I don't know what they could do to those lines, but I'm not comfortable waiting to find out. I also don't exactly know how we prevent them from doing this without some sort of aggressive military response.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 62
Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
I don't know what they could do to those lines, but I'm not comfortable waiting to find out. I also don't exactly know how we prevent them from doing this without some sort of aggressive military response. | ||
Excludos
Norway8016 Posts
On April 02 2018 05:53 Plansix wrote: In other troubling news. https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/980448239488065538 I don't know what they could do to those lines, but I'm not comfortable waiting to find out. I also don't exactly know how we prevent them from doing this without some sort of aggressive military response. This seems like the exact thing that warrants a military response tho. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On April 02 2018 06:14 Excludos wrote: This seems like the exact thing that warrants a military response tho. not really; it's like a lot of the stuff china does and focuses on: stuff that's serious, but not quite serious enough/clear enough to justify opening fire. though I guess it'd depend on what exactly you mean by a military response. | ||
A3th3r
United States319 Posts
On April 02 2018 05:12 Kyadytim wrote: I'm citing Poe's law on A3th3r. Given some of the oddities of his phrasing choices and the way he keeps citing articles that more or less contradict the posts he cites them in, his posts make a lot more sense if you work from the assumption he's parodying being a Trump supporter rather than actually being a Trump supporter. Yeah.... Kyadytim, I try to support the guy but he makes it difficult to do that. Trump is not a good president. But, he is a conservative so I'm trying to fight the good fight & support the conservative prez. The girl at the Barnes & Noble I talked to today thought I was silly for even trying. I rather preferred George W. Bush's presidential term & George H.W. Bush, the 41st president. Anyways, he is in office now and so I feel like I should make an effort to bring up his positive achievements. | ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands21540 Posts
On April 02 2018 07:01 A3th3r wrote: Why?Yeah.... Kyadytim, I try to support the guy but he makes it difficult to do that. Trump is not a good president. But, he is a conservative so I'm trying to fight the good fight & support the conservative prez. The girl at the Barnes & Noble I talked to today thought I was silly for even trying. I rather preferred George W. Bush's presidential term & George H.W. Bush, the 41st president. Anyways, he is in office now and so I feel like I should make an effort to bring up his positive achievements. Why does a 'conservative' automatically deserve your support? By supporting out a blind loyalty the bad have no reason to be better and the good have no reason to not turn bad for their own gain. | ||
Excludos
Norway8016 Posts
On April 02 2018 06:26 zlefin wrote: not really; it's like a lot of the stuff china does and focuses on: stuff that's serious, but not quite serious enough/clear enough to justify opening fire. though I guess it'd depend on what exactly you mean by a military response. By military response I obviously didn't mean "go to war with", but rather use them to board the ships in question and find out what the hell they're up to, if anything. | ||
m4ini
4215 Posts
On April 02 2018 07:01 A3th3r wrote: Yeah.... Kyadytim, I try to support the guy but he makes it difficult to do that. Trump is not a good president. But, he is a conservative so I'm trying to fight the good fight & support the conservative prez. The girl at the Barnes & Noble I talked to today thought I was silly for even trying. I rather preferred George W. Bush's presidential term & George H.W. Bush, the 41st president. Anyways, he is in office now and so I feel like I should make an effort to bring up his positive achievements. lol, no #partyovercountry is republican, not conservative (there's conservative democrats too, these two things are not mutually exclusive). I know it's really hard to understand for trump supporters, but you're not conservatives. Republicans are to some degree conservatives by accident, and of course there's the odd actual conservative too. The rest are republicans. Including you, btw. I don't think you could've made it more clear that you support the president because he's "your side", rather than an actual good president. That's why actually at least remotely decent presidents get hunted by snide remarks over their birth certificates. Because it's not important that your country does well, it's important that your party does well. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On April 02 2018 07:18 Excludos wrote: By military response I obviously didn't mean "go to war with", but rather use them to board the ships in question and find out what the hell they're up to, if anything. that kinda IS going to war, it's certainly an act of war at any rate. they're in international waters, you can't just board them, nor can you detain and interrogate foreign nationals like that (legally). | ||
Excludos
Norway8016 Posts
On April 02 2018 07:53 zlefin wrote: that kinda IS going to war, it's certainly an act of war at any rate. they're in international waters, you can't just board them, nor can you detain and interrogate foreign nationals like that (legally). Well I'm not going to even attempt to say it's not complicated, but fucking with other people's shit in international water (in this case com cables) would already be illegal, which warrants some kind of reaction. You're also definitively allowed to board other vessels in various situations without it being an act of war, tho I'm not going to pretend to know if this is one of them. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On April 02 2018 08:20 Excludos wrote: Well I'm not going to even attempt to say it's not complicated, but fucking with other people's shit in international water (in this case com cables) would already be illegal, which warrants some kind of reaction. You're also definitively allowed to board other vessels in various situations without it being an act of war, tho I'm not going to pretend to know if this is one of them. it's hard to definitively prove they're interfering with the cables; at least that's how it sounded to me from the article. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 02 2018 08:23 zlefin wrote: it's hard to definitively prove they're interfering with the cables; at least that's how it sounded to me from the article. Which is a good reason to stop them from skulking around the cables and and force their ships to back off. Which can be done, but an aggressive posture from our military and president. So I doubt it is going to happen. | ||
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + MASON CITY, Iowa—Manufacturers in northern Iowa are begging Terry Schumaker for freshly trained workers for their factories. The problem is he doesn’t have enough students to train. “It’s not like we have the people beating down our door to apply,” said Mr. Schumaker, a dean at the North Iowa Area Community College in Mason City. It is a problem playing out in many parts of the Midwest, a region with lower unemployment and higher job-opening rates than the rest of the country. Employers, especially in more rural areas, are finding that there are just too few workers. That upends a long-running view in Washington, D.C., and many state capitals, where policy makers often say the unemployed simply lack the skills to get hired. Mr. Schumaker said Iowa has plenty of free programs to train workers. And Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds is poised to sign Tuesday legislation that would provide an estimated $18 million for worker-training programs. But shrinking high-school classes leave fewer potential trainees. Other states, like Indiana and Wisconsin, are undertaking similar moves. President Donald Trump has touted worker-training programs, and his daughter Ivanka visited Iowa in March to highlight the efforts. The U.S. labor market is the tightest it has been in nearly two decades. The national unemployment rate held at a 17-year low of 4.1% for five straight months, and the number of job openings is at a record. In the Midwest, the worker shortage is even more pronounced. If every unemployed person in the Midwest was placed into an open job, there would still be more than 180,000 unfilled positions, according to the most recent Labor Department data. The 12-state region is the only area of the country where job openings outnumber out-of-work job seekers. “The crux of the problem is that we don’t have the people here,” said Dave Zrostlik, president of commercial truck manufacturer Stellar Industries Inc., based in Garner, a rural city of about 3,000 people near Mason City. The shortage of labor is hurting Stellar’s bottom line. “We’ve got the biggest backlog of orders ever,” said Mr. Zrostlik, as he walked past an assembly line sitting unused because he can’t find the workers to staff a second shift. Normally, his 450-employee company fills orders in about eight weeks. Today, it takes 18 weeks or more. With about 28,000 residents, Mason City is the largest town in about a 100-mile radius. It supports industries like manufacturing, construction and agriculture. A sign at an Arby’s restaurant on the highway from Mason City to Garner proclaims, “If you’re smiling, we’re hiring.” Firms in rural areas are more likely to report their applicant pool is limited, the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta said. Controlling for other factors, such as the size of a business or education level required for a job, 68% of rural firms reported too few applicants for open jobs, versus 57% of employers in urban areas. The Midwest has seen an outflow of people. A net 1.3 million people living in the Midwest in 2010 had left by the middle of last year, according to census data. The area also attracts fewer immigrants than the rest of the country. As a result, Midwest employers are more dependent on filling jobs with workers who already live there. David Swenson, a regional economist at Iowa State University, doesn’t believe Iowa suffers from a skills gap. More job training programs are a “solution to a problem that doesn’t exist,” he said. “Thinking that it’s going to solve rural labor issues is misguided.” Beth Townsend, head of Iowa’s department of workforce development, said Iowa has an abundance of low-skilled workers but is facing a gap when it comes to jobs that require some specialized training. “We’ve got a lot of adults who could be easily upskilled,” she said. In particular, she is trying to get more disabled people or ex-convicts into the workforce because they often face more hurdles in finding employment. Iowa’s 2.9% unemployment rate has already drawn thousands of workers off the sidelines. The share of Iowa adults working or seeking work was 67.9% in February, nearly five percentage points higher than the national average, U.S. Labor Department data show. North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Kansas similarly have a relatively high rate of adults in the labor force. That suggests many potential workers on the fringe of the labor market have come back. And those who aren’t working now may not be for other reasons, such as staying home with children or a lack of transportation. “If someone needs to buy a car and commute 60 miles to take a job in a rural community, they may find it’s not worth taking the job,” said Carl Van Horn, director of the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University. Eric Sauey, CEO of Seats Inc. in rural Reedsburg, Wis., says that as his business making seats for commercial vehicles has grown, it has become harder to find the workers he needs. He is competing with other industries in his town of 9,200, like health care and carpentry, for the same pool of workers. His company trains employees internally. In fact, Mr. Sauey said he would rather his employees weren’t trained externally when they get to his factory. “We’d rather people not have any experience because then they’re not bringing bad habits with them,” he said. WSJ | ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On April 02 2018 07:01 A3th3r wrote: Yeah.... Kyadytim, I try to support the guy but he makes it difficult to do that. Trump is not a good president. But, he is a conservative so I'm trying to fight the good fight & support the conservative prez. The girl at the Barnes & Noble I talked to today thought I was silly for even trying. I rather preferred George W. Bush's presidential term & George H.W. Bush, the 41st president. Anyways, he is in office now and so I feel like I should make an effort to bring up his positive achievements. Interestingly this conservative you support donated to Hillary multiple times. | ||
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On March 31 2018 06:24 zlefin wrote: i'm not clear on what your point is; can you clarify what you're trying to say? America plays fast and loose with the idea of integrity; praising it on one hand and then attempting to destroy the lives of the people who actually show it on a regular basis. It's understandable that the government hates Snowden, it is baffling that the people - whom his leak was an unquestionable service to - turned on him as well. Calling for integrity while culturally disincentivising it is a problem, because it's pretty much the only way to fix many of the problems in the US right now. And this one isn't a top - down problem, it's down - top. If the people at the top had some reason to suspect they'll be punished for not behaving with integrity, they might actually do it. Without that threat, with the American people actively rewarding corrupt scumbags over and over and punishing those who do behave with integrity, the results are fairly obvious. On April 02 2018 08:20 Excludos wrote: Well I'm not going to even attempt to say it's not complicated, but fucking with other people's shit in international water (in this case com cables) would already be illegal, which warrants some kind of reaction. You're also definitively allowed to board other vessels in various situations without it being an act of war, tho I'm not going to pretend to know if this is one of them. You people had a cold war with Russia once. Are you seriously eager to start another one? What if you board their ships and they're not doing anything at all? This reeks of 'OH NOES, RUSSIA IS ON MANOEUVRES IN THE BLACK SEA, WE MUST STOP THEIR AGGRESSION'. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
Excludos
Norway8016 Posts
On April 02 2018 18:21 iamthedave wrote: America plays fast and loose with the idea of integrity; praising it on one hand and then attempting to destroy the lives of the people who actually show it on a regular basis. It's understandable that the government hates Snowden, it is baffling that the people - whom his leak was an unquestionable service to - turned on him as well. Calling for integrity while culturally disincentivising it is a problem, because it's pretty much the only way to fix many of the problems in the US right now. And this one isn't a top - down problem, it's down - top. If the people at the top had some reason to suspect they'll be punished for not behaving with integrity, they might actually do it. Without that threat, with the American people actively rewarding corrupt scumbags over and over and punishing those who do behave with integrity, the results are fairly obvious. You people had a cold war with Russia once. Are you seriously eager to start another one? What if you board their ships and they're not doing anything at all? This reeks of 'OH NOES, RUSSIA IS ON MANOEUVRES IN THE BLACK SEA, WE MUST STOP THEIR AGGRESSION'. I don't even know where to begin on this one. Are you serious? First of: You people..? I'm not from the US. Secondly: If they are fucking with international com cables then they are literally fucking with the entire world. Situations like this is literally what we have a military for. Boarding a civilian vessel with a military on grounds that they are disturbing undersea equipment is not a fucking act of war. Russia fucking with said underwater equipment on the other hand very much is. That said you can't just board ships willy nilly. You need some kind of evidence, which is going to be hard to obtain. Thirdly: What is with this ridiculous notion of "We should just do whatever Russia wants, because they have nukes"? That is an absolutely disturbing thought. If you let them do whatever they want, they're not going to stop at anything. Russia is the playground bully, and they will just keep pushing until you push back. They literally just sent a few hundred soldiers to their deaths back in February to test if America was willing to stand their ground (Which, luckily, they were). That doesn't mean Russia is willing to go straight to midnight. | ||
Excludos
Norway8016 Posts
On April 02 2018 19:48 zlefin wrote: Ok, that's clear. personally, I don' find it surprising that some people dislike snowden, as there's some reasonable basis for doing so. I'm not sure why you'd find ti baffling, as it's extremely common that some people support and some people oppose. it's not like snowden is a paragon of integrity. decent integrity, maybe; but not a paragon. I'm not sure who you're responding to here, as I couldn't find any posts mentioning Snowden since the last thread got locked. But I on the other hand do find it surprising...Well, maybe not surprising, but disappointing at least. I'm not sure how anyone could possibly questions someone's integrity when he literally upended his entire life for what he thought was the best for humanity. Whether he was wrong or right about doing it can be questioned sure, but his integrity should not be. And please no conspiracy theories. Base your discussions around evidence please. This "Oh but he must have sold information to the Chinese/Russia/Lichtenstein to stay alive" is just random nonsense until there's actually proof of it. This guy literally gave you proof of a government conspiracy, and instead of being up in arms about it, people are bringing in more conspiracy theories to somehow prove that he's wrong. The last thread really went to shit fast on this subject because of this nonsense. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On April 02 2018 21:29 Excludos wrote: I'm not sure who you're responding to here, as I couldn't find any posts mentioning Snowden since the last thread got locked. But I on the other hand do find it surprising...Well, maybe not surprising, but disappointing at least. I'm not sure how anyone could possibly questions someone's integrity when he literally upended his entire life for what he thought was the best for humanity. Whether he was wrong or right about doing it can be questioned sure, but his integrity should not be. And please no conspiracy theories. Base your discussions around evidence please. This "Oh but he must have sold information to the Chinese/Russia/Lichtenstein to stay alive" is just random nonsense until there's actually proof of it. This guy literally gave you proof of a government conspiracy, and instead of being up in arms about it, people are bringing in more conspiracy theories to somehow prove that he's wrong. The last thread really went to shit fast on this subject because of this nonsense. I was responding to the person who posted on this same page, literally right before my post, and was replying to me, who mentioned snowden. and i'm not gonna argue with you on this, as you're evincing unreasonableness. if you think the thread went bad on this subject maybe it's because your own view is unreasonable. I'm willing to discuss the matter with other people. | ||
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
Also: On March 31 2018 13:06 A3th3r wrote: That's some strong alternate history going on there. US did not technically kill Saddam Hussein, and the US did not invade Iraq to "take out" (by which I presume to mean to kill) Saddam Hussein, nor was it because of the invasion of Kuwait, seeing as several years had passed since then. I am going to having a hard time believing that you was this misinformed about recent historical events.The US took out Saddam Hussein in Iraq because they invaded Kuwait, who they considered an ally at that time. Now, Iraq is in a state of disarray, so, that's what they get, I guess. | ||
| ||