There we go

Digital Masta
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta »

Cane_The9lives wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:08 pm
Digital Masta wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:41 am
San Goku wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:33 am I told my son it's bath time and he came running head forward with his arms sticking backwards. I smiled thinking where did he learn that. We barley watched Naruto together lol.
Lol

So I didn't watch Obi-Wan but apparently it went as predicted. Propped up Reva and destroyed canon by having things that make no sense and don't connect to the original trilogy.
Maybe watch it and then judge for yourself?
I've never done crack either but I don't think I am gonna give it a try.

Nope. I don't owe these companies that shit on everything my time and money. Didn't I already go over this a while ago?

I could pirate it but I'm not going to.

It's like Uwe Boll films. Remember him? The awful film director. You don't need to see another Uwe Boll film to know it will likely be crap.

You and I are different audiences. You can watch and not care much about canon and THE MESSAGE but not me. So go enjoy and ignore me.
Cane_The9lives
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:15 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Cane_The9lives »

Digital Masta wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:25 pm
Cane_The9lives wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:08 pm
Digital Masta wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:41 am

Lol

So I didn't watch Obi-Wan but apparently it went as predicted. Propped up Reva and destroyed canon by having things that make no sense and don't connect to the original trilogy.
Maybe watch it and then judge for yourself?
I've never done crack either but I don't think I am gonna give it a try.

Nope. I don't owe these companies that shit on everything my time and money. Didn't I already go over this a while ago?

I could pirate it but I'm not going to.

It's like Uwe Boll films. Remember him? The awful film director. You don't need to see another Uwe Boll film to know it will likely be crap.

You and I are different audiences. You can watch and not care much about canon and THE MESSAGE but not me. So go enjoy and ignore me.
This show wasn't woke, but I can forgive you not knowing that since you haven't watched it.
San Goku
Posts: 1979
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:41 am

Re: There we go

Post by San Goku »

Good job America on Roe v Wade, some hope for humanity and the most vulnerable.

The overturning reminded me about this story a couple months back.

Link: https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/21/americas ... index.html

Literally no one said anything or criticized the decision to abortion up to 24 weeks.

Edit:

Ppl just told me in Canada we allow up to 8 months, how did I not know this 😳. We also have a disgusting clause where it can be as easy as wanting a boy or girl as the reason 😳🤯😵‍💫

Edit:

@DM where was the link on abortion statistics that you shared a couple months back? I want to share.
killacross
Posts: 1683
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 7:00 am
Location: NC, USA

Re: There we go

Post by killacross »

xandorxerxes wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:20 pm Predictable
Image

You mad, mad...

I troll, I troll.

Seriously though... This is gonna backfire in ways unforseen. It always does.
San Goku
Posts: 1979
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:41 am

Re: There we go

Post by San Goku »

^^

True and the cycle continues: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CfMe-TwJ ... MyMTA2M2Y=

Anyone see this doc: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CfNHdgDL ... MyMTA2M2Y=

My PM: https://www.instagram.com/tv/CfM8Gvqj4l ... MyMTA2M2Y=

Even a topic I know he's serious about he seems fake.
Digital Masta
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta »

killacross wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 1:19 am
xandorxerxes wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:20 pm Predictable
Image

You mad, mad...

I troll, I troll.

Seriously though... This is gonna backfire in ways unforseen. It always does.
I don't doubt it. It's gonna be a mess but it will eventually level out in the long term. The short term though...a new summer of love potentially coming.
Digital Masta
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta »

San Goku wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:48 pm Good job America on Roe v Wade, some hope for humanity and the most vulnerable.

The overturning reminded me about this story a couple months back.

Link: https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/21/americas ... index.html

Literally no one said anything or criticized the decision to abortion up to 24 weeks.

Edit:

Ppl just told me in Canada we allow up to 8 months, how did I not know this 😳. We also have a disgusting clause where it can be as easy as wanting a boy or girl as the reason 😳🤯😵‍💫

Edit:

@DM where was the link on abortion statistics that you shared a couple months back? I want to share.
Not the same link I think but the data is the same

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_a ... tatistics/
killacross
Posts: 1683
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 7:00 am
Location: NC, USA

Re: There we go

Post by killacross »

OMFG!!
... A gas tax holiday isn't good enough, there is talk about stimulus checks to combat uncontrolled inflation
xandorxerxes
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:43 pm

Re: There we go

Post by xandorxerxes »

TL;DR - I didn't argue with anyone, I just rambled as I attempted to respond to comments. Feel free to skip topics by quote blocks (or just the whole post entirely).

Fed inflation efforts should start impacting us in a few months. Things like removing the gas tax help people living paycheck to paycheck, but inflation isn't the problem.

July 2021 cost: $3.185
Inflation: 9%
Estimated June 2022 cost: $3.47165
Actual cost: $5.107
Cost not attributed to inflation: $1.63535 or 50%.

So yeah. Inflation is AN issue, but isn't THE issue. The issue is that people realized they can jack their prices and blame Biden, and... it worked. For a while. Then it backfired when things got too expensive, and people stopped buying as much so profits actually dropped (see: start of bear market). Gas is more nuanced thanks to the Russian/Ukranian war, but only 8% of our gas is sourced from Russia (if I recall correctly). It's more that it drives up the price of crude. Crude is up about... 50%. There's your cost. Inflation cost you $0.29, Russia/economics cost you $1.635.
killacross wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 1:19 am
xandorxerxes wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:20 pm Predictable
You mad, mad...

I troll, I troll.

Seriously though... This is gonna backfire in ways unforseen. It always does.
Grats on the kid, just now saw that.

Backfires:
- Increased healthcare costs, because our medical system is stupid
- Increased wait times at hospitals, because having a child is a billion times harder than taking a pill after having sex
- Loss of jobs/wages for women when they can't work or have to give up their future if they're pregnant early
- Increased population of children that can't be supported, stressing our already stressed out social nets
- Increased stress on schools, especially in the poorest neighborhoods
- Increased suicide rate, especially in teenagers (likely statistically insignificant, but it's there)
- Increased deaths from pregnancies that go wrong
- Increased deaths from "home remedy abortions" (beatings, fallings, coat hangers, etc)
- There's a correlation between crime and abortion, though it's in dispute. There has been some validation, but it's more that abortion allows for fewer teenage mothers and fewer teenage mothers means lower crime when their kids grow up. For those of you who are proponents of having a father figure in your life... there are going to be a lot more kids without them.

Keep in mind all of those impact the poor the most.

And the biggest one (imo)...

- Defining a life at conception means that any miscarriage or even the morning after pill is an abortion by legal definition. If you wanted to somehow parse out "natural" miscarriages from "unnatural" miscarriages (e.g. taking Mifegymiso), well, good luck. Who even knows what caused your miscarriage? Maybe it was something you did and you had no idea it was a risk? Maybe you had to take cancer drugs so that you wouldn't die and you lost the gamble? At least you probably get manslaughter instead of homicide for some of these?

I think what a LOT of people (in general) don't get is the difference between what they think is right and how the law impacts people. It's easy to say "abortion is wrong, trans-girls shouldn't play sports, etc" and it's incredibly difficult to do that legally because of how laws are applied, which goes back to your unforeseen consequences bit.
San Goku wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:48 pm Good job America on Roe v Wade, some hope for humanity and the most vulnerable.

The overturning reminded me about this story a couple months back.

Link: https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/21/americas ... index.html

Literally no one said anything or criticized the decision to abortion up to 24 weeks.

Edit:

Ppl just told me in Canada we allow up to 8 months, how did I not know this 😳. We also have a disgusting clause where it can be as easy as wanting a boy or girl as the reason 😳🤯😵‍💫

Edit:

@DM where was the link on abortion statistics that you shared a couple months back? I want to share.
This article seems to be sourced well enough, but I don't have time anymore to read sources of sources terribly thoroughly: https://www.verywellhealth.com/reasons- ... ion-906589

You're wrong about the abortion up to 8 months, and not in the way you probably think I'm going to say - it's legal up until birth:
Meanwhile, the fetal rights issue was ultimately decided in the 1989 case Tremblay v Daigle. The Supreme Court found that only a person had constitutional rights, and that such rights began at the time of live birth. The Court also decided that the father of a fetus has no proprietary interest in a fetus; he may not obtain an injunction to prevent a woman from exercising her right of choice to have an abortion.
Again, that's mostly quick google searching, but I couldn't find anything quickly that contradicted that and a few others that corroborated it. That said, Canada has a low abortion rate and 90%+ abort in the first trimester.
Digital Masta wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:52 am I don't doubt it. It's gonna be a mess but it will eventually level out in the long term. The short term though...a new summer of love potentially coming.
Amusingly (I guess), by definition this particular issue would never level out long term. It would always get worse, because there will be more people. If you can think of a scenario where more people = good by virtue of existing, then obviously that would get better.
Digital Masta
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta »

xandorxerxes wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 12:56 am Backfires:
- Increased healthcare costs, because our medical system is stupid
- Increased wait times at hospitals, because having a child is a billion times harder than taking a pill after having sex
- Loss of jobs/wages for women when they can't work or have to give up their future if they're pregnant early
- Increased population of children that can't be supported, stressing our already stressed out social nets
- Increased stress on schools, especially in the poorest neighborhoods
- Increased suicide rate, especially in teenagers (likely statistically insignificant, but it's there)
- Increased deaths from pregnancies that go wrong
- Increased deaths from "home remedy abortions" (beatings, fallings, coat hangers, etc)
- There's a correlation between crime and abortion, though it's in dispute. There has been some validation, but it's more that abortion allows for fewer teenage mothers and fewer teenage mothers means lower crime when their kids grow up. For those of you who are proponents of having a father figure in your life... there are going to be a lot more kids without them.

Keep in mind all of those impact the poor the most.
I was going to write something longer but I'm gonna take my own advice and just say:

$20 says this fire and brimstone reality doesn't happen, but you'll have to wait 30 years for that money because that's really how long it will take to get really good data on this.


More decentralization...I love it. Come on xandor...COME ON! You know deep in that deep blue heart of yours that national divorce is the best decision and this is just a slight step in that direction. Come on man, why share a government with these people? You don't like them and they don't like you. Why continue to fight each other trying to vie for power every 2 to 4 years when you can live in a world with people who GENERALLY share very similar values to you?


It can be peaceful...complicated but peaceful. I will never understand (actually that's not true as I had my come to Jesus moment back in 2015) why having a one size fits all approach is better than having more decentralized control which allows people more choice especially when these regions are so different culturally. Unless you're just all about top-down control, then it makes perfect sense.

Come, my friend...come to me and support national divorce. The door to this bus is always open, we'll just get off at different stops.

Image


Unrelated but not sure who's watching the boys but my reaction after that lastest episode (episode 6)

Image
xandorxerxes
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:43 pm

Re: There we go

Post by xandorxerxes »

Fire and brimstone... psh. It's just making everyone more miserable. There aren't enough abortions in a year to materialize into anything super significant from what I listed out, but it's a lot of drops in a bucket that's already really, really full.
Digital Masta wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 1:32 am More decentralization...I love it. Come on xandor...COME ON! You know deep in that deep blue heart of yours that national divorce is the best decision and this is just a slight step in that direction. Come on man, why share a government with these people? You don't like them and they don't like you. Why continue to fight each other trying to vie for power every 2 to 4 years when you can live in a world with people who GENERALLY share very similar values to you?

Come, my friend...come to me and support national divorce. The door to this bus is always open, we'll just get off at different stops.
3 Reasons. If you can solve them for me, sign me up.

1) I'd be personally screwed either way. I hold extremely liberal social views around equality/equitability, but generally don't agree with liberal political solutions. And then there are all of the non-social views that I completely disagree with...

2) It actually hoses red states, especially southern/southeastern ones. Red states generally collect more government money than they pay in and have the worst outcomes for things like education, health, poverty, etc. Those outcomes definitely don't get better when funding dries up or when your major cities leave your state (I assume at this point they'd just be their own city-states). There's a reason that politicians in southern Illinois run on seceding to get away from Chicago but never actually do it.

3) Lots of studies show that homogenous group think is bad. Part of why we're here is because social networks and search engines throw like-minded people together and filter out things that don't meet a person's worldview. Arguing about a flat earth shouldn't be an issue in 1800, let alone 2022. If I read a bunch of fox news, I don't want to see only conservative outlets popping up on my searches (plug for DuckDuckGo here).

I really feel like a lot of the current problems are on politicians (Trump was absolutely abysmal, but he was the result of it and not the start of it). Newt Gingrich pretty much called it what it is - he literally said it doesn't matter what facts are. It matters what people think facts are. Right now liberals spin everything as racist if there's a hint of racial disparity, even though often it's not race that's the causal force. Conservatives cling to outdated technologies and spurn scientific and economic progress either by spinning it as a religious issue or a "jobs" issue, and the (for lack of a better term) Trump-ists just make up their own facts and call the actual reality "fake news" when it disagrees with anything in their worldview.

We just need some damn leaders to actually step up and let experts say to people "this is how things are" and base policy on that. There's still plenty of disagreement to be had, but we have to actually accept fact-based realities as a foundation. This would be much easier to do if we stop gutting our education system, but that's apparently not on anyone's priority list.

I guess my solution is for politicians to regulate themselves to truths. No wonder I'm so damn miserable, my solution is a literal contradiction.

Fact for funsies - we are stricter on abortion than Sharia law despite the Quran prohibiting abortion and the Bible/Torah allowing or prescribing it.
San Goku
Posts: 1979
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:41 am

Re: There we go

Post by San Goku »

Posted this in a wrong thread

------------


Wow I seen Judge Clearance Thomas opinion, now I what @killa and @DM were talkingabout. Ya'll done pissed the man off with leaking the opinion majority ruling documents, giving out addresses to the SCOTUS homes, threatening his fellow SCOTUS colleagues. My advice to the left, don't piss that man off but please don't listen to me lol.
Digital Masta
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta »

xandorxerxes wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 2:59 am Fire and brimstone... psh. It's just making everyone more miserable. There aren't enough abortions in a year to materialize into anything super significant from what I listed out, but it's a lot of drops in a bucket that's already really, really full.
Digital Masta wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 1:32 am More decentralization...I love it. Come on xandor...COME ON! You know deep in that deep blue heart of yours that national divorce is the best decision and this is just a slight step in that direction. Come on man, why share a government with these people? You don't like them and they don't like you. Why continue to fight each other trying to vie for power every 2 to 4 years when you can live in a world with people who GENERALLY share very similar values to you?

Come, my friend...come to me and support national divorce. The door to this bus is always open, we'll just get off at different stops.
3 Reasons. If you can solve them for me, sign me up.

1) I'd be personally screwed either way. I hold extremely liberal social views around equality/equitability, but generally don't agree with liberal political solutions. And then there are all of the non-social views that I completely disagree with...

2) It actually hoses red states, especially southern/southeastern ones. Red states generally collect more government money than they pay in and have the worst outcomes for things like education, health, poverty, etc. Those outcomes definitely don't get better when funding dries up or when your major cities leave your state (I assume at this point they'd just be their own city-states). There's a reason that politicians in southern Illinois run on seceding to get away from Chicago but never actually do it.

3) Lots of studies show that homogenous group think is bad. Part of why we're here is because social networks and search engines throw like-minded people together and filter out things that don't meet a person's worldview. Arguing about a flat earth shouldn't be an issue in 1800, let alone 2022. If I read a bunch of fox news, I don't want to see only conservative outlets popping up on my searches (plug for DuckDuckGo here).

I really feel like a lot of the current problems are on politicians (Trump was absolutely abysmal, but he was the result of it and not the start of it). Newt Gingrich pretty much called it what it is - he literally said it doesn't matter what facts are. It matters what people think facts are. Right now liberals spin everything as racist if there's a hint of racial disparity, even though often it's not race that's the causal force. Conservatives cling to outdated technologies and spurn scientific and economic progress either by spinning it as a religious issue or a "jobs" issue, and the (for lack of a better term) Trump-ists just make up their own facts and call the actual reality "fake news" when it disagrees with anything in their worldview.

We just need some damn leaders to actually step up and let experts say to people "this is how things are" and base policy on that. There's still plenty of disagreement to be had, but we have to actually accept fact-based realities as a foundation. This would be much easier to do if we stop gutting our education system, but that's apparently not on anyone's priority list.

I guess my solution is for politicians to regulate themselves to truths. No wonder I'm so damn miserable, my solution is a literal contradiction.

Fact for funsies - we are stricter on abortion than Sharia law despite the Quran prohibiting abortion and the Bible/Torah allowing or prescribing it.

See that's the thing, I don't need to have all the answers for how it will all work in order to advocate for moving more in that direction. It's like slavery, back then there were people saying.

"BUT WHO WILL PICK THE COTTON?!! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!" Because slavery was quite literally the way things worked for all of humankind up until it wasn't anymore.

The correct response to that was: "I don't know. But slavery is wrong so I don't care about who will pick it, I just know what we're doing now doesn't work and is a heinous immoral act."

And when you think about, let's say I did know how the cotton would be picked by basically telling people that we're gonna have giant metal machines that are powered by long-dead plant/animal juice and they will be able to do things at a faster and better rate than any human would ever be capable of, they would've thrown me into an insane asylum.

As a matter of fact, the long-dead plant/animal juice metal machines really only came about BECAUSE slavery was outlawed forcing people to come up with new and better ways to get things done because they couldn't rely on keeping other humans as property anymore.

So how will it all work out? I have no idea, but there are better people out there who have thought of possible ideas for a "free society".

But at the end of the day, I just know that what we have now doesn't work and it's wrong and moving towards less top-down control is better...ALWAYS.

The one thing about homogenous group think. National divorce doesn't mean everyone will think the same. You can have people that have different ways of thinking but share the same values overall. That's quite literally everyone in their personal lives. It's when you have values that are at complete odds with one another that you can no longer live around one another especially when you can vote to affect the other person's life.

I'm not a conservative. I'm an anarchist or voluntarist as they call it as well HOWEVER a lot of what conservatives value cross over much more into my values than does a progressive. I'm sure there are some liberal folks that would cross over into my values as well and they probably could get along with some conservative folk as well because deep down there are some values that intersect.

All of these people can potentially live together but still disagree on things. For example, I'm pretty sure that Tim Pool, Ben Shapiro, and Michael Malice can all live in the same neighborhood and be cool with each other. Tim is a "post-liberal", Ben is a conservative and Michael is an anarchist but their core values cross over with each other but they do NOT all agree on the same thing.

They have way more in common with each other than they do with progressives with whom they'd have trouble living around because their way of life and values are complete opposites. It doesn't work. Just look at your own personal life. You don't typically have people in your life that are diametrically opposed to your values unless you're forced to, like at work or if it's a family member you'd rather not be around but feel like you have to. This doesn't mean you guys think exactly the same or agree on everything.

For example, at my company there is this Australian dude named, Mikey. Mikey is a prick. A complete and total prick. When I started working there I had heard about him but then when I eventually met him, within five minutes I realized he was a midwit and then a complete asshole as well. It's so bad that EVERY SINGLE teacher and Japanese staff member either dislike him or flat out hates him. Even the nicest guy at the company got so mad at him once that he lost it, tore into him and got in trouble for it. The nice guy is the type of guy that if he's angry and yelling then someone really had to push him to a bad place. Luckily Mikey no longer works the days that I work but we would NEVER...EVER interact with each other if it weren't for work. I don't want him anywhere near me. And I work with people that definitely have different politics from me...but we all hate Mikey.
Cane_The9lives
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:15 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Cane_The9lives »

"It is better to debate a question without settling it, than to settle a question without debating it" - Joseph Joubert
Digital Masta wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 4:56 am See that's the thing, I don't need to have all the answers for how it will all work in order to advocate for moving more in that direction. It's like slavery, back then there were people saying.

"BUT WHO WILL PICK THE COTTON?!! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!" Because slavery was quite literally the way things worked for all of humankind up until it wasn't anymore.

The correct response to that was: "I don't know. But slavery is wrong so I don't care about who will pick it, I just know what we're doing now doesn't work and is a heinous immoral act."

And when you think about, let's say I did know how the cotton would be picked by basically telling people that we're gonna have giant metal machines that are powered by long-dead plant/animal juice and they will be able to do things at a faster and better rate than any human would ever be capable of, they would've thrown me into an insane asylum.

As a matter of fact, the long-dead plant/animal juice metal machines really only came about BECAUSE slavery was outlawed forcing people to come up with new and better ways to get things done because they couldn't rely on keeping other humans as property anymore.

So how will it all work out? I have no idea, but there are better people out there who have thought of possible ideas for a "free society".
If we are going refer to historical parallels that may or may not be comparable (Let alone applicable) as argument predicates, then I submit to you the following query : Have you considered the negative repercussions of your proposal in weighing its benefits and viability?

If what you say is true, and that you don't need to fully understand the finer points of how it will be enacted, what are the cons acting against it?
How could it all go wrong, and does the benefits outweigh the risks of complete implosion?

If Federalism is dead, and confederation of sovereign territories based upon nationalist/religious (and perhaps even ethnic) values is the only path forward to maximize American prosperity, it would be unwise to ignore the lessons of history. You point to slavery, I'll point to Yugoslavia; and the subsequent bloody conflicts that continues to reverberate throughout the Balkans. What you propose cannot be achieved without new borders drawn. The utopia you yearn for cannot be won without shedding blood, and a separation of people along ideological/political/social lines while nominally being equal has failed miserably in the past. I'm willing read any arguments you have in favor of it, but just saying "I dunno how it will work, but lets try it and see" doesn't exactly persuade me.


Digital Masta wrote: But at the end of the day, I just know that what we have now doesn't work and it's wrong and moving towards less top-down control is better...ALWAYS.
Don't look now, but you're taking the exact same lack of substance approach Gun control advocates employ after every mass shooting:

"The status quo doesn't work, we need to change things!!!"

"OK, but how?"

"I don't know, just fix it, DO SOMETHING!!!"

"That's not a proposal though...."

"I DON'T CARE, JUST DO SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!"
Digital Masta
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:56 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Digital Masta »

Cane_The9lives wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 11:49 am "It is better to debate a question without settling it, than to settle a question without debating it" - Joseph Joubert
Digital Masta wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 4:56 am See that's the thing, I don't need to have all the answers for how it will all work in order to advocate for moving more in that direction. It's like slavery, back then there were people saying.

"BUT WHO WILL PICK THE COTTON?!! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!" Because slavery was quite literally the way things worked for all of humankind up until it wasn't anymore.

The correct response to that was: "I don't know. But slavery is wrong so I don't care about who will pick it, I just know what we're doing now doesn't work and is a heinous immoral act."

And when you think about, let's say I did know how the cotton would be picked by basically telling people that we're gonna have giant metal machines that are powered by long-dead plant/animal juice and they will be able to do things at a faster and better rate than any human would ever be capable of, they would've thrown me into an insane asylum.

As a matter of fact, the long-dead plant/animal juice metal machines really only came about BECAUSE slavery was outlawed forcing people to come up with new and better ways to get things done because they couldn't rely on keeping other humans as property anymore.

So how will it all work out? I have no idea, but there are better people out there who have thought of possible ideas for a "free society".
If we are going refer to historical parallels that may or may not be comparable (Let alone applicable) as argument predicates, then I submit to you the following query : Have you considered the negative repercussions of your proposal in weighing its benefits and viability?

If what you say is true, and that you don't need to fully understand the finer points of how it will be enacted, what are the cons acting against it?
How could it all go wrong, and does the benefits outweigh the risks of complete implosion?

If Federalism is dead, and confederation of sovereign territories based upon nationalist/religious (and perhaps even ethnic) values is the only path forward to maximize American prosperity, it would be unwise to ignore the lessons of history. You point to slavery, I'll point to Yugoslavia; and the subsequent bloody conflicts that continues to reverberate throughout the Balkans. What you propose cannot be achieved without new borders drawn. The utopia you yearn for cannot be won without shedding blood, and a separation of people along ideological/political/social lines while nominally being equal has failed miserably in the past. I'm willing read any arguments you have in favor of it, but just saying "I dunno how it will work, but lets try it and see" doesn't exactly persuade me.
You left out the fact that Yugoslavia and that entire region was smashed into a giant Soviet block before being separated again after the fall of the USSR. That's not the exactly the same thing.

Also, why does everyone assume that when people like me say this it means that tomorrow where just gonna get rid of everything? Start with the federal government having less and less power and then move to start moving to smaller and smaller government from there. This is like a 100-year plan. It can go very wrong if this is taken lightly.

You're willing to read any arguments I give you but you're not willing to look them up yourself. Which means you aren't really that interested. Which is fine. But it's not my job to do it for you.

See, years ago, things I hadn't heard before crossed my path, I was curious so I began to look and listen to more about the subject and I gradually came to where I am now. This was years in the making for me.

Here's an article from Lew Rockwell.com and Lew has dedicated his whole life to this stuff so I'm sure there are plenty more articles you could read there. If you're interested Lew Rockwell's site can send you down a rabbit hole of Austrian Economic, libertarian/anarchist thinking.


This article is written by Stephan Molyneux and it is from WAY back in 2005. He also has two free books you can get in damn near every format available called Practical Anarchy and Everyday Anarchy. One is about the theory and the other is about how it could look in practice. Doesn't mean he's 100% right but people do think about this stuff.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2005/10/ste ... ernatives/

Don't look now, but you're taking the exact same lack of substance approach Gun control advocates employ after every mass shooting:

"The status quo doesn't work, we need to change things!!!"

"OK, but how?"

"I don't know, just fix it, DO SOMETHING!!!"

"That's not a proposal though...."

"I DON'T CARE, JUST DO SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!"
Not really sure how you square that circle but okay. Considering what they advocate for is the opposite of less top-down control. I think in terms of more guns...not less.
xandorxerxes
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:43 pm

Re: There we go

Post by xandorxerxes »

Digital Masta wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 4:56 amSee that's the thing, I don't need to have all the answers for how it will all work in order to advocate for moving more in that direction. It's like slavery, back then there were people saying.

But at the end of the day, I just know that what we have now doesn't work and it's wrong and moving towards less top-down control is better...ALWAYS.
Cane_The9lives wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 11:49 am If we are going refer to historical parallels that may or may not be comparable (Let alone applicable) as argument predicates, then I submit to you the following query : Have you considered the negative repercussions of your proposal in weighing its benefits and viability?
Essentially something to this effect, just on a personal level - I know the change is worse for me (and some others, see point 2), so changing to it isn't in my interests. To make it in my interests, at least some of those points would have to be addressed. The root of my issues is still just the divorcing of the public debate from reality, but I'd rather enable people to identify reality than stick all of the deniers into a different place. Yeah, I don't want them in my life if I can help it, but I also don't want people stuck and trapped to authoritarian whims at whatever government level. Smaller government levels also means more corruption, since it takes influencing a smaller number of people to reach the same ends. See: Tennessee municipal broadband and AT&T.
San Goku
Posts: 1979
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:41 am

Re: There we go

Post by San Goku »

Watched Top Gun last night and I was pretty impressed with the movie. Iconic movies like that doesn't always pan out when you bring it back 20+ years later, this worked out. Some intense battles and training drills.

Latest episode of The Boys was top notice. Enjoyed seeing Homelander taking some hard punches to the face.
San Goku
Posts: 1979
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:41 am

Re: There we go

Post by San Goku »

I learn some interesting things on the net. I had no idea about the Born Alive Bill (now an Act) and how the Democrats fought against it. The Born Alive Bill is if a baby survives a failed abortion you have to provide care.... We are talking about already out the womb kicking and screaming.

Seen a clip of Jr Senator Ben Sasse ripping the Dems.

Link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-con ... e-bill/619

Link: https://youtu.be/tMTJZMHRM6U
Cane_The9lives
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:15 pm

Re: There we go

Post by Cane_The9lives »

San Goku wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:04 am I learn some interesting things on the net. I had no idea about the Born Alive Bill (now an Act) and how the Democrats fought against it. The Born Alive Bill is if a baby survives a failed abortion you have to provide care.... We are talking about already out the womb kicking and screaming.

Seen a clip of Jr Senator Ben Sasse ripping the Dems.

Link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-con ... e-bill/619

Link: https://youtu.be/tMTJZMHRM6U
Far be it from me to play Devil's advocate for the Democrats, but their argument is worth considering.
Essentially they argued the bill was superfluous and overly punitive, and its wording so easily misconstrued that it placed an undue burden on health-care providers fearing non-stop lawsuits and prosecution, thus altering their level of care.

The bill was essentially a Redux of another Act( still in effect) passed over two decades ago that basically ensured the same rights to the fetus born alive after a failed abortion, and was almost literally named the exact same way : "Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002."

They argued it was unneeded and designed to attack Doctors for political gain, and not necessarily because they believed in infanticide, which of course was how it was spun. I hate Democrats, but I hate the malignant tumor of partisan spin even more.

I like Sasse, he's one of my favorite Senators, but he was hedging his bets to get the Dem's on record contesting the bill for political reasons.

FYI San it still hasn't passed into law. "Act" in this context is just a title, functionally it's still a bill.
San Goku
Posts: 1979
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:41 am

Re: There we go

Post by San Goku »

Cane_The9lives wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:26 pm
San Goku wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:04 am I learn some interesting things on the net. I had no idea about the Born Alive Bill (now an Act) and how the Democrats fought against it. The Born Alive Bill is if a baby survives a failed abortion you have to provide care.... We are talking about already out the womb kicking and screaming.

Seen a clip of Jr Senator Ben Sasse ripping the Dems.

Link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-con ... e-bill/619

Link: https://youtu.be/tMTJZMHRM6U
Far be it from me to play Devil's advocate for the Democrats, but their argument is worth considering.
Essentially they argued the bill was superfluous and overly punitive, and its wording so easily misconstrued that it placed an undue burden on health-care providers fearing non-stop lawsuits and prosecution, thus altering their level of care.

The bill was essentially a Redux of another Act( still in effect) passed over two decades ago that basically ensured the same rights to the fetus born alive after a failed abortion, and was almost literally named the exact same way : "Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002."

They argued it was unneeded and designed to attack Doctors for political gain, and not necessarily because they believed in infanticide, which of course was how it was spun. I hate Democrats, but I hate the malignant tumor of partisan spin even more.

I like Sasse, he's one of my favorite Senators, but he was hedging his bets to get the Dem's on record contesting the bill for political reasons.

FYI San it still hasn't passed into law. "Act" in this context is just a title, functionally it's still a bill.
Democrats 218 no 1 yes
Republicans 0 no 210 yes


I'll have to look into it more to see if it was just wording for the Bill not to pass, but I doubt that's the reason.

I wonder what the reason was for the 1 that was for it?

Okay still a Bill, thanks. So the Act cause it passed a certain point in the process of arguments and votes I assume.
Post Reply