All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[Tami]

Nancy Pelosi: "Disinfectant in the body. You know what they call that? They call that embalming, that's the medical term."

Twitter Link with Video

[Tami]

Rebellious Louisiana pastor Tony Spell placed on house arrest after failing to promise he’ll follow coronavirus guidelines

Tony Spell, the rebellious Louisiana pastor who has continued to hold massive church services despite coronavirus guidelines, is now under house arrest.

A lawyer for Spell told NBC News that the pastor was fitted for an ankle bracelet after he failed to ensure that he’d follow social distancing protocol.

[jetengine]

In America the whole welfare queen stereotype developed because of an organized propaganda campaign to dismantle social safety nets because they knew that whites would be disgusted at the notion of their tax dollars going to support anyone who wasn't white. If Britain or any other European country had had the same kind of racial demographics that the US did at the time, the same kind of argument could have been deployed to dismantle your welfare systems. Indeed this is sort of what we are seeing now as more and more immigrants and refugees enter the continent, and all of a sudden the same people who loved to talk down to Americans about how we don't look after each other are all of a sudden not so keen on the idea.

The development of a large underclass in the UK and other rich countries shouldn't be a surprised to anyone, now that nearly all of the low skilled work has been farmed out to cheaper labor markets there isn't really much that these people can contribute. And it's not so easy for these people to climb the social ladder either, because there are often far more qualified candidates from overseas to compete against for those higher paying jobs, and shutting them out by favoring local hires typically makes your companies less competitive.

The government can easily create work for them. It chooses not to. Remember Pwrd this is the same government that thinks foodbanks are a great idea and that Austerity works.

[Mister Mets]

Charity is kinda shitty tbh.
Why should people have to wait and suffer, just for donations from the rich or mass donations from the struggling poor ? I'd much prefer taxation to be used accurately and correctly with the money regularly going to help people rather then wasted on flim flam or ignored because of tax avoidance/loopholes when if any government REALLY wanted it they could just take it back.

ONE YEAR of Amazons taxes here in the UK could pay our entire NHS Cost.

It shouldn't be a substitute for the things taxes should handle, but charity makes sense in many situations.

There are times when outcomes are positive, but you wouldn't want the government selecting beneficiaries.

Charitable organizations often have local knowledge and established ties to a community.

A new organization could overcome the blind spots that would be inevitable if the government were the only one handling things.

1. Hard to give time to charity when working two or more jobs.
2. Easy to give money when you’ve got a lot of money.
3. Easy to donate blood when you’re not discriminated against.

If conservatives feel so good about being parted from their money why are they so against tax increases for the wealthy when those funds could be used to keep people alive and teach people to read?

The conservatives who get involved in charity don't want their taxes going to things that they believe to be a waste of money.

You can't really pick and choose where your taxes go.

Having worked with people in that situation, there is often a psychological phenomenon known as "learned helplessness" at play. The symptoms are very much like depression. It is usually caused by trying and trying and not getting any kind of reward.

The policy implications on this are tough, as it's something that should be considered when allocating funds (not as an argument against welfare, but as something that should be taken into account when trying to help people.)

No, I don't think a thousand a week is a bad salary. What's the point your making? I'm confused.

You said "If $600 a week (plus, ya know, your initial couple hundred depending on your states amount) is more than you were making while fucking working, maybe it's a bad system you were working in!" which suggests someone getting paid a thousand dollars is in a bad system.

[Mister Mets]

So another "slippery slope" argument then -- should have expected as much given past exchanges.



Reagan used to just call them "welfare queens" by the way -- this of course was to attack both "socialism" and black people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen

I was discussing a general idea in response to a perspective on conservative tropes and whether work is essential.

I'm not sure where the slippery slope comes in.

In both vote and party, you do.

That's your business of course but if you're going to make comments about African-Americans and things like the Coronavirus make sure you also include -- or at least don't try to dodge -- the fact that your party does everything in it's power to make sure that black people have little say in addressing these problems via elected representatives, up to and including illegally changing their votes during elections.

This would be a far more equitable country if your party didn't routinely suppress African-American and Latino voters to achieve it's goals.

Trump likely wouldn't even be president -- this is what happens when you turn a blind eye to the racist base that your party is built upon.

You can't sit here and pretend that addressing racism and bigotry in your party is a direct attack on you unless you agree with said bigotry.

Instead of addressing said bigotry (and you still haven't) you spent nearly ten pages trying to make it about me rather than your party's behavior.

What have I said about African-Americans and Coronavirus that you disagree with?

On the ad hominem thing, I don't think I was discussing you. I was discussing a particular argumentative approach you were implementing in a post and then follow-up posts. I still maintain that, but my comments were about what you were saying at that time.

I haven't been talking about the Republican party's behavior, because it wasn't germane to the post you were responding to. To do so would also encourage ad hominems in the future.

"You can't sit here and pretend that addressing racism and bigotry in your party is a direct attack on you unless you agree with said bigotry." is an odd comment to unpack. You seem to claim is that something can't be an ad hominem if it isn't a personal attack, which is pure semantics. The binary you pose requires one to accept your premise. I don't believe your view of the Republican party is accurate, but I certainly don't agree with the bigoted views you associate with it.

Do you believe the Republican Party in general suppresses or attempts to suppress the votes of African-American citizens?

In general, no.

[Malvolio]

It’s pretty much a slam dunk certainly Trump will turn that commencement into a campaign rally because he’s been dying to have one for weeks now. It doesn’t matter half a damn to him that those cadets risk getting infected or turning West Point into one huge Petri dish, and if what I heard was even half true that Trump won’t let anyone wear masks at the ceremony, then he’ll risk a disaster for the sake of his ego.

Yet Trump and other Republicans are always talking about how much they support the military.

[Kirby101]

And maybe corporations who got the biggest tax break in history and then used it for stock buy backs, and then getting trillions in bailouts is a bad fucking system. But lets attack suffering working people, shall we?

[Joker]

You said "If $600 a week (plus, ya know, your initial couple hundred depending on your states amount) is more than you were making while fucking working, maybe it's a bad system you were working in!" which suggests someone getting paid a thousand dollars is in a bad system.

Nope. It doesn't. I don't know if I didn't articulate properly ( I have no trouble understanding me, but I wrote it) or you're missing my point?

I'm suggesting that just maybe the working class have been in a bad system for a long time. Maybe if 1K a week is so much better than what you were earning working, it's abad system. Maybe we should be paying people better, because when the lowly working class stopped working, the companies of billionaires fucking dissolved like ice in an Arizona summer and the entire economy collapsed.

Maybe we should pay these people more so they'll be happy to return to work. And because, you know, as demonstrated by the last couple months THEY ARE VITAL.

[Kirby101]

Minimum wage, adjusted for inflation from the 70s, should be around $700 a week.

[TheDarman]

-There is far more evidence suggesting that Biden sexually assaulted Tara Reade than there ever was that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Blasey-Ford. It'd probably be hilarious to go back and hold the people here to the same standards they applied back in 2018 but I am far too lazy to do so.

Are you also too lazy to look at the facts, because you are playing fast and loose with them. There is not “far more evidence”. Indeed, there is far more contrarian evidence being presented that Reade isn’t telling the truth than Ford. Ford took a polygraph and was dragged out to testify as a result of a leaked document. Reade was, in her own words, waiting for the right time. Need proof of that? Here:

3CDA938A-FF14-4615-A94C-9ED1EE6D53BF.jpg

The issue with Kavanaugh’s case was the lack of evidence on either side of the argument. It is exceedingly difficult to disprove a negative, especially when Ford couldn’t yield an exact date in 1982. However, that’s why most people on this board were looking for a deep dive into the allegations and a thorough investigation before pushing a guy like Kavanaugh through. Instead, Kavanaugh reacted entitled to the position, threw a tantrum, and engaged in impeachable conduct for a judge by engaging in blatantly partisan rhetoric.

Meanwhile, the video being shared around with Larry King doesn’t match what Reade says her mom said to King nor does it seem like the demeanor of a woman who learned her daughter had been assaulted by a “prominent senator”. She even said nothing was said out of “respect” for the senator. Who respects someone who sexually assaulted their daughter?

Reade can’t nail down the location of the assault, changing the story of where it happened multiple times depending on the outlet. She had already come out once before to accuse Biden of harassment (though, back then, she said it never amounted to “sexual” behavior). So, she was either lying then or lying now. At least Ford was consistent, though had a fairly fuzzy recollection of events that made it more difficult to investigate.

This isn’t to mention the litany of problems with the story itself. Why was a staffer not wearing appropriate attire? Why would Biden have done this in a semi-public hallway during a time of heightened scrutiny for harassment and assault? Why can no one find records filed with the Senate directly (not Biden’s office)? Why weren’t these things uncovered by Obama’s vetting team, who were very thorough in doing background checks? Why would Reade have said last year that she had hoped “Biden had changed” since he was a senator (monsters who rape people aren’t redeemable)? Why would she have put out supportive tweets of Biden as late as 2017, 24 years after the alleged assault? Why would timing have played a part other than to deny Biden consolidation of support against her preferred candidate?

[emac1790]

I haven't posted in along time, but this video puts what I've been saying about the American system for years.

[PaulBullion]

So, is Trump having a major meltdown, or is he tweeting silly stuff with bad spelling (Hambergers, Noble Prize for Journalists) on purpose in hopes it will change the conversation from his advice to inject Purell?

[Tami]

So, is Trump having a major meltdown, or is he tweeting silly stuff with bad spelling (Hambergers, Noble Prize for Journalists) on purpose in hopes it will change the conversation from his advice to inject Purell?

He just wants attention, and he is looking for it in the most annoying way.

[Gray Lensman]

He just wants attention, and he is looking for it in the most annoying way.

I can't imagine Trump not having long press conferences for more than 3 days - otherwise his withdrawals will cause him to do anything at all for another attention fix, and social distancing guidelines prevent him from having rallies.

[A Small Talent For War]

Nope. It doesn't. I don't know if I didn't articulate properly ( I have no trouble understanding me, but I wrote it) or you're missing my point?

I'm suggesting that just maybe the working class have been in a bad system for a long time. Maybe if 1K a week is so much better than what you were earning working, it's abad system. Maybe we should be paying people better, because when the lowly working class stopped working, the companies of billionaires fucking dissolved like ice in an Arizona summer and the entire economy collapsed.

Maybe we should pay these people more so they'll be happy to return to work. And because, you know, as demonstrated by the last couple months THEY ARE VITAL.

That's an interesting point I hadn't considered.

There is the obvious conspiracy theory that this Covid19 pandemic is being used as an opportunity to condition the world's population to act against their own interests. The reasoning being that the Climate Change/Global Warming scare wasn't enough to get people to give away their individual rights, so let's see if we can take something that is "no worse than the flu" to get them to basically freeze in place on command.

That is ridiculous, but what I can see happening is that the middle class and working class are now globally prepared for organizing mass national labor strikes to protest abuses of state power and economic inequities. Those have been effective in countries where they were previously common, but now this is like a global labor strike drill for everyone to use again whenever our governments decide to appease minority interests at the cost of the majority.

"You want us to go back to work? Okay, give us a national mandatory income and health care plan irrespective of employment first."