EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 841
| 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
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12204 Posts
On October 13 2018 02:43 Plansix wrote: Apparently Jamal Khashoggi recorded and broadcast his own murder on his Apple watch from inside the embassy. That is how we have audio of it. If I read a spy novel about a reporter reporting on their own murder, it would seem over the top. But here we are. That's awesome. Sorry, did I say awesome? I meant terrible. Definitely terrible. But kind of awes... terrible. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 13 2018 02:46 Nebuchad wrote: That's awesome. Sorry, did I say awesome? I meant terrible. Definitely terrible. But kind of awes... terrible. I’m sort of struggling describe how I feel about it. Impressive? Inspiring? Awe? What happened to him is terrifying and makes me depressed just thinking about how I would feel if I faced that. But the clarity to set your watch/phone to record and broadcast the whole thing impresses me. Maybe he hoped someone would hear and save him? But I don’t think that was the case. Folks who defy regimes like SA always seem to have come to terms with the idea they could be killed at any moment. Maybe he hoped his fellow reporters at the Post would get a hold of it and use it to challenge SA in some way. To expose the brutal regime from behind the “progressive reforms” that are just PR for a brutal nation. | ||
|
Wegandi
United States2455 Posts
It would be dangerous and dumb to cut aid to our "allies" says the Post (or if you want to be more precise the always lovely Jennifer Rubin). I wonder how the Post feels now. /shrug | ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19246 Posts
On October 13 2018 03:47 Wegandi wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/10/16/cut-all-foreign-aid-that-would-be-dumb-and-dangerous/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.cd2186dda85a It would be dangerous and dumb to cut aid to our "allies" says the Post (or if you want to be more precise the always lovely Jennifer Rubin). I wonder how the Post feels now. /shrug I've always found myself unable to pick a side when it comes to foreign aid. For instance, if we sent in the USA army to Venezuela to help the people of that country it would most definitely be frowned upon by the world. But if we send money, goods, materials to that country then it's not only seen as good, but expected from the USA. To me, I think it's a double standard. Unless it's disaster aid, shouldn't we fully not interfere with other countries? This is a tough question to answer. Does China take this approach or do they interfere "for the good of another country's people" in any way? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 13 2018 04:39 BisuDagger wrote: I've always found myself unable to pick a side when it comes to foreign aid. For instance, if we sent in the USA army to Venezuela to help the people of that country it would most definitely be frowned upon by the world. But if we send money, goods, materials to that country then it's not only seen as good, but expected from the USA. To me, I think it's a double standard. Unless it's disaster aid, shouldn't we fully not interfere with other countries? This is a tough question to answer. Does China take this approach or do they interfere "for the good of another country's people" in any way? You have hit the nail on the head when it comes to supplying weapons and other material means. If China or Russia provide them, the violence in Yemen still takes place, for instance. But by providing them with weapons, we are complicate in the violence. And in the era of Trump, there isn’t even the specter of someone paying attention to what is going on or attempting to mitigate the slaughter. I think these arms deals were better suited to a more involved congress and are just dangerous now. They have likely been dangerous ever since the early 2000s. | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
He testified that the first exchanges about that were in december with DOJ, whereas NY Attorney General alleges there were several contacts early 2017, and the idea was pushed by Bannon and Kobach. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/doj-trump-advisers-discussed-adding-citizenship-question-2020/story?id=58446662 Kobach is the guy that was head of the "voter fraud" investigation, and was held in contempt of court earlier this year for failing to comply with a court order to notify thousands of people that they were registered to vote. "The Attorney General says in a response to the filing that Kobach told Ross to add the question so noncitizens wouldn't be counted in drawing congressional districts and that Ross personally pushed for the question without cooperation from other agencies." Absolutely nothing shady ongoing in the background of the Trump administration to manipulate voters of course !!... (the link about contempt for reference : https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/18/us/kris-kobach-voter-fraud.html ) | ||
|
nojok
France15845 Posts
On October 13 2018 04:39 BisuDagger wrote: I've always found myself unable to pick a side when it comes to foreign aid. For instance, if we sent in the USA army to Venezuela to help the people of that country it would most definitely be frowned upon by the world. But if we send money, goods, materials to that country then it's not only seen as good, but expected from the USA. To me, I think it's a double standard. Unless it's disaster aid, shouldn't we fully not interfere with other countries? This is a tough question to answer. Does China take this approach or do they interfere "for the good of another country's people" in any way? I've thought about this a lot as France has very strong ties with a lot of former colonies which are not doing so well. What I (well not my idea but amongst all the different opinions I read this is the one I favored) came up with is stop subsidizing our agriculture, it's basicly killing local industries. You remember those lessons you had in school on how you develop a strong economy? First agriculture then textile industry then other industries and eventually services. It's barely possible for local farmers from poor countries to compete with subsidized EU/NA products, then they have to compete with Chinese textile industry AND second-hand clothes from Western countries. It's basicly impossible under those circumstances to build a decent economy. Really first step is asking our governments to stop subsidizing agriculture so heavily. | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
On October 13 2018 05:18 nojok wrote: I've thought about this a lot as France has very strong ties with a lot of former colonies which are not doing so well. What I (well not my idea but amongst all the different opinions I read this is the one I favored) came up with is stop subsidizing our agriculture, it's basicly killing local industries. You remember those lessons you had in school on how you develop a strong economy? First agriculture then textile industry then other industries and eventually services. It's barely possible for local farmers from poor countries to compete with subsidized EU/NA products, then they have to compete with Chinese textile industry AND second-hand clothes from Western countries. It's basicly impossible under those circumstances to build a decent economy. Really first step is asking our governments to stop subsidizing agriculture so heavily. This is impossible. You are only thinking at an economic level. But you forget something very important : the ability for a country to produce its own food is strategic. In case a war arises, a country that cannot produce its food is royally fucked. Thus agriculture, is one of the backbones of any decent country that wants to stay "independant" and a sovereign state. Which France pretty much is : we want to keep our own nuke deterrence force, so we don't participate in NATO's, we want to keep a full military force, etc etc. So allowing your agriculture to go under and become dependant on other countries who might be foes in the future is a huge no, even if we lose money in the process. Even in economic terms, good luck telling your local farmers they can close up shop, to allow other countries to develop better. You cannot do that easily in a democracy :-) | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21712 Posts
And I'm not convinced that our cheap lettuce and carrots are keeping Africa from developing their own economy. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19246 Posts
On October 13 2018 05:34 Gorsameth wrote: Cutting farming subsidies will raise food prices. Rising food prices hurt everyone in the wallet, especially the poor. And I'm not convinced that our cheap lettuce and carrots are keeping Africa from developing their own economy. Are the subsidies not paid with taxes? Couldn't the argument be made if the you reduced taxes and eliminated subsidies that citizens would break even. Obviously this is a pure free market approach and it would still endanger lots of farmers, but it's still an argument that could be made. | ||
|
nojok
France15845 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21712 Posts
On October 13 2018 05:47 BisuDagger wrote: The poor tend to pay to very little taxes, so no that doesn't work.Are the subsidies not paid with taxes? Couldn't the argument be made if the you reduced taxes and eliminated subsidies that citizens would break even. Obviously this is a pure free market approach and it would still endanger lots of farmers, but it's still an argument that could be made. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 13 2018 05:51 Gorsameth wrote: The poor tend to pay to very little taxes, so no that doesn't work. And then there is the problem of food shortages if the farm industry contracts to much. Food shortages lead to unrest. Unrest leads to governments being overthrown and other instability. | ||
|
Wegandi
United States2455 Posts
On October 13 2018 05:49 nojok wrote: Oh come on, we can spend more than 5% of our income on food, it won't kill us. Btw did you notice this stupidly record breaking hot fall in Europe? Yeah that's the monthly reminder we can't keep consuming as much useless stuff or the planet will be fucked up for thousands of generations. But god forbid we cut in our leisure budget, oh nonono, I don't give a fuck about those thousand of billions of humans following me. Global warming is a Chinese hoax. Very cold winter, snow in the middle east, no global warming = you can't use stupid anecdotes...it's about the long-term science! Extremely hot fall, look a storm during storm season, etc. = global warming! We're doomed! Ya'll crack me up. Choose one. | ||
|
nojok
France15845 Posts
On October 13 2018 05:59 Wegandi wrote: Very cold winter, snow in the middle east, no global warming = you can't use stupid anecdotes...it's about the long-term science! Extremely hot fall, look a storm during storm season, etc. = global warming! We're doomed! Ya'll crack me up. Choose one. I agree a single evidence does not prove anything but if we break heat records every year (and we do) it proves something. It had to be read "we once again break a record", not as "oh weird outlier right here". Btw long term science has proven global warming is real and man made. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Wegandi
United States2455 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And for the majority of human history humanity got its ass kicked by weather. It is only in the last 100 years that we have gotten a really good dealing with it. Climate change is super scary when viewed through that lens. | ||
| ||
