Darth Thing is that many on the left are not pro-abortion as in they are rooting for women to have them, they would prefer it if women didn’t feel the need for such a procedure, but these left wingers know that as long as there is that desire to have them regulated and done under the best medical supervision, while doing all they can to limit the number that are asked for. I remember someone that was pro drug legalisation and argued against prohibition saying that if there was a desire for drugs and they were illegal it just meant criminals would make money off supplying the demand and wouldn’t care if what they sold was unhealthy or fatal. But this same person also wanted to make abortions illegal to preform or have. I tried to point out the contradiction but it was as if his mind was split into two on these issues one a civil rights/legal issue the other a religious issue. To me prohibition doesn't work as said I prefer abortions to be regulated and done under the best medical supervision, but doing all I can to try and limit or stop the desire and need for them. This can be done because it has been in many countries but often the measures that are needed are opposed by the very people that wish to impose the abortion prohibition. Such things as clear sex education from an early age and free provision of birth control and birth control advise, also having a social, welfare and employment environment that does not put women under pressure to abort. So I think it would be better to go with more left leaning policies put forward by people that actually want to help people rather than voting for right wingers pushing for knowingly flawed prohibition laws in a cynical attempt to get religious voters. You want the mentally ill to have access to guns? Which nationals as in which citizens of a particular nation are you wanting to support I mean you can have citizens from numerous cultures within one nation. Nationalism usually mean the imposing of one ideal, one culture on a nation with those not conforming having their citizenship downgraded or removed, while multiculturalism is usually about celebrating diversity within equality. Also what do you mean by open borders - for example don't you want open borders between diffrent US states. You would need to explain this? Also what do you mean by ‘horrible life’ as that is a very subjective. Again this sounds confused and ill-informed can you please expand? What is you opposition to Obama care based on? * At this point I stopped replying individually to the points on the list as most had the same reply - this sounds confused and ill-informed can you please expand?
Democrats are lucky to be able to keep the country from falling apart altogether, and if they don't deal with the Tea Party, their own party will divide in half.
I travel the world advising organisations on what tech to use and specialise in IoT implementations. I know exactly what is available now and what is on the way. Your world of robots isn’t going to happen. Human capital is too valuable. You sound like a misguided child. As for relevant policies, I don’t think so. That’s just laughable
This statement of "facts" (????????) comes from that most reliable and accurate of all sources ................. "friend of mine". "My buddy." Boy THAT'S where you go for the real factual stuff - my buddy. Probably disseminated that golden wisdom at that most trusted of academic establishments .............. the corner bar.
This quote goes with my above post and that of Balbus requesting a back-up to Darth's post comments at post #8.
The workaholic Japanese and white US and EU populations have been imploding faster than any other on the planet for half a century. The world has people to burn, which is why global warming is an issue. Academics and professionals have the lowest reproductive rates of all. They talk about things like Darwinian evolution and Humanism, then encourage everyone to work harder, and call the rest of the world lazy bums.
Trust me again, you don't want crazies running around with ANY guns. The 2017 Las Vegas shooting was done by a crazy person. Had he not been allowed any guns, the 60 people he killed for no damn reason would be alive today. It is very good to stop crazies from having guns. Also, Hitler was about as far right as you can get. His policies promoted extreme nationalism, German superiority over all other races and groups, and the absolute destruction of all groups deemed unfit to live in an aryan Germany as envisioned by him. A double edged sword. A certain level of border control is indeed needed to keep the country sovereign. But you cannot avoid global co-operation at this point. Many countries' economies rely on the free passage of people and goods. Trump damaged the US economy, when he attempted to insulate America into a bubble from the rest of the world with his nationalist policies. Same for the Britons with Brexit. No country is an island anymore. Also, be wary of nationalism. Many mass murders have been committed under the influence of nationalist zeal. Nationalists like to use the nationalist pride as an excuse to murder others. Only governments can levy taxes. Where I come from, banks don't have this sort of power. Banks can charge service fees, but you can eliminate those by switching to a cheaper bank. Well somebody correct me, if you please, but I believe all the major Middle East conflicts that involved the US were started by US Republicans. Iraq 1 by Bush senior, and Iraq 2 and Afghanistan by Bush junior. And the Arab spring and the Syrian civil war happened regardless of America's actions, and the rise of ISIS was a direct result of Bush junior's actions in Iraq, when he toppled Saddam Hussein's regime, leaving behind an unstable power vacuum. Don't look like no leftist wars to me. Workers' unions by definition center their actions around defending the rights of its member workers. It's not their job to cater to the entire poor community, and never has been. That's the job of the government. Since when have places like Breitbart news been leftist? As for some of the other points, it's true that the American left has been a little bit too obsessed with people's genders in recent times when, in fact, securing people's livelihoods should still be a more pressing concern. Especially now, when the Covid-19 pandemic is hurting a lot of people's finances. Shouting about "white male privilege" comes off as preachy, and is actually detrimental to the popularity of leftist policies. It comes with the risk that you'll actually alienate the white males from the left and drive them straight into the arms of the enemy.
Your post suggests human capital is too valuable, which defies all the evidence indicating modern capitalism and communism both eat people like candy for breakfast. They are extremists who exploit each other at every opportunity, and poison the middle ground where any genuine salt-of-the-earth values might take root. Human capital is so valuable, it costs over $2,000.oo for some 20 millions peasants to buy passage into the US, and Donald Duck has attempted to build a wall to keep them all out.
Preventing the illegal movement of labour, be it skilled or unskilled, is evidence of investment in the human capital that already exists within the boundary being protected. That completely counteracts your belief on the matter
There are over 350 million slaves in the world today, half the cargo ships on the ocean carry contraband, while the white population of the US has the highest rates of abortion, suicide, rape, child abuse, divorce, and alcoholism and promotes gun rights and civil war. The human body is worth roughly $2,000.oo in basic elements, and Hitler was keenly interested in extracting all those for fun and profit, Stalin and Mao killed people by the tens of millions, and the entire world ecology is collapsing, all because.... people are so valuable.
I'm hoping many, MANY people will remember the George W. Bush televised speech where he championed being able to bring in even MORE illegal immigrants when he said, "We need to change these immigration laws so it's NOT ILLEGAL ANYMORE." This is exactly what the business community (the biggest donors to the REPUBLICAN PARTY) wanted ....... more dirt-cheap labor with "government red tape" eliminated so they could bring in more & more "no-longer illegal" cheap-labor immigrants. Bush's speech is on recorded VIDEO and AUDIO TAPE. Factual history. People have S-U-C-H short memories ..................... and willing blindness.
An interesting aside - can i give you my musings I don’t have Longstone’s more expert knowledge, I’ve done my bit of tech support but not at higher levels - but i’d like to give my two pennies worth. I agree that the age of robots in the traditional sense (human facsimiles, mechanical slaves) is unlikely to happen, but technological advances have and will take place. The thing is that machines can be clever at doing the routine but not abstract thinking, they can replace a person doing the same job over and over on the assembly line but be useless at cleaning the toilets or sorting out a fuck up in the supply chain, because those things change everyday. But ‘i'm old enough to remember the typing pool and the wages office, the clatter of a hundred typewriters stopping when a young man came into the room (terrifying) and going down to collect my wages and signing a ledger in which my hours had been written in to receive an actual physical wage packet (never filled enough with real money) . That has all gone in many places in the world. Now traditionally the route from the labour class to the lower middle classes was through the minor administrative jobs for example clerks and secretaries and from there it was possible to rise up the admin tree even to management. The system had hope built in. So repetitive labour could be automated and lower admin jobs could be computerised and what replaced these was the rise of the services sector but many of those jobs were lower paid and had less possibility of advancement. But there was still enough to give people hope. Well now clever algorithm are coming for the higher admin roles and many of the services sector jobs are gone or going due to online activities. What in many places has arisen are exploitative mechanisms such as zero hour contracts, the gig workforce and surveillanced and monitored pay per work jobs (so you end up with workers wearing nappies because they can't take time away from their work). This to me is a return to the pre 20th century idea of the lower orders not being fully human and that kind of thing destroys hope and it is what many fear they might fall into. * But there is a problem with this - since the 1920 increasingly and especially in what we call ‘the west’ the modern economic system has been based on the a consumerist model - goods are made to be sold the more people have to spend the more they buy, the whole Keynesian economic ideas were based on the idea that - a distributive system were people got good wages that produced disposable wealth so they could spend into the economy which increased economic growth and tax revenues - was a good thing. As were social and welfare programmes that did the same. But that was largely based on industrial models of mass production. The rise of the services sector and neoliberalist ideas caused the old distributive systems to be questioned, attacked and to some extent dismantled. Wealth began to concentrate. The consumerist economy has continued in places like the US and UK (that more fully embraced neolberal ideas) although it was increasingly sustained by debt (public and private) and the production of cheaper goods from outside. This was because for most of the middle and lower classes their incomes had to a large extent had become stagnant or dropped while the wealth of the top percentage rose hugely concentrating wealth even more. The debt brought about the financial crisis and foriegn production hollowed out the remaining manufacturing base. The question is how long is the comsumasist model sustainable - low wages decreases disposable wealth this can be offset by debt and cheaper imports for so long but if wages keep falling and jobless increase then wouldn’t there come a tipping point? And I don't see an improving economic model ready to take over and fear the step back into the exploitative one that came before it. That is unless we do something about it.
Again, who is to determine the crazies? Hitler used the exact same logic as yours. They didn't want "crazies" having guns such as mentally ill persons. Nazis also euthanized thousands of schizophrenics. If the Capatalists have their way, we will have some kind of minority report tier dystopia where an AI predicts our future behaviors and throws us in asylums to keep us "safe". The reasoning will be to reduce mass shootings of course.
I suggest all American citizens be given IQ tests and those that fall in the range that are most susceptible to join dangerous political, religious or civil cults be shipped off to live in Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida , the Carolinas and never be allowed to vote, have guns , children or express any opinions whatsoever.. Makes about as much sense as what the ideas of republicans represent. On second thought---------
Darth Sorry you seem to be leaving a lot of unanswered questions in your wake, it makes people suspect you have none and are just trolling and pushing out fake news. Actually the Nazis increased the number of people that could own guns – here is something I’ve posted before - the German legislature in 1919 passed a law that effectively banned all private firearm possession, leading the government to confiscate guns already in circulation. In 1928, the Reichstag relaxed the regulation a bit, but put in place a strict registration regime that required citizens to acquire separate permits to own guns, sell them or carry them. The 1938 law signed by Hitler that the NRA’s LaPierre has mentions in his book basically does the opposite of what he says it did. “The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition,” Harcourt wrote. Meanwhile, many more categories of people, including Nazi party members, were exempted from gun ownership regulations altogether, while the legal age of purchase was lowered from 20 to 18, and permit lengths were extended from one year to three years. Now you have to remember that many of those committed Nazis Party members were often those that believed in paranoid conspiracy theories that many others then and now thought were crazy – things like eugenics and the mass extermination of whole peoples. What do you mean by ‘capitalists’? To me many right wingers don’t care about the high levels of gun related deaths in the US because they done really affect them or if the death are of what they see as the ‘inferior or criminal classes’ then they actually thing that is a good thing (reducing the undesirables from the gene pool). It is why they push an ‘individualistic’ ideologies that heap blame on the individual for their actions or health problems - as such nothing can be done to help such people so locking them up in institutions (with little or no rehabilitation given) like prisons is promoted as the only option. As a leftie I want to help people with mental health problems rather than just ‘throw them in asylums’. But to do that you need a communal approach with public systems, institutions and social infrastructure in place that s funded enough to give that help.
