All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[JackDaw]

Politely, you have to be looking at things from the wrong angle to look at that and think "Dodge..."

If I am lighting my neighbor's house on fire six nights a week?

"How many nights a week is acceptable for my neighbor to stand in my driveway?..." is the very last question that anyone should be asking.

Never mind me being the one who is asking it.

Another dodge!

I don’t know of any country in the world that doesn’t control immigration by some means or other.

There’s a ton of reasons for that…some bad (maybe most), some good.


In this world US and Western Europe has taken an unfair share of resources for hundreds of years (you’re self evidently right about tha)…no one can do anything about that.

So in this real world what immigration policy do you want your Democratic government to pursue?

(Would it be any different to one pursued by UK Conservative government? Basically to try to limit immigration to people with useful skill sets such as doctors, nurses, lorry drivers via a points system…flexing numbers as needs change.)

[numberthirty]

Another dodge!

I don’t know of any country in the world that doesn’t control immigration by some means or other.

There’s a ton of reasons for that…some bad (maybe most), some good.


In this world US and Western Europe has taken an unfair share of resources for hundreds of years (you’re self evidently right about tha)…no one can do anything about that.

So in this real world what immigration policy do you want your Democratic government to pursue?

(Would it be any different to one pursued by UK Conservative government? Basically to try to limit immigration to people with useful skill sets such as doctors, nurses, lorry drivers via a points system…flexing numbers as needs change.)

Again...

The only way to see that as some manner of "Dodge..." is to ignore the reality that is in front of us all.

Unless there is some sort of solid proof that Mexico is in the shape that it is in completely independent of the illegal drug market in the US.

Otherwise?

You are not in any position to realistically discuss what immigration policy should be.

(Never mind that the bulk of the folks who have come across/to the border recently are attempting to make an asylum claim. They are not simply immigrating. The very idea that what we are having is simply an immigration discussion is just nonsensical.)

[Mister Mets]

Typical hyperbolic conservative response. Do you think there might be something between what we have now an this?

Yes. I've been pretty clear about that, consistently supporting an increase in the amount of allowed legal immigration.

That said, I'm interested in what people's limiting principles are, because it's not evident in much of the discussion about the topic.

[Zauriel]

Andrew Yang no longer a Democrat, will launch third party

So Andrew Yang will launch a third party next month

If he is the one who will break the two-party system led by big money, then I will join his new party. Both parties suck and neither of them has done any meaningful changes to the country.

[Panfoot]

Disregarding the absolutely asinine statement about neither party doing any meaningful changes (hey maybe ask literally any minority group about that!), you know Yang is rich too right?

[PwrdOn]

Yes. I've been pretty clear about that, consistently supporting an increase in the amount of allowed legal immigration.

That said, I'm interested in what people's limiting principles are, because it's not evident in much of the discussion about the topic.

That's because deciding who gets into the country is kind of like deciding who gets into a nightclub, everyone kind of knows what kinds of people you do and don't want, but the rules are kept deliberately vague because explicitly laying them out makes you seem like prejudiced dickhead, and rightfully so.

[Tami]

Andrew Yang no longer a Democrat, will launch third party

So Andrew Yang will launch a third party next month

If he is the one who will break the two-party system led by big money, then I will join his new party. Both parties suck and neither of them has done any meaningful changes to the country.

Andrew Yang is Big Money. Or should say he was Big Money until he made most of it disappear one way or another.

Political Parties cost money, a lot of money. The timing of this announcement is interesting as it coincides with the publication of his new book (publicity stunt to boost book sales?)

Also where along the political spectrum would his part be? To the Left of Democrats? To the Right of Democrats (also known as Moderates)?

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Andrew Yang no longer a Democrat, will launch third party

So Andrew Yang will launch a third party next month

If he is the one who will break the two-party system led by big money, then I will join his new party. Both parties suck and neither of them has done any meaningful changes to the country.

So Yang, who, by the way, IS big money, wants to do what Trump threatened to do before Qpublicans knuckled under, satisfy his narcissism by launching a third party to serve no other purpose than to satisfy his need for attention. This charade promises to be nothing more than a waste of time, money and resources while breaking absolutely nothing in terms of the two party system.

[Zauriel]

Andrew Yang Criticizes Democratic Party, Says People Think They Care 'More About Policing Cultural Issues' Than Improving Lives

Disregarding the absolutely asinine statement about neither party doing any meaningful changes (hey maybe ask literally any minority group about that!), you know Yang is rich too right?

Last year the DNC platform committee voted AGAINST:

��Medicare for All
��Medicare for Kids
��Legalizing Cannabis
��Rejecting Corporate money
��Banning Corporate Lobbyists

No objective person can claim the Democrats serve the people. Just like the GOP, they serve the oligarchy.

Political Parties cost money, a lot of money. The timing of this announcement is interesting as it coincides with the publication of his new book (publicity stunt to boost book sales?)
?

Political parties also get money through donations and isn't it also all tax-free? Both the GOP and the Democratic Party have big and wealthy donors.

[Kirby101]

Ah, the old, if they aren't 100% Sanders progressive, they are the same as the GOP tripe.

[thwhtGuardian]

Andrew Yang no longer a Democrat, will launch third party

So Andrew Yang will launch a third party next month

If he is the one who will break the two-party system led by big money, then I will join his new party. Both parties suck and neither of them has done any meaningful changes to the country.

This complaint comes off as increasingly more and more naïve. On the one hand you have the republicans who actively pass laws curtailing the rights of women, minorities and LBGTQ people and on the other you have the democrats who support all those groups and do try to get laws past that protect them...but yeah, sure, both sides suck.

Does the Democratic party need to grow a pair and do more? Absolutely...but to equate them as the same as the Republicans is just objectively wrong.

[JackDaw]

Again...

The only way to see that as some manner of "Dodge..." is to ignore the reality that is in front of us all.

Unless there is some sort of solid proof that Mexico is in the shape that it is in completely independent of the illegal drug market in the US.

Otherwise?

You are not in any position to realistically discuss what immigration policy should be.

(Never mind that the bulk of the folks who have come across/to the border recently are attempting to make an asylum claim. They are not simply immigrating. The very idea that what we are having is simply an immigration discussion is just nonsensical.)

Lol, of course it’s a dodge if you continually refuse to answer a straightforward question.

Are you effectively saying you favour unlimited immigration/ unlimited asylum claims from Mexico until US illegal drug trade is sorted out?

I genuinely don’t know what your own position is.

[Zauriel]

So Yang, who, by the way, IS big money, wants to do what Trump threatened to do before Qpublicans knuckled under, satisfy his narcissism by launching a third party to serve no other purpose than to satisfy his need for attention. This charade promises to be nothing more than a waste of time, money and resources while breaking absolutely nothing in terms of the two party system.

So you think Andrew Yang's party will be probably disbanded before it starts? Are you going to also say "I'd be surprised if his party lasts a whole month."?

This complaint comes off as increasingly more and more naïve. On the one hand you have the republicans who actively pass laws curtailing the rights of women, minorities and LBGTQ people and on the other you have the democrats who support all those groups and do try to get laws past that protect them...but yeah, sure, both sides suck.

Does the Democratic party need to grow a pair and do more? Absolutely...but to equate them as the same as the Republicans is just objectively wrong.

Perhaps the one of the first things the Democrats need to do is kick Conservative members like Joe Manchin out of the party. Why are they bothering to keep him in the party membership ?

[numberthirty]

Lol, of course it’s a dodge if you continually refuse to answer a straightforward question.

Are you effectively saying you favour unlimited immigration/ unlimited asylum claims from Mexico until US illegal drug trade is sorted out?

I genuinely don’t know what your own position is.

More like...

"I'm not about to entertain this garbage about that I am being asked a straightforward question when I can pretty easily see that actual reality says that it is pretty obviously a complicated question..."

To put it about as simply as I can think to put it...

You just had to put a slash in there to include "Asylum..." Once you are actually finally starting to address actual reality but you are still asking "What should our immigration policy be?..."

The position is roughly...

"You are only talking about, at best, half of the equation. When you are actually ready to talk about the entire equation? Let's talk. Until then? I'm going to have to keep pointing out that you seemingly can't even grasp what the entire problem is.

We can't even start having a discussion about solving problems if you are going to ignore half of a problem while acting like you are taking things seriously..."

[Tendrin]

Andrew Yang wants to gut the welfare state to replace it with a UBI. If you care about any of the things you profess to care about you should pay more attention to his failed candidacy for Mayor and the things he said there. He has no future, is a bad politician, and will probably only help Republicans electorally.

As for masks in schools, I had wanted to post more but RL kept me busy for the last few days, but the answer remains: masks in schools are good. There are things that may need to be done to improve their effectiveness, and that's without getting into obfusacatory, supposed 'nuance', where all the things that might hamper mask effectiveness, such as poor ventilation and proximity, are simply signs that make them *more important* as a last line of defense, even if they are less effective than they could be. That is not the same as 'effectiveness unclear' as a defense of GOP policies, of course, such as someone on this board likes to indulge in in an effort to make them reasonable.

When you're on the same side as people screaming at school boards or trying to perform citizens arrests on school principals, it is probably best to reconsider your stance.