US Politics Thread |OT| SAD TRUMP

[Mandark]

nah bro tell us about the sunspots

[Nola]

I don't have a problem with the science. I have a problem with applying incomplete science to push governmental policy. Policy which effects billions of people. 

Back in the early 2000's, the UK switched over to diesel engines in an effort to curb Co2 output, now London is choking under smog advisories and people are breathing in more particulates than ever.   In the US, our dalliance with alternative fuels (ethanol) has largely been a waste and now is near impossible to undo (because lobbies have formed to keep it in place).

I'm all for science driving policy once the modeling becomes airtight. Until then, I'll always be around to bring up these doomsday predictions as each year passes. These people that make them need to be held accountable.

They are forecasts, air tight is not possible.

But the underlying science is about as air tight as you can get. Ever increasing temperatures and CO2 concentrations are going to cause dislocation, rising sea levels, ocean acidification, and large amounts of foreseeable economic harm. What the time table for that harm isn't going to be perfect, but it seems pretty identifiable what many of those harms will be. And we are already seeing many of those harms now.

You don't need perfect forecast models to know that the underlying science should be addressed by simple economic mechanisms like a carbon tax or cap and trade system, shift subsidization toward more sustainable, greener energy, and move away from the fuel sources that no matter the time table, will produce far more long-term economic harm than they are generating in short-term productivity and economic benefits.

[ToxicAdam]

That's where we won't see eye to eye then. If the science is airtight, then the modeling should be also. Otherwise it's just GIGO.

It wasn't until less than a decade ago when they even began to start understanding how aersolization impacted climate. They still can't model clouds correctly. Every 8 years they keep adjusting the impact of co2 forcing  and they still don't have a solid number on that.

So, I don't really waste my time listening to people that push Co2 mitigation as an answer, when we have real environmental problems with particulates and land use. That's where the focus should be and it upsets me to see so much time and effort wasted.

[Nola]

That's where we won't see eye to eye then. If the science is airtight, then the modeling should be also. Otherwise it's just GIGO.

It wasn't until less than a decade ago when they even began to start understanding how aersolization impacted climate. They still can't model clouds correctly. Every 8 years they keep adjusting the impact of co2 forcing  and they still don't have a solid number on that.

So, I don't really waste my time listening to people that push Co2 mitigation as an answer, when we have real environmental problems with particulates and land use. That's where the focus should be and it upsets me to see so much time and effort wasted.

What about the underlying science do you contest? It sorta sounds like more weather vs climate confusion.

I also don't know whether the stock market will be up or down this day three weeks from now. However, I do know that corporations strive to maximize profit and strive to boost earnings year over year. So in the long-run, it is a fairly safe assumption to conclude that stock markets will go up. Same goes with climate vs weather.

We know that increasing the amount of GHG's in an atmosphere is going to raise the surface temperature of a planet and like with CO2, slowly acidify the ocean, which will affect sea life and corals, harming ecosystems. Just because we can't give a day and date that we will hit X temperature increase and the day and date all of the Great Barrier Reef will bleach, doesn't discredit the underlying science. Just because we find out more about how some chemical affects the atmosphere doesn't change what burning fossil fuels does in terms of intensifying the greenhouse effect. Your logic is baffling me.

[team filler]

ToxicAdam indeed 

[Mandark]

tell us about the cosmic rays

[ToxicAdam]

That's where we won't see eye to eye then. If the science is airtight, then the modeling should be also. Otherwise it's just GIGO.

It wasn't until less than a decade ago when they even began to start understanding how aersolization impacted climate. They still can't model clouds correctly. Every 8 years they keep adjusting the impact of co2 forcing  and they still don't have a solid number on that.

So, I don't really waste my time listening to people that push Co2 mitigation as an answer, when we have real environmental problems with particulates and land use. That's where the focus should be and it upsets me to see so much time and effort wasted.

What about the

I made it all pretty clear. Focus needs to be put on eliminating particulate pollution and managing land use instead of co2.

 

[Mandark]

GET ME PICTURES OF THE MAUNDER MINIMUM

[ToxicAdam]

The gif was a great touch.

[Mandark]

Seriously though, are you off that solar thing now?

[ToxicAdam]

It's probably something I said in the past as an aside. I don't remember embracing it as a core belief or creating threads about it.

Usually if I knew something triggered people, i would run  with it even if I didn't buy into it.

[seagrams hotsauce]

It's probably something I said in the past as an aside. I don't remember embracing it as a core belief or creating threads about it.

Usually if I knew something triggered people, i would run  with it even if I didn't buy into it.

what a cool and respectable way of forming opinions

[ToxicAdam]

I mean there was a reason I was banned 20+ times and permabanned 3 times @ gaf. It wasn't due to a lack of effort.

[Human Snorenado]

No one has ever questioned your commitment to Sparkle Motion, TA.

[Kara]

https://twitter.com/BoozyBarrister/status/944288057871695873

It rules that this is on the same page as a bunch of unchallenged shitposts about George "responsible for possibly 1 million unnecessary deaths (wow)" Bush II not being that bad.

[Mandark]

It rules that this is on the same page as a bunch of unchallenged shitposts about George "responsible for possibly 1 million unnecessary deaths (wow)" Bush II not being that bad.

http://www.thebore.com/forum/index.php?topic=44608.msg2356651#msg2356651

[kingv]

I’d still take Bush over Trump.

Trump hasn’t killed a bunch of innocent people yet, but if that is literally the metric we are using, then trump is arguably better than obama, or at least no worse.

Or maybe not, supposedly he’s already killed more civilians in ISIS air strikes than Obama did in three years.

People that think Trump is better than Bush are dumb unimaginative people that don’t see how bad things can get under an incredible moron who’s much dumber, less compassionate, and lacks understanding of world events even more so than Bush II.

He has shown every willingness to repeat every war crime that Bush II did, and then exceed them. He just hasn’t yet been given the opportunity.

[El Babua]

Trump is a psyop designed for us to accept war profiteers in the future as long as they seem nice 

[kingv]

I never said I thought Bush was a good President, just that he was a better one than I think trump will end up being looking back a few years from now.

[Phoenix Dark]

Yea Trump is pretty bad but until he starts a war based on faulty evidence which results in millions dead/trillions of dollars redistributed to military industrial complex lost he's not #1 on that list.

Hopefully all this revisionism and "enemies becoming e-friends" shit is just the prelude to inviting David Frum, Bill Kristol, etc to a Red Wedding type event.

[Mandark]

I appreciate that Trump could and would do worse things than he has so far, given the chance.

But it's not like we saw the worst case from Bush either. Dude was absolutely ready to invade Iran and gut Social Security.

[kingv]

Shit, Obama got a lot closer to gutting Social Security than Bush ever did.

The only thing that saved us from benefit cuts and chained-CPI was Republican incompetence and liberal opposition.

Bush’s idea never even got past the “I’m going to give some speeches on this” stage and getting shitcanned as an idea by Congress within 6 months of his 2nd term.

That’s when the wool came off of my eyes on Obama. When push came to shove he was more than willing to screw American retirees.

Again, let’s give Trump another year to adress “the welfare” because his first budget made Bush II look like FDR.

[Joe Molotov]

Trump is a psyop designed for us to accept war profiteers in the future as long as they seem nice 

At least no one ever talks about how they'd like to have a beer with Trump. 

[kingv]

When push came to shove he was more than willing to screw American retirees.

Obama?

Barack "spread the wealth around" Obama?

(Image removed from quote.)

Perhaps you don’t remember the cat food commission and Obama wholeheartedly offering up the recommendations in return for... keeping the government open and raising the debt ceiling.

The Dw-Nominate rankings have Obama as the most moderate Democratic President since at least Truman. Obama as incredibly liberal is basically a myth. Heck his biggest accomplishment was a moderate Republican position up until about the moment a Democratic Congress passed it. He’s not right wing, but he’s as close to dead center as we have gotten in at least 70 years.

[Mandark]

nah

[Syph]

emailgate 2.0 just getting started

[chronovore]

Trump is a psyop designed for us to accept war profiteers in the future as long as they seem nice 

But Trump doesn't seem at all nice.

[kingv]

So it seems Papadopoulos knew the Russians had Hillary’s emails two months before Wikileaks released them...

[Assimilate]

Being in a second/third rate country (a country in south america) right now has honestly changed my political views a bit. I've definitely become more conservative. I've always voted democrat, and at one point when i was younger would consider myself a progressive.

That's all but gone. I won't vote for the current republican system in the U.S, definitely not, but when a capable conservative makes an appearance and the current crop of Democrats are what they are now i may just flip over.

Watching leftist, progressive policies balloon in some of these latin countries has shown me how bad it can get. If you don't have centrists running the country there's always going to be a problem.

[Nola]

Authoritarianism and failed states is not really unique to one ideology. 

[Assimilate]

leftist progressive policies can indeed wreak havoc on a nation

just look at norway, sweden, the netherlands etc

oh wait (Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Dufus, very fitting.

Those countries are small, not racially diverse, never were racially diverse, and have been in lock step for centuries. It's easy to steer the ship in those situations.

Culture makes a big difference, and when a bigger country has many different types of cultures within, it becomes a lot more complex to navigate policy. You also have the very tricky topic of genetics, which play a huge role as well. I hate when people try to throw in the scandinavian countries into the discussion. They're nothing like a massive country as a Brazil.

[Madrun Badrun]

Canada says hello.

[Assimilate]

Canada says hello.

Right.

You mean a population the size of California? Are you all fucking distinguished mentally-challenged?

 

[Nola]

leftist progressive policies can indeed wreak havoc on a nation

just look at norway, sweden, the netherlands etc

oh wait (Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Dufus, very fitting.

Those countries are small, not racially diverse, never were racially diverse, and have been in lock step for centuries. It's easy to steer the ship in those situations.

Culture makes a big difference, and when a bigger country has many different types of cultures within, it becomes a lot more complex to navigate policy. You also have the very tricky topic of genetics, which play a huge role as well. I hate when people try to throw in the scandinavian countries into the discussion. They're nothing like a massive country as a Brazil.

The best rationale I have managed to come up with for this talking point is that as countries get more diverse, often following the hitting of economic rough patches, the predominant race or religion tends to channel their racism and xenophobia through a shifting view of social safety nets as handouts to the undeserving poor(I.E. the brown people or minority groups they begin to hate) or policies that seek to remove the undesirables. Which is why achieving needed social safety net expansion becomes more difficult in places like America. The ironic component is that, like in America and Europe, that seems to give rise to right-wing authoritarianism. But because of your exclusive focus on your experience in Latin America(I assume not in a place like Chile living in the aftermath of Pinochet), you seem to be priming the pump and developing a major blind spot to those sort of avenues authoritarianism grips hold as well.

[Assimilate]

leftist progressive policies can indeed wreak havoc on a nation

just look at norway, sweden, the netherlands etc

oh wait (Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Dufus, very fitting.

Those countries are small, not racially diverse, never were racially diverse, and have been in lock step for centuries. It's easy to steer the ship in those situations.

Culture makes a big difference, and when a bigger country has many different types of cultures within, it becomes a lot more complex to navigate policy. You also have the very tricky topic of genetics, which play a huge role as well. I hate when people try to throw in the scandinavian countries into the discussion. They're nothing like a massive country as a Brazil.

The best rationale I have managed to come up with for this talking point is that as countries get more diverse, often following the hitting of economic rough patches, the predominant race or religion tends to channel their racism and xenophobia through a shifting view of social safety nets as handouts to the undeserving poor(I.E. the brown people or minority groups they begin to hate) or policies that seek to remove the undesirables. Which is why achieving needed social safety net expansion becomes more difficult in places like America. The ironic component is that, like in America and Europe, that seems to give rise to right-wing authoritarianism. But because of your exclusive focus on your experience in Latin America(I assume not in a place like Chile living in the aftermath of Pinochet), you seem to be priming the pump and developing a major blind spot to those sort of avenues authoritarianism grips hold as well.

I'm really not talking about authoritarianism though. I'm talking about aggressive leftist policies that although have good intentions don't manifest in the ways naive progressives think they will. It's not sensible to think that everything is racism and oppression. Yes, there's definitely a component of that but i'd have to argue that it's not as strong as some make it out to be.

And on your point of social safety nets. I definitely believe in it, no question. However, if you come to certain latin american countries and see how fast the underprivileged will mobilize in a location, take up prime real estate, and then refuse to pay for basic utilities and electricity while continuing to reproduce at alarming rates... it's mind boggling.

Who foots the bill for this electricity? The societies middle class that ends up with astronomical electricity and utility bills. Some will then come out and say "well, you don't provide the proper means for abortion and population control" right because you'll get corrupt wide eyed politicians coming in targeting these population sections for votes. And in a country like Brazil where voting is mandatory... you get the idea.

[Nola]

I'm really not talking about authoritarianism though. I'm talking about aggressive leftist policies that although have good intentions don't manifest in the ways naive progressives think they will. It's not sensible to think that everything is racism and oppression. Yes, there's definitely a component of that but i'd have to argue that it's not as strong as some make it out to be.

And on your point of social safety nets. I definitely believe in it, no question. However, if you come to certain latin american countries and see how fast the underprivileged will mobilize in a location, take up prime real estate, and then refuse to pay for basic utilities and electricity while continuing to reproduce at alarming rates... it's mind boggling.

Who foots the bill for this electricity? The societies middle class that ends up with astronomical electricity and utility bills. Some will then come out and say "well, you don't provide the proper means for abortion and population control" right because you'll get corrupt wide eyed politicians coming in targeting these population sections for votes. And in a country like Brazil where voting is mandatory... you get the idea.

Then what are you talking about? Because you seem to be all over the map and not making much of a coherent argument other than "I identify X thing I don't like as a left-wing issue, therefore I am going to broad brush and correct for that by blindly throwing my lot into the conservative wing without any similar scrutinizing process."

Because as people have pointed out numerous times already, and America itself validates that viewpoint as well, plenty of left-wing ideas as you would seem to classify them are a major reason for the ongoing economic stability and opportunities almost all of the western world benefits from. Corruption and perversion of ideals that lead to failed states or unintended consequences aren't really unique to one broad ideological bloc.

If you are talking about things like actual Communism or Marxist-Leninism, yeah, its not been a very workable way to organize a society based on the evidence, neither has libertarianism through military dictatorship, or gilded-age style capitalism. But centrism as America would define it, seems to be advocacy for a form of stasis in what by most accounts have been failed or broken policies in terms of economic regulations, social safety nets, social justice, political institutional decay, criminal justice, and environmental problems. And I guess in my mind I am struggling to see how a John Kasich or some American centrist that is continually shifting thanks to an increasingly authoritarian conservative party is the answer to those issues?

[Mandark]

You also have the very tricky topic of genetics, which play a huge role as well.

Elaborate, please.

[Assimilate]

Because as people have pointed out numerous times already, and America itself validates that viewpoint as well, plenty of left-wing ideas as you would seem to classify them are a major reason for the ongoing economic stability and opportunities almost all of the western world benefits from.

There are left-wing ideas that have contributed, as much as there are right-wing ideas that have.

Which ones do you speak of specifically that have been pointed out? I don't want to go looking through the thread but i'm interested to know.

You also have the very tricky topic of genetics, which play a huge role as well.

Elaborate, please.

Some people are predispositioned to be smarter than others, as there are segments of the population that are naturally more athletic.

[Oblivion]

You also have the very tricky topic of genetics, which play a huge role as well.

I like where this is going.

[CatsCatsCats]

So Scandinavians get health care because of their superior genetics? Seems legit

[kingv]

Because as people have pointed out numerous times already, and America itself validates that viewpoint as well, plenty of left-wing ideas as you would seem to classify them are a major reason for the ongoing economic stability and opportunities almost all of the western world benefits from.

There are left-wing ideas that have contributed, as much as there are right-wing ideas that have.

Which ones do you speak of specifically that have been pointed out? I don't want to go looking through the thread but i'm interested to know.

You also have the very tricky topic of genetics, which play a huge role as well.

Elaborate, please.

Some people are predispositioned to be smarter than others, as there are segments of the population that are naturally more athletic.

I would guess that this is almost guaranteed to be true, that genetics play some role in the shape of the bell curve for various races, but I don’t think anyone really has a great understanding of how it breaks down and in no case do I think it’s really substantiated that it’s a particularly big driver of say the average educational achievement of various races. Socioeconomic factors are much more important.

[Assimilate]

Socioeconomic factors are much more important.

So when exactly did socioeconomic factors start playing the bigger part? How many thousands of years ago?

[Mandark]

So Scandinavians get health care because of their superior genetics? Seems legit

Brazilian DNA isn't advanced enough to cope with social democracy, but those dummies would flourish in a modern market economy.

[kingv]

Socioeconomic factors are much more important.

So when exactly did socioeconomic factors start playing the bigger part? How many thousands of years ago?

What we can say is that the average IQ has went up like 12-14% in the US over the last 50 years and that when a poor kid is adopted by a rich family their IQ increases like in the 15-20 pt range.

Maybe this is because IQ is an imperfect measurement, that partially, but unintentionally, reflects the idea of intelligence that the probably relatively affluent people that designed the test.

But for sure, the American population has not gotten like 10-12% more intelligent in 50 years based off of any changes in genetics, and that a kids intelligence isn’t changing because of genetics after an adoption.

[Assimilate]

Socioeconomic factors are much more important.

So when exactly did socioeconomic factors start playing the bigger part? How many thousands of years ago?

What we can say is that the average IQ has went up like 12-14% in the US over the last 50 years and that when a poor kid is adopted by a rich family their IQ increases like in the 15-20 pt range.

Maybe this is because IQ is an imperfect measurement, that partially, but unintentionally, reflects the idea of intelligence that the probably relatively affluent people that designed the test.

But for sure, the American population has not gotten like 10-12% more intelligent in 50 years based off of any changes in genetics, and that a kids intelligence isn’t changing because of genetics after an adoption.

And yet IQ has been a great indicator of a person's overall aptitude. 

Base level IQ has gone up for everyone. The adoption statistics did show an increase, but nothing astonishing. It did not strengthen the socioeconomic argument at all.

[Mandark]

"It's not sensible to think that everything is racism and oppression."

However, also, some races are genetically inferior and that's why we can't have egalitarian societies.

[Assimilate]

However, also, some races are genetically inferior and that's why we can't have egalitarian societies.

You're taking it somewhere i'm not but that's typical for someone to do that.

[Mandark]

I think it's a pretty fair reading of what you've said on this page.

[curly]

Listen if history has taught us anything it's that the latins need a strong caudillo hand to govern them

[thehunter116]

Because as people have pointed out numerous times already, and America itself validates that viewpoint as well, plenty of left-wing ideas as you would seem to classify them are a major reason for the ongoing economic stability and opportunities almost all of the western world benefits from.

There are left-wing ideas that have contributed, as much as there are right-wing ideas that have.

Which ones do you speak of specifically that have been pointed out? I don't want to go looking through the thread but i'm interested to know.

You also have the very tricky topic of genetics, which play a huge role as well.

Elaborate, please.

Some people are predispositioned to be smarter than others, as there are segments of the population that are naturally more athletic.

EUGENICS HO!

[seagrams hotsauce]

Fwiw assimilate, it doesn't really make a difference where you fall on the political spectrum since you're a total dipshit anyway

[Unbounded]

Socioeconomic factors are much more important.

So when exactly did socioeconomic factors start playing the bigger part? How many thousands of years ago?

What we can say is that the average IQ has went up like 12-14% in the US over the last 50 years and that when a poor kid is adopted by a rich family their IQ increases like in the 15-20 pt range.

Maybe this is because IQ is an imperfect measurement, that partially, but unintentionally, reflects the idea of intelligence that the probably relatively affluent people that designed the test.

But for sure, the American population has not gotten like 10-12% more intelligent in 50 years based off of any changes in genetics, and that a kids intelligence isn’t changing because of genetics after an adoption.

And yet IQ has been a great indicator of a person's overall aptitude. 

[Citation needed]

[Kara]

It rules that this is on the same page as a bunch of unchallenged shitposts about George "responsible for possibly 1 million unnecessary deaths (wow)" Bush II not being that bad.

http://www.thebore.com/forum/index.php?topic=44608.msg2356651#msg2356651

Challenging is what happened to TA for holding incorrect thought on the very same page; the post you're linking to is evidence for expanding the technical parameters of Godwin's Law.

[Mandark]

nah

[etiolate]

There are more variations within a population than there is variation between populations. When looking at issues with a population, you should factor in the averages of various traits, but I am not sure what that has to do with the topic. I haven't really followed the topic much though, cuz this thread is where the shitters hang out.

I do love that people bring up Sweden when that country locked itself into isolation for years, making it a white ethno state of sorts, and then has war profiteering to thank for its financial basis. Progressive policy success right there.

[Assimilate]

I do love that people bring up Sweden when that country locked itself into isolation for years, making it a white ethno state of sorts, and then has war profiteering to thank for its financial basis. Progressive policy success right there.

Another one of my favorites is people loving Japanese culture and everything about them when they completely shut out any type of immigration but of course the United States is the bad guy lol. People pour into this country from all over but nah the U.S is terrible oh nooos.

Fwiw assimilate, it doesn't really make a difference where you fall on the political spectrum since you're a total dipshit anyway

  Seagrams all i've ever seen you do in here is cry about other people's post you don't like. Shouldn't you be on retardera crying about injustice?

Because as people have pointed out numerous times already, and America itself validates that viewpoint as well, plenty of left-wing ideas as you would seem to classify them are a major reason for the ongoing economic stability and opportunities almost all of the western world benefits from.

There are left-wing ideas that have contributed, as much as there are right-wing ideas that have.

Which ones do you speak of specifically that have been pointed out? I don't want to go looking through the thread but i'm interested to know.

You also have the very tricky topic of genetics, which play a huge role as well.

Elaborate, please.

Some people are predispositioned to be smarter than others, as there are segments of the population that are naturally more athletic.

EUGENICS HO!

Didn't your mother ever tell you not to marry stupid?

[curly]

The most pathetic fucks on this website base their identity around dumb forum drama

No one gives a shit about resetera in this thread you moron

[Assimilate]

The most pathetic fucks on this website base their identity around dumb forum drama

No one gives a shit about resetera in this thread you moron

hmmm.... i think you're wrong there chum.

EDIT: fuck my life. i can't even leave this place because of the potential crime. the police is on strike. god damn it. thankfully i met someone last weekend and she's coming over to cook 

[thehunter116]

The most pathetic fucks on this website base their identity around dumb forum drama

No one gives a shit about resetera in this thread you moron

I got told to go back to Era because I said TLJ was good. 

Salt as far as the eye can see. 

[Rufus]

Another one of my favorites is people loving Japanese culture and everything about them when they completely shut out any type of immigration but of course the United States is the bad guy lol.

...They do?