some of those concerns. If we remove general macroeconomics for a second, the poorest ‘natives’ tend to bear the brunt of problems caused by immigration and benefit less (visibly), so there is a reason that sentiment can be so strong. Those communities tend to, for example have a much higher strain on resources and provisions from immigrants who haven’t fully integrated yet, than middle and upper classes tend to be exposed to. It’s an asymmetric phenomenon at its core, and there’s a reason it’s such a perpetual hot button issue. For the record I’m not anti-migration, but I think this asymmetry is really sidestepped in a lot of discourse on the topic. If, however the position is ‘the US can’t afford universal healthcare because it subsidies Europe’, I will push back against that position because it’s errant nonsense. The US’ state healthcare spend per capita alone is roughly that of the UK’s NHS, which has flaws but is a universal system. If we factor in the private sector spend, the US pumps about double what we do into healthcare. So the idea that there’s not the money in the kitty is fanciful There are limits to what can be entertained IMO, that is all. What is the initial grievance? Is it reasonable? And in most cases it probably is. Then you get to the causes of said grievance. Well you’ll probably get a decent chunk of valid perceptions, but less than the last step. And finally you get ‘how do we fix said grievance?’ Well if the causes people believe are bullshit, the fixes based on them simply aren’t going to work are they? Which ultimately results in the actual initial (often valid) grievance being unresolved To cut an increasingly long post short, I believe many of these grievances are legitimate, but indulging bullshit doesn’t ultimately resolve them. It’ll maybe make a bunch of folks feel a bit better for a while but it doesn’t do anything. MAGA is almost entirely predicated on bullshit, with some exceptions existing. I think people deserve better, I think the policy prescriptions of this movement are ludicrous (with some exceptions perhaps) and I wholly reject the idea that I’m some ivory tower elitist who hates the small folk and won’t hear them out. This isn't remotely the question I answered, so I'll have to retreat a step and ask you if you can acknowledge the difference between what the American right-wing gets wrong about Europe, and why the right wing is (allegedly) hyperfixated on Europe and increasingly worse about it. Does this difference exist for you?
You're doing this really fun trapeze act where right wing ideology isn't worth investigating its causes and shifting focuses (how many times have you said thus far that it's all bullshit and it's not worth even entertaining), but you're super interested in dialoguing with me on the subject of right wing ideology. Buddy, I'm not in this game to convince you otherwise. I'm not your knight in shining armor come to rescue you from your dismissiveness. I stated why I think differently and maybe you should waste less words telling me why it's not worth talking about.
|
On May 29 2026 01:57 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist. Objectively false. Question is ignorance or bad faith. The US defence budget, which was vastly higher than any potential rival, was 880b when Trump took over. He’s moving it to 1500b, an increase of 620b. There are about 75m taxpayers in the US after we exclude minors and people who earn too little to pay (retirees, stay home parents etc.). That’s another $8,300 per taxpayer to cover the military costs of Trump’s vanity. It’s a vast increase at a time when taxes are being cut. Please point to the Federal social service program that had a $620b budget increase.
Hard to blame a current deficit on a budget that doesn't actually exist yet. Even more strange for you. You can read a pie chart and a graph. Millitary spending is way smaller and had generally been decreasing as a %of gdp since the cold war. Budget woes come from other spending. Mostly "non-discretionary" spending.
|
On May 29 2026 02:39 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Like where does the frequent claim that the US is subsidizing EU welfare states by allowing us to have lower defense spending come from? The numbers doesn't support that at all.
The USA willfully became the West's global policeman after World War II because it came with an unprecedented amount of soft power and economic growth. There was nothing controversial about this until Trump came along and started the discourse that the USA has to spend so much money on our military because we're getting ripped off by those Europeans loafing off of NATO. Not only is this just flagrantly wrong, it doesn't even make sense, because both Trump terms came with explosions of unnecessary military spending despite an increasingly isolationist foreign policy. He promised to run the government like a business, and he's done so by increasing spending, decreasing income, and tearing up all the deals that were one-sidedly beneficial to America. It's part of the reason people keep thinking he's being blackmailed, if a Manchurian Candidate became POTUS it would be hard to sabotage the country as rapidly as Trump has.
|
On May 29 2026 02:39 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist. I've learned about a stabbing in Switzerland from conservative message boards and not from Swedish news. And it's not that they don't cover things that happens in Europe, the school bus that got hit by a train in Belgium 2 days ago was major headline news everywhere. But no muslims involved so 0 zero response on US sites. Of course it's only my opinion it's getting "worse". Migrant crisis was 2015 so you might be correct in the timeline, it's a big political shift in Europe as well. But there are other things that aren't answered. Like where does the frequent claim that the US is subsidizing EU welfare states by allowing us to have lower defense spending come from? The numbers doesn't support that at all. We for sure reduced defense spending *a lot* after the cold war and are increasing it now but we had welfare states before, during, and after that time period as well. It's not only news about crime and migration there is also a big focus on (certain types) of political news from Europe, and an even bigger focus on US policy moves towards Europe. My personal take is that there is an ongoing information campaign against conservative voters in the US based on the content I've been seeing. I might be wrong it's not a wild take. As for social spending, military spending and debt. You absolutely have to take on social spending, especially social security which is otherwise going to be the world's biggest ponzi scheme in the not so distant future. Especially since that's $73tn not in the current debt. But if was any other country you would be broke right now. And make no mistake, you will be soon if you don't fix this. You can't afford a 1500bn military budget right now. It should never have been increased and you should probably look to cut some spending. Ideally almost everything in the budget that doesn't severely impact consumer spending should be shaved and taxes should go up. I would very much like for the current form of the US to continue for a long time, and not reducing the deficit is a far greater threat to that than keeping your current pre-Trump military budget.
I leave you to your opinion on if there is a shift. I agree there has been a change in *how* Europe is discussed, for the reasons I gave. It's harder to find an American saying we should be like Europe.
Stories about things like "subsidizing the welfare state" comes from both A) looking at the relative social spending vs millitary spending and B) the *unwillingness* by European nations to meet their NATO obligations. So sure, they have huge welfare states and have for decades. You see that France has government spending at like 57% of GDP and an Americans eyes pop out of our heads. At least mine do.
I've said for a while now that the debt is a problem but I am convinced nothing will happen until we reach the crisis moment. Congress is not capable of cutting anything unless forced. For the record I am for more defence spending, that's one of the main things for the government to do. But cuts do need to be made especially since Americans will riot if there are large tax increases. Even Democrats nowadays promise "no tax increases for people who make less than $X" where X is hundreds of thousands of dollars. Good luck with a VAT or broad based income tax hike.
|
Lovely how the fascist bootlickers are claiming:
A) The budget is mostly impacted by social security and defense spending has very little influence on the budget.
B) US military spending has allowed Europe to have social security by reducing their defense spending.
Fuck me, you all sure burned away any remains of brain cells you once might have had. Too bad you live on the same planet as us.
The whole right wing take on Europe is the saddest piece of uninformed retarded nonsense I have read in my lifetime and I read a whole lot of ignorant bullshit. To actually believe 10% of that, you have to have your head up someones asshole sniffing all the good stuff.
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
On May 29 2026 03:23 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 02:39 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist. I've learned about a stabbing in Switzerland from conservative message boards and not from Swedish news. And it's not that they don't cover things that happens in Europe, the school bus that got hit by a train in Belgium 2 days ago was major headline news everywhere. But no muslims involved so 0 zero response on US sites. Of course it's only my opinion it's getting "worse". Migrant crisis was 2015 so you might be correct in the timeline, it's a big political shift in Europe as well. But there are other things that aren't answered. Like where does the frequent claim that the US is subsidizing EU welfare states by allowing us to have lower defense spending come from? The numbers doesn't support that at all. We for sure reduced defense spending *a lot* after the cold war and are increasing it now but we had welfare states before, during, and after that time period as well. It's not only news about crime and migration there is also a big focus on (certain types) of political news from Europe, and an even bigger focus on US policy moves towards Europe. My personal take is that there is an ongoing information campaign against conservative voters in the US based on the content I've been seeing. I might be wrong it's not a wild take. As for social spending, military spending and debt. You absolutely have to take on social spending, especially social security which is otherwise going to be the world's biggest ponzi scheme in the not so distant future. Especially since that's $73tn not in the current debt. But if was any other country you would be broke right now. And make no mistake, you will be soon if you don't fix this. You can't afford a 1500bn military budget right now. It should never have been increased and you should probably look to cut some spending. Ideally almost everything in the budget that doesn't severely impact consumer spending should be shaved and taxes should go up. I would very much like for the current form of the US to continue for a long time, and not reducing the deficit is a far greater threat to that than keeping your current pre-Trump military budget. I leave you to your opinion on if there is a shift. I agree there has been a change in *how* Europe is discussed, for the reasons I gave. It's harder to find an American saying we should be like Europe. Stories about things like "subsidizing the welfare state" comes from both A) looking at the relative social spending vs millitary spending and B) the *unwillingness* by European nations to meet their NATO obligations. So sure, they have huge welfare states and have for decades. You see that France has government spending at like 57% of GDP and an Americans eyes pop out of our heads. At least mine do. I've said for a while now that the debt is a problem but I am convinced nothing will happen until we reach the crisis moment. Congress is not capable of cutting anything unless forced. For the record I am for more defence spending, that's one of the main things for the government to do. But cuts do need to be made especially since Americans will riot if there are large tax increases. Even Democrats nowadays promise "no tax increases for people who make less than $X" where X is hundreds of thousands of dollars. Good luck with a VAT or broad based income tax hike.
It’s almost like France having the welfare state it does is because it chooses to spend 57% of GDP on government spending or something
The idea it can do this solely because of American largesse is utterly fanciful, I mean by all means don’t emulate it, but it’s perfectly within American economic capacity to emulate various European style welfare states.
What’s even in NATO for Europeans if the current direction of travel continues? A European centric combined defence policy is looking more and more attractive by the day
|
On May 29 2026 03:23 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 02:39 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist. I've learned about a stabbing in Switzerland from conservative message boards and not from Swedish news. And it's not that they don't cover things that happens in Europe, the school bus that got hit by a train in Belgium 2 days ago was major headline news everywhere. But no muslims involved so 0 zero response on US sites. Of course it's only my opinion it's getting "worse". Migrant crisis was 2015 so you might be correct in the timeline, it's a big political shift in Europe as well. But there are other things that aren't answered. Like where does the frequent claim that the US is subsidizing EU welfare states by allowing us to have lower defense spending come from? The numbers doesn't support that at all. We for sure reduced defense spending *a lot* after the cold war and are increasing it now but we had welfare states before, during, and after that time period as well. It's not only news about crime and migration there is also a big focus on (certain types) of political news from Europe, and an even bigger focus on US policy moves towards Europe. My personal take is that there is an ongoing information campaign against conservative voters in the US based on the content I've been seeing. I might be wrong it's not a wild take. As for social spending, military spending and debt. You absolutely have to take on social spending, especially social security which is otherwise going to be the world's biggest ponzi scheme in the not so distant future. Especially since that's $73tn not in the current debt. But if was any other country you would be broke right now. And make no mistake, you will be soon if you don't fix this. You can't afford a 1500bn military budget right now. It should never have been increased and you should probably look to cut some spending. Ideally almost everything in the budget that doesn't severely impact consumer spending should be shaved and taxes should go up. I would very much like for the current form of the US to continue for a long time, and not reducing the deficit is a far greater threat to that than keeping your current pre-Trump military budget. I leave you to your opinion on if there is a shift. I agree there has been a change in *how* Europe is discussed, for the reasons I gave. It's harder to find an American saying we should be like Europe. Stories about things like "subsidizing the welfare state" comes from both A) looking at the relative social spending vs millitary spending and B) the *unwillingness* by European nations to meet their NATO obligations. So sure, they have huge welfare states and have for decades. You see that France has government spending at like 57% of GDP and an Americans eyes pop out of our heads. At least mine do. I've said for a while now that the debt is a problem but I am convinced nothing will happen until we reach the crisis moment. Congress is not capable of cutting anything unless forced. For the record I am for more defence spending, that's one of the main things for the government to do. But cuts do need to be made especially since Americans will riot if there are large tax increases. Even Democrats nowadays promise "no tax increases for people who make less than $X" where X is hundreds of thousands of dollars. Good luck with a VAT or broad based income tax hike. One of the strange points of Democrat and Republican agreement nowadays is saying that taxes should stay the same or decrease for 96-98% of Americans. That's the math behind the recent candidate Kamala Harris's campaign promise excluding those that make under $400,000. It should be obvious foolishness if we're talking about the deficit or paying off the debt, but so is focusing conversations around the $900 bil budget category instead of the $4.1 tril budget category. Government should do it all, but don't you dare touch my hard-earned money!
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
On May 29 2026 03:34 Oleo wrote:
Lovely how the fascist bootlickers are claiming:
A) The budget is mostly impacted by social security and defense spending has very little influence on the budget.
B) US military spending has allowed Europe to have social security by reducing their defense spending.
Fuck me, you all sure burned away any remains of brain cells you once might have had. Too bad you live on the same planet as us.
The whole right wing take on Europe is the saddest piece of uninformed retarded nonsense I have read in my lifetime and I read a whole lot of ignorant bullshit. To actually believe 10% of that, you have to have your head up someones asshole sniffing all the good stuff.
An irregular contributor here but fuck me you really cut to the core of the issue here with almost no fat on the bone whatsoever, bravo!
Yeah it’s fucking nonsense.
|
Northern Ireland27271 Posts
On May 29 2026 03:42 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 03:23 Introvert wrote:On May 29 2026 02:39 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist. I've learned about a stabbing in Switzerland from conservative message boards and not from Swedish news. And it's not that they don't cover things that happens in Europe, the school bus that got hit by a train in Belgium 2 days ago was major headline news everywhere. But no muslims involved so 0 zero response on US sites. Of course it's only my opinion it's getting "worse". Migrant crisis was 2015 so you might be correct in the timeline, it's a big political shift in Europe as well. But there are other things that aren't answered. Like where does the frequent claim that the US is subsidizing EU welfare states by allowing us to have lower defense spending come from? The numbers doesn't support that at all. We for sure reduced defense spending *a lot* after the cold war and are increasing it now but we had welfare states before, during, and after that time period as well. It's not only news about crime and migration there is also a big focus on (certain types) of political news from Europe, and an even bigger focus on US policy moves towards Europe. My personal take is that there is an ongoing information campaign against conservative voters in the US based on the content I've been seeing. I might be wrong it's not a wild take. As for social spending, military spending and debt. You absolutely have to take on social spending, especially social security which is otherwise going to be the world's biggest ponzi scheme in the not so distant future. Especially since that's $73tn not in the current debt. But if was any other country you would be broke right now. And make no mistake, you will be soon if you don't fix this. You can't afford a 1500bn military budget right now. It should never have been increased and you should probably look to cut some spending. Ideally almost everything in the budget that doesn't severely impact consumer spending should be shaved and taxes should go up. I would very much like for the current form of the US to continue for a long time, and not reducing the deficit is a far greater threat to that than keeping your current pre-Trump military budget. I leave you to your opinion on if there is a shift. I agree there has been a change in *how* Europe is discussed, for the reasons I gave. It's harder to find an American saying we should be like Europe. Stories about things like "subsidizing the welfare state" comes from both A) looking at the relative social spending vs millitary spending and B) the *unwillingness* by European nations to meet their NATO obligations. So sure, they have huge welfare states and have for decades. You see that France has government spending at like 57% of GDP and an Americans eyes pop out of our heads. At least mine do. I've said for a while now that the debt is a problem but I am convinced nothing will happen until we reach the crisis moment. Congress is not capable of cutting anything unless forced. For the record I am for more defence spending, that's one of the main things for the government to do. But cuts do need to be made especially since Americans will riot if there are large tax increases. Even Democrats nowadays promise "no tax increases for people who make less than $X" where X is hundreds of thousands of dollars. Good luck with a VAT or broad based income tax hike. One of the strange points of Democrat and Republican agreement nowadays is saying that taxes should stay the same or decrease for 96-98% of Americans. That's the math behind the recent candidate Kamala Harris's campaign promise excluding those that make under $400,000. It should be obvious foolishness if we're talking about the deficit or paying off the debt, but so is focusing conversations around the $900 bil budget category instead of the $4.1 tril budget category. Government should do it all, but don't you dare touch my hard-earned money!
Why aren’t you respecting people’s desire to not be taxed more?
|
On May 29 2026 03:23 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 02:39 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 23:51 Introvert wrote:On May 28 2026 16:46 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 14:51 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 14:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On May 28 2026 07:26 dyhb wrote:On May 28 2026 05:09 Razyda wrote:On May 28 2026 04:58 Jankisa wrote:
When it comes to human and worker rights, EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home. They dont hate it, they hold it in contempt, and not because of the reasons you mentioned, but because Europe is essentially non factor and yet it keep acting all high and mighty. Right-wing ideology: The EU boasts of the gentler and kinder liberal society, all the while the US is subsidizing their defense budgets through NATO, and thus their welfare state by extension. All the while, they’ve exchanged core freedoms and justice for the promise of safety and security. Their domestic policy is flawed. They are overly dependent on Russian energy. They should be regarded as on a diverging path from the US and subject to less partnership. The more stringent right-wingers will use europoor and caretaker governments of tourist destinations. (I take it that Europeans, for their part, also think America is backwards or uncultured. Thanks for the answer but it's still very vague. EU countries had welfare states during the cold war, in the in-between period and at the current time. During that period defense spending have been extremely varied. Clearly there is no connection to the welfare states and defense spending so how exactly does the US subsidise our welfare? Furthermore do you disagree with the assessment that the US have pushed Europe to buy US systems and that the US, by being the leader in NATO, have heavily influenced European armies? We have had the core freedoms debate before so let's not rehash that one. But what kinds of false sense security are we talking about? And how is our domestic policy flawed? As for Russian energy I am assuming you meant that in the past tense? At this point we are more reliant on US energy. Most countries in the world import some kind of energy from somewhere. It's not until recently that has been a problem (which many are working on, like EU and China, which at the end of the day will be a net negative for energy exporters.) Finally exactly how are we on a divergent path from the US? I want to put forward the fair reading of how America's right wing views Europe, or the problems of Europe from the American right-wing context. Of course it's going to be vague! But if a poster's apprehension of the topic advances beyond, and I'm trying to be fair here so this is a direct quote from the thread, "EU is the "shining city on the hill" and Xi, Putin and Trump hate it because it's a horrible contrast to what they are doing to people at home," then that's an absolute win. The ultimate goal here is to be able to express to a triple-Trump voter in America an opinion on Europe that they would wholeheartedly agree with from their perspective, and not the same claptrap that's how left-wingers view right-wingers and what they would really describe their thought process if only they were more honest. You've got a perspective that would reduce to how you'd argue a right-winger out of believing as they do, which is valid in that context, but not actually responsive to On May 28 2026 00:50 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Why is there such a hyperfixation on Europe? And why is it getting worse?
We are really living rent free in the MAGA heads. Of course they also don't know anything about Europe. I doubt that there is such a hyperfixation, or that it's getting worse, but the substance of the charge is your own personal research, which isn't actually something that can serve as a basis for argument. Fair enough that's what they think. And I'm trying to understand *why* they think it. Thus my questions. I've been around for a while. US citizens (conservatives in particular) have never been particularly interested in gang related shootings in Sweden. Now it's discussed on conservative sites. Why? The US has not, and isn't now, particularly concerned about the values of it's allies and conservative groups seem to care very little about it except for specific European parts. Well everyone had their own reasons and I am not sure I agree with you that there has been more focus. But if there has I would say mostly it is a similar reason to why lefties in the US *stopped* pointing to Europe all the time. They make for good examples. Dems used to tout Europe "if they can do xyz so can we!" But since Europe has fallen behind economically and has gained a reputation as an overly stifling bureaucracy, people don't really use it as a positive anymore, at least not on the center left. So over the course of a decade (at this point maybe longer ago) when some thought that Europe was a model of what to do, the rights primary engagement with it was against domestic political opponents. Now it still is, but it's used on offense. My own sense is that things began to change with the migrant crisis, but I could be wrong. On May 28 2026 23:16 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Interest on the national debt is eating 19% of federal revenue — watchdog warns it will get worse | Fortune https://share.google/DcQimvO0cksbGQsQFInterest rates are starting to spike. But Cuba is a national safety issue and the national debt apparantly is not. So why not have another war at a time where the budget should be cut considerably? Because millitary spending is not a primary driver of the debt. Social services is, I think just like it is in every western country. You cannot balance the budget on the back of the military, especially if the America that even the Europeans claim they want is to exist. I've learned about a stabbing in Switzerland from conservative message boards and not from Swedish news. And it's not that they don't cover things that happens in Europe, the school bus that got hit by a train in Belgium 2 days ago was major headline news everywhere. But no muslims involved so 0 zero response on US sites. Of course it's only my opinion it's getting "worse". Migrant crisis was 2015 so you might be correct in the timeline, it's a big political shift in Europe as well. But there are other things that aren't answered. Like where does the frequent claim that the US is subsidizing EU welfare states by allowing us to have lower defense spending come from? The numbers doesn't support that at all. We for sure reduced defense spending *a lot* after the cold war and are increasing it now but we had welfare states before, during, and after that time period as well. It's not only news about crime and migration there is also a big focus on (certain types) of political news from Europe, and an even bigger focus on US policy moves towards Europe. My personal take is that there is an ongoing information campaign against conservative voters in the US based on the content I've been seeing. I might be wrong it's not a wild take. As for social spending, military spending and debt. You absolutely have to take on social spending, especially social security which is otherwise going to be the world's biggest ponzi scheme in the not so distant future. Especially since that's $73tn not in the current debt. But if was any other country you would be broke right now. And make no mistake, you will be soon if you don't fix this. You can't afford a 1500bn military budget right now. It should never have been increased and you should probably look to cut some spending. Ideally almost everything in the budget that doesn't severely impact consumer spending should be shaved and taxes should go up. I would very much like for the current form of the US to continue for a long time, and not reducing the deficit is a far greater threat to that than keeping your current pre-Trump military budget. I leave you to your opinion on if there is a shift. I agree there has been a change in *how* Europe is discussed, for the reasons I gave. It's harder to find an American saying we should be like Europe. Stories about things like "subsidizing the welfare state" comes from both A) looking at the relative social spending vs millitary spending and B) the *unwillingness* by European nations to meet their NATO obligations. So sure, they have huge welfare states and have for decades. You see that France has government spending at like 57% of GDP and an Americans eyes pop out of our heads. At least mine do. I've said for a while now that the debt is a problem but I am convinced nothing will happen until we reach the crisis moment. Congress is not capable of cutting anything unless forced. For the record I am for more defence spending, that's one of the main things for the government to do. But cuts do need to be made especially since Americans will riot if there are large tax increases. Even Democrats nowadays promise "no tax increases for people who make less than $X" where X is hundreds of thousands of dollars. Good luck with a VAT or broad based income tax hike.
Fair enough. It's much harder to find a European that says we should be like the US too.
There are a lot of problems with waiting for "the crisis point" to come.
As the Fortune article points out, that you reach the point where interest rates outscale growth. And at that point fixing it will be much more difficult and painful. Like a lot more difficult. If current interest rates don't go down that point could 2036. That's just Trump and one more president. And that's as long as things doesn't get *worse*.
Another problem is that since you can just keep borrowing money to cover increasing interest payments the general American won't notice anything until the whole house of cards collapses. It's exactly like a household running on maxing out new credit cards to cover interest rates on the old ones + overspending. Once you can't get that final card you are fucked but until then the kids won't notice anything in their daily routine.
And finally America has no one to stop them. Greece had Europe that could say "no", push towards proper finances and back them up with credit as they recovered.
In the US it's your politicians and your educated voters.
Fixing this now would probably be fine. You need more taxes, cut *some* spending and structural reforms to medicare and social security. It won't be a big problem for most Americans.
In 10 years it's going to be considerably harder.
In 15-20 years (?) if allowed to crash it might seriously bring down the entire country at that point and taking the global economy with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
