Page 160 of 186 FirstFirst ... 60110150158159160161162170 ... LastLast
Results 1,591 to 1,600 of 1859

Thread: OT: Politics

  1. #1591
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,919
    It will certainly be interesting to see which direction Afghanistan, Syria, and Turkey go. Just really hoping nobody resorts to genocide.

  2. #1592
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,919
    Can't stop himself from lying, it's a compulsion

    Nafta Promise: The U.S. still hasn?t lifted metals tariffs on Canada and Mexico
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-...d=hp_opin_pos1

  3. #1593
    i wonder the craziness this thread would hit with irony and josh over trump's lie that he raised pay by more than 10%.

    https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/trump...h21Yt-JLZn7h8g

    watching otherwise seemingly rational humans debase themselves defending trump's lies was the turning point in a couple relationships of mine. as much as josh and others will accuse me of being a partisan about things, its not actually political disagreement that drives me to fundamentally not respect another person's faculties. its actually rejecting reality itself that causes it. this statement by trump is totally and completely, false. like so many before it. its simply untrue. and its not a political disagreement. its just reality.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 12-27-2018 at 11:44 AM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  4. #1594
    triggering the libs by pwning the SEALs: https://mavenroundtable.io/theintell...e%20Enthusiast
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  5. #1595
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,919
    Oh hey look, the investigation into the FBI was political theater to undermine Mueller.

    https://www.newsweek.com/republican-...-1274485?amp=1

  6. #1596
    Insider
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,173
    Something Steve and I have discussed - very cool that the data here is that it's a negative cost program (much like the wall and trump tax cut)

    https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/...quebec/579193/
    "So you've done this before?"
    "Oh, hell no. But I think it's gonna work."

  7. #1597
    Quote Originally Posted by Lurker27 View Post
    Something Steve and I have discussed - very cool that the data here is that it's a negative cost program (much like the wall and trump tax cut) LOL!!!

    https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/...quebec/579193/
    this is a good way to address the birthrate issues 1st world countries have. people (including me) are making a very rational choice, because we are the first or second generation of humans who realistically get the choice, to not have children. and economics, and opportunity costs are a leading reason. a very real IMO solution to the fermi paradox is that if we stick with a pure capitalist system, and having children is so economically punished, then the birthrate will continue to drop to well below replacement rates.

    we need to find ways of offsetting the costs to the parents, both real dollars, and opportunity costs, if we want humans to make different decisions than they are now.

    most traditionalists (like the gender conversations we've had before) want to try and force us to have children. either by restricting access to birth-control/sterilization, or stigmatizing and guilt tripping and brainwashing children that they must too have children, or any combination of those things. but that doesn't work, and really just results in a bunch of shitty parents, the result of which is shitty children, which make shitty adults. id be happy to have children, if it didn't put me 250k and 20 years behind where i want to be. that is possible, but not with modern economics and modern nuclear family models. i think being more accepting of multi-adult, multi-generational households would help considerably as well. grand parents taking on the children, other, non-parent adults helping with the house etc etc.

    but you know capitalism, why do things for free within a community utilizing humans in the most efficient way, when we can create a profit motive, and middle man the fuck out of the system until its un-sustainable?
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 01-02-2019 at 11:35 AM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  8. #1598
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,919
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    this is a good way to address the birthrate issues 1st world countries have. people (including me) are making a very rational choice, because we are the first or second generation of humans who realistically get the choice, to not have children. and economics, and opportunity costs are a leading reason. a very real IMO solution to the fermi paradox is that if we stick with a pure capitalist system, and having children is so economically punished, then the birthrate will continue to drop to well below replacement rates.
    I don't see why that's a bad thing.

  9. #1599
    Insider Unfated33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    766
    It depends on what your goals are. For those that want to continue to operate in a growth model of economics, dropping birthrates is a substantial danger to you. Generation Y saved the Baby Boomers, as they were absolutely freaking out from 2000 to 2010 when there weren't enough Gen Xers to move up into senior staff positions all across the economy.

    I think finding an economic system that works even when there is no growth is essential.

  10. #1600
    Quote Originally Posted by PBSteve View Post
    I don't see why that's a bad thing.
    slowing birthrates, a-ok.

    but i would be, and am concerned with non-replacement birth rates.

    the simple fact, is that in modern first world countries, even with the current levels of family planning access (ie, fairly restricted), the birthrates are not high enough to sustain the population. population growth is then from non-fist world countries, and as soon as family planning access becomes better there, they too will drop to non-sustainable population birth rates. under our current economic and social structure, when given the choice to have children or not, people are choosing not to. that means we need to change the economic and social structure, if we want to sustain the population.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •