How do you fix the US?

[Heathen Hammer]

Interesting how attempting to reduce the Trillion dollar deficit is now seen as a bad thing. Remember the deficit? The thing that Trump promised to eliminate? Well it went up by 68%. Remember when the right prided itself as being fiscally responsible?

Also I'm always amused how right wing populists always end up batting for the rights of large corporations ahead of their own.

It is intellectually dishonest to attribute economic decline caused by Chinese virus to Trump.

Source??

I mean saying "I'm right because... reasons" isn't really a valid debating strategy.

Are you asking for a source on Biden being in government for half a century now?

More shilling for corporations? Of course you are...

But imagine being that callous that measures being introduced to stop people dying from easily preventable illnesses is seen as a bad thing. Now imagine the Christian right taking this position. Because nothing says you're a Christian more than telling the sick to go "f" themselves...

Just as Jesus would have done...

What does Biden promising free healthcare to illegal aliens having to do with corporations?

So in other words, Trump is introducing no policies or measures that will increase the employment rights or the conditions of the American Working class. Imagine being THAT cowardly and craven that you think that medieval serfdom is all you deserve.

"But Margorie, I've already told you... increasing the minimum wage and allowing paid maternity leave is communism and will force our beloved corporate masters to put their own hands in their pockets. Which is something we cannot allow!"

That's just like your opinion, man.
GOP introduced a stimulus package to assist working class, and your "progressive" comrades in Dead Old Party blocked it. Democrats are the anti-working class party no matter how many mental gymnastics their supporters do.

[TheLeft]

It is intellectually dishonest to attribute economic decline caused by Chinese virus to Trump.

No, not really seeing as the deficit was spiralling out of control way before COVID-19 ever happened.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjo.../#3353c4734819

Try again...

Are you asking for a source on Biden being in government for half a century now?

No. Just a source to back up your claim that apparently Biden is responsible for every job that has been relocated overseas...

What does Biden promising free healthcare to illegal aliens having to do with corporations?

Because like most working class GOP voters, you seem to care more about the welfare of faceless corporations than people. A proper National Health Service would spell big trouble for Big-Pharma.

Regardless of which. How can you be so callous and uncaring to suggest that the world's richest country shouldn't try and heal the sick?

Is that more right-wing "family values"?

That's just like your opinion, man.
GOP introduced a stimulus package to assist working class, and your "progressive" comrades in Dead Old Party blocked it. Democrats are the anti-working class party no matter how many mental gymnastics their supporters do.

Sure. That's why Biden wants to raise the minimum wage and introduce paid maternity leave, and Trump... well doesn't.

Tell me. Why do you think that you don't deserve the same rights that workers here in Europe get? Why does serfdom appeal to you so much?

[antaeus]

Sure. That's why Biden wants to raise the minimum wage and introduce paid maternity leave, and Trump... well doesn't.

Tell me. Why do you think that you don't deserve the same rights that workers here in Europe get? Why does serfdom appeal to you so much?

The only logical conclusion is that Heathen stands to gain from the situation?

[Cope]

Spoiler for CNN: 

[Exarch]

There is an immediate solution to the US' current woes, a tried and tested solution: War.

It's what the Argentine Junta tried back in 1982, and it's what the current USG is attempting to do thus far, war with iran, in SCS, or in Korea. War may solve the US' current problems but it's risky.

[antaeus]

Spoiler for CNN: 

Ahhh that old meme. Memes are great. Especially when they're disingenuous. I dislike CNN as much as you do, but you do discrediting them a disservice by reposting half baked memes that don't stand up to even basic rigor.

"Everyone should have a shot at paid family leave" was written by pro-paid family leave activists Heather Boushey and Katie Bethell. "Trump's budget to include family leave" is a hard news story and doesn't contain an opinion at all. The final article, "How paid family leave hurts women," was authored by Vanessa Brown Calder, a policy analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute.

If anything, CNN is guilty of presenting a diversity of opinions. Shame on them?

- The Examiner from years ago

[Cope]

Ahhh that old meme. Memes are great. Especially when they're disingenuous. I dislike CNN as much as you do, but you do discrediting them a disservice by reposting half baked memes that don't stand up to even basic rigor.

What is humour: The post.

[antaeus]

What is humour: The post.

"Humour with obvious political intent"

It's a lose/lose for anyone who engages. If you critique it, you look like you have no sense of humour or can't take a joke. If you let it be, it achieves it's desired goal of discrediting a political idea.

[Cope]

The image achieves its desired goal because it exposes a kernel of truth. It is easy to see pattern over coincidence when a partisan liberal network just happens to publish an article decrying paid family leave within days of the Trump administration budgeting for paid family leave. Diversity of opinion indeed.

[antaeus]

The image achieves its desired goal because it exposes a kernel of truth. It is easy to see pattern over coincidence when a partisan liberal network just happens to publish an article decrying paid family leave within days of the Trump administration budgeting for paid family leave. Diversity of opinion indeed.

Is your suggestion that CNN are both liberal hyper-partisan, but also anti-liberal if it means showing Trump is wrong? You are aware that CNN published other articles with a raft of opinions in between this cherry picked selection right? And that CNN have published other articles that highlight things they like that Trump has done?

Again, you do discrediting them a disservice. The meme contains a narrative. To point out double standards at CNN. But it is hyper partisan in it's intent and selection of articles, and takes all of 30 seconds on google to refute. It is only there to encourage people to make poorly thought out snap judgements and to reinforce cognitive biases with partial and selective truths.

CNN are biased: they don't fact check enough, and their editorials are idiotic. But in this case, kernel of truth my behind.

[Cope]

Is your suggestion that CNN are both liberal hyper-partisan, but also anti-liberal if it means showing Trump is wrong?

Yes. That's the point of the joke.

You are aware that CNN published other articles with a raft of opinions in between this cherry picked selection right? And that CNN have published other articles that highlight things they like that Trump has done?

Again, you do discrediting them a disservice. The meme contains a narrative. To point out double standards at CNN. But it is hyper partisan in it's intent and selection of articles, and takes all of 30 seconds on google to refute. It is only there to encourage people to make poorly thought out snap judgements and to reinforce cognitive biases with partial and selective truths.

CNN are biased: they don't fact check enough, and their editorials are idiotic. But in this case, kernel of truth my behind.

You can't "refute" comedy. :'D

[Heathen Hammer]

No, not really seeing as the deficit was spiralling out of control way before COVID-19 ever happened.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjo.../#3353c4734819

Try again...

Doesn't change the fact that economy was growing steadily until Chinese Virus affected it.

No. Just a source to back up your claim that apparently Biden is responsible for every job that has been relocated overseas...

What did he, in his capacity as office-holding politician, do to prevent that in half a century that he spent being in government?

Because like most working class GOP voters, you seem to care more about the welfare of faceless corporations than people. A proper National Health Service would spell big trouble for Big-Pharma.

Big Pharma is doing fine in both Canada and UK. Elephant in the room is that drugs and medical treatment are overpriced, due to government overregulation in favor of specific corporations. So again, we have Democrats kissing ass of corporations at the expense of working class.

Regardless of which. How can you be so callous and uncaring to suggest that the world's richest country shouldn't try and heal the sick?

Is that more right-wing "family values"?

US under Trump is doing a pretty good job with that, all things considered. If COVID hit US with Democrats in the office, the death toll would have been a lot higher, Democrats even protested Trump shutting down travel with China last year. Democrats are fine with hundreds of thousands dying as long as their corporate sugar daddies are happy.

Sure. That's why Biden wants to raise the minimum wage and introduce paid maternity leave, and Trump... well doesn't.

Tell me. Why do you think that you don't deserve the same rights that workers here in Europe get? Why does serfdom appeal to you so much?

Raising minimum wage is an idiotic populist move, since purchasing power of an individual remains practically the same or even goes down since prices go up due to rising expenses. Again, we have the Liberal mouthbreather in Canada who did that and only made things worse.
If you want to improve livelihood of working class, then you need to cut taxes, so that there are more jobs and more companies move in to hire people. Biden would just crush the economy and it would hit working people the most, as his corporate handlers have their tax havens to avoid paying more taxes, while its your average worker that would lose his job and would be able to buy less.

[Ludicus]

4. Repeal the 26th amendment and add a new amendment raising the voting age to 25 (with exceptions for military personnel) in federal elections.

What does voting at 25 changes? and with exceptions for military personnal? why? the next step would be a military written constituition?
Around the world, the highest minimum age of voting is 21, with the sole exception of the United Arab Emirates, where the the oldest minimum voting age is 25 years old.
---
[QUOTE=Heathen Hammer;15962213Big Pharma is doing fine in both Canada and UK[/QUOTE]
Nope. Canada enacts drug price crackdown, in blow to ... - Reuters

On the U.K.’s National Health Service, every person is covered completely. There are no bills, deductibles, or co-pays. Btw, Canada holds a high life expectancy rate ( 82.52 years) thanks to the efficiency of its national health care system.The reason why the US differs from European countries is a matter of a reactionary politics and psychology.

[Ludicus]

Double post

[Cope]

What does voting at 25 changes? and with exceptions for military personnal? why? the next step would be a military written constituition?
Around the world, the highest minimum age of voting is 21, with the sole exception of the United Arab Emirates, where the the oldest minimum voting age is 25 years old.

This is the short answer:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

University of Rochester Medical Centre, Understanding the Teen Brain.

[antaeus]

I don't understand the exception for military personnel. Is it because volunteering to kill someone makes you an adult?

Or is that by donating your life to defend your country you're instantly more capable of thinking critically about politics?

Or is it bribery?

I don't get it.

[Exarch]

You need to give each of the ethnicities in the US their own homeland, a nation for the slave descendants of the african americans; a portion for Chinese Americans, a tract of territory of hispanics and finally last but not least, a space as well for the midwest whites as opposed to the northeast WASPS.

[Lord Thesaurian]

I don't understand the exception for military personnel. Is it because volunteering to kill someone makes you an adult?

Or is that by donating your life to defend your country you're instantly more capable of thinking critically about politics?

Or is it bribery?

I don't get it.

During the 1960s, many Americans pushed both Congress and the state legislatures to lower the minimum voting age from 21 to 18. This was mostly because of to the Vietnam War. As the war went on, more and more people started to protest the war and become active.[3] During that war, many young men were drafted and sent to fight in the war before they were old enough to vote. This meant they had no way to influence the people sending them off to risk their lives. Protesters started to use the slogan "Old enough to fight, old enough to vote" again.

Supporters also argued that the law treated eighteen-year-olds as adults in many other ways. For example, they had to pay income taxes. Supporters argued that this was "taxation without representation" – meaning that 18- to 20-year-olds had to pay taxes, but had no say in what those taxes were or what they were spent on, because they could not vote.[7]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty...s_Constitution

[Cope]

I don't understand the exception for military personnel. Is it because volunteering to kill someone makes you an adult?

Or is that by donating your life to defend your country you're instantly more capable of thinking critically about politics?

Or is it bribery?

I don't get it.

Any person serving in the military ought to have the ability to influence, through the ballot box, the politicians sending them to war. Ironically, this is one of the same reasons why the Twenty-sixth Amendment was passed in the first place.

[antaeus]

Any person serving in the military ought to have the ability to influence, through the ballot box, the politicians sending them to war. Ironically, this is one of the same reasons why the Twenty-sixth Amendment was passed in the first place.

I do understand that logic, but it seems an arbitrary solution though. It would be just as easy to limit service to over 25s... when they're "mentally grown up enough" to understand why they're giving their life away, and already enfranchised enough to choose politicians who have the temperament required to not go to war unnecessarily.

If the justification for increasing the voting age to 25 is that people under that age aren't yet fully mentally mature, isn't sending people who aren't yet fully mentally mature off to war tantamount to abuse?

Anyway... sorry, we're off topic. I'm just fascinated by the way we define who is an adult in different scenarios.