Politics thread (USA Elections 2016) - Page 347

On January 03 2024 21:38 Loco wrote: "As far as I know, none but the votaries of monotheistic, that is to say, Jewish religions, look upon suicide as a crime. This is all the more striking, inasmuch as neither in the Old nor in the New Testament is there to be found any prohibition or positive disapproval of it; so that religious teachers are forced to base their condemnation of suicide on philosophical grounds of their own invention. These are so very bad that writers of this kind endeavor to make up for the weakness of their arguments by the strong terms in which they express their abhorrence of the practice; in other words, they declaim against it. They tell us that suicide is the greatest piece of cowardice; that only a madman could be guilty of it; and other insipidities of the same kind; or else they make the nonsensical remark that suicide is wrong; when it is quite obvious that there is nothing in the world to which every man has a more unassailable title than to his own life and person." - Arthur Schopenhauer The idea of being a "libertarian" while being against the single most important liberty afforded to us by nature is ostensibly ridiculous. Perhaps the most religious feeling of all is the feeling that life is sacred. It's not something you can rationalize - there is literally no argument in its favor. But just like every religious kook out there, Milei is anti-abortion and anti-suicide, because he has a feeling that life is wonderful, and everyone deserves to be stuck in it. Only an insane tyrant would hold these absolutist positions, putting all else aside.

Libertarianism was pro socialist and pro democracy until ww2 basically. John Stuart mill was pro worker democracy and his economics textbook was the main one taught in school until 1900. The 20th century was steady growth in corporate power and a steady decline in the belief that working life should be run democratically. Economists were also more pro environment in the 19th century as well imo. They taught people about the Jevons principle. Now you have nordhaus who is basically an omnicide denier. It's only fringe ecological economists who talk about jevons. The mainstream view now is that you should slap on a small carbon tax and then let capitalism sort out the rest. That's fanaticism, but it isn't on the level of this argentian presidents straight denial.

I could possibly respect these pro life positions if the people who held them actually were pro life. He certainly does not value the lives homeless people, or young people. I decided that most pro lifers were massive hypocrites when they bragged about bombing whole cities full of people. Their position should be called pro featus preservation, not pro life. Or perhaps just anti abortion. But I do know some pro lifers who care about homeless people and work in charities and such. I'm certainly not gona go ridicule some peasant in the Phillipines and call her a tyrant for her pro lifer position haha.

On January 03 2024 21:59 RiKD wrote: Show nested quote + On January 03 2024 19:54 Stroggoz wrote:   On January 03 2024 14:23 RiKD wrote: Wasn't one of the biggest reasons for Argentina's struggles because the IMF gave a corrupt junta in power at the time boatloads of loans and most of the leaders just took that money and put it in off shore bank accounts? I want to say in some way the CIA was linked as well but I don't remember. Obviously, the junta dissapearing people at will was not good either. Operation condor? Most of the power that America has exerted over the south in recent decades has been through economic bargaining power rather than these cia conspiracies imo. - The Argentine secret service SIDE (Secretaría de Inteligencia del Estado) also cooperated with the DINA in Pinochet's Chile and other South American intelligence agencies. Eight South American nations supported endeavours to eradicate left-leaning groups on the continent, known as Operation Condor, a United States-backed campaign of anti-democratic and political repression and state terror. It is estimated to have caused the deaths of more than 60,000 people. SIDE also trained—for example in the Honduran Lepaterique base—the Nicaraguan Contras who were fighting the Sandinista government there. - The United States provided military assistance to the junta and, at the start of the Dirty War, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger gave them a "green light" to engage in political repression of real or perceived opponents.[24][25][26] The U.S. Congress approved a request by the Ford Administration, to grant $50,000,000 in security assistance to the junta. In 1977 and 1978 the United States sold more than $120,000,000 in spare military parts to Argentina, and in 1977 the U.S. Department of Defense granted $700,000 to train 217 Argentine military officers.[27] - The re-establishment of diplomatic ties allowed for CIA collaboration with the Argentine intelligence service in arming and training the Nicaraguan Contras against the Sandinista government. Argentina also provided security advisors, intelligence training and some material support to forces in Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras to suppress local rebel groups as part of a U.S.-sponsored program called Operation Charly.[30] My memory was a book The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein but I apologize for just copy and pasting from Wikipedia. I'm surprised Argentina has such short memories. At least Milei is not dissapearing people yet although I saw a message to the "shit libs," leftists, socialist, communists to get in line and he was carrying a bat.

It's pretty easy to propagandize people with no interest I politics on the social media. About a third of people cannot tell the difference between libertarianism and socialism, and they are the targets. It's the role of data scientists at Cambridge analytica to controll these people's voting choice. Now, Facebook got sued big time for that. But you can get away with this kind of thing in a lot of other places in the world. Social media propaganda is basically the norm for most elections in the world now. That gets you alot further than these old fashioned cia coup.

Elections arnt rigged with campaign finance or cia coupts. Thats one of the things the left wrongly focuses on too much. They are rigged by controlling culture. Way more money goes into running the media, pr, and ranking algorithms, advertising than lobbying for policies. Lobbying is kinda the thing you do once made sure that you've turned society into a bunch of pathetic mental slaves. It is only after that task is accomplished that you can start lobbying.

Lobbying doesn't have to be such a bad thing either. If the left pooled all its money together they could certainly buy a lot of political influence.

The Shock Doctrine is relevant here because it's main thesis was neoliberalism is more easily implemented by exploiting a crisis. It's easy to get more extreme views to come to the centre when ppl are mad as fuck about 100 percent inflation and politician's are driving around in lambos.

If we agree to kill the fetus with no shot at life can we kill the politicians that are driving around in lambos when we all can't afford bread? I mean maybe we can afford bread but olive oil is expensive as fuck out here.

On January 03 2024 08:14 Stroggoz wrote: I actually agreed with you that it was full of unproductive parasites. Neoliberalism is a watered down version of anarcho capitalism really. There's no debating that Neoliberal policies ravaged most of the world's economies in the 80s and 90s and caused argentina to collapse in 2001. Anarcho capitalism would destroy all of civilization because it doesn't deal with externalities. The fact that neoliberalism has always failed isn't an argument for stronger version of it. You know Austrian economics is an anti reality discipline right. It's hard coded into their axioms. I certainly think that the left is largely corrupt cunts when in power and the neoliberals are uncivilized savages who destroy whole economies just like in 2001. As if an anarcho capitalism would be any better?

Saying neoliberalism is a watered down version of anarcho capitalism or libertarianism is saying social democracy is a watered down version of soviet communism, the thing they got in common is privatization and international markets the big difference is the size of the state, the US has a massive state with a super tight regulative control of everything and it pales in comparison to Argentina I mean, Milei deleted 380,000 regulations in one day I mean how in the fuck do you even write that many regulations its beyond me, there is nothing remotely free in Argentinas market if you say that you clearly have no idea what you are talkinga bout its one of the most restrictive bureocratic economies in the fucking world.

Also its ridiculous to say neoliberalism has always failed, while pushing hard left wing ideologies, the irony is off the charts.

On January 03 2024 14:23 RiKD wrote: Wasn't one of the biggest reasons for Argentina's struggles because the IMF gave a corrupt junta in power at the time boatloads of loans and most of the leaders just took that money and put it in off shore bank accounts? I want to say in some way the CIA was linked as well but I don't remember. Obviously, the junta dissapearing people at will was not good either.

LOL no.

Argentina's decline started with Juan Perón who was a fascist, admirer of Musolini he copied his left wing policies, nationalized industries, closed international trade and ran a massive fiscal deficit, La juntas coup was a response to their return after the exile and it only lasted 6 years, if the military leaders stole IMF money would be a drop in a pond in Argentinas economic problems.

On January 03 2024 21:38 Loco wrote: But just like every religious kook out there, Milei is anti-abortion and anti-suicide, because he has a feeling that life is wonderful, and everyone deserves to be stuck in it. Only an insane tyrant would hold these absolutist positions, putting all else aside.

Hard disagree with him on those ones, but to say anyone who is anti-suicide or abortion is an insane tyrant is hyperbolic to put it midly, these are complex subjects and disagreeing doesnt make you a monster, you are not 20 anymore.


Anyway we finally got our batter up, you commies have had a few turns and you swung and missed hard with a few hundred millions of death, now lets see if it works out, fingers crossed.

Don't think anyone here killed a few hundred million people lol.
I'm pretty sure stalinist/maoist and other authoritarian regimes topped at joint combined 100 million at most, if that's what you mean. Which is awful enough, so no need to exaggerate.

Even those that claim that they killed that many people focus on selectively chosen structural violence in many cases. I.e, the fact that Russia's life expectancy went up alot during Stalins era, ignoring that but focusing on starvation deaths elsewhere. True in China as well.

More people died from lack of good nutrition and healthcare in India than in that awful famine. Its kind of amusing that many in favour of capitalism point to the benefits of industrialization when basically every single economy ever has had to drop free markets to industrialize, on top of many of them making the exact same arguments that marxian economists did. Lots of people blame the north korean famine solely on the dictator there as well, in fact part of it was caused by the russian economic collapse due to free market reforms. The opinions people have on deaths by political system are highly ideology (yours are laughable).

There's actually a lot of nuance to it if you look into it, but at the very least you cannot go around saying "person X and person Y in political systems x and y both died to structural violence but only person Y counts", which is the argument that 99% of people make no matter what political system they are talking about. I once listened to a stalinist professor
lecture on the justification for stalinism and he gave the exact same arguments that people like Bill Gates and Steven Pinker made. He said there was progress. He was right in the sense of industrialization bringing people out of poverty, but it was a pretty weak argument nonetheless since it was a false N-chotomy.

Its pretty hard to get a fair opinion on this, but capitalism is surely a giant killing machine in terms of both structural and direct violence (tens of millions in straight violence like war) I wouldn't say capitalism is worse even though its killed far more. That would be ideological as well, since its had more time to kill. Mostly though I think its irrelevant. There are always alternatives to any of these systems that people can promote, and have promoted.

Millei is a climate change denier. He may want to look into the number of deaths that influences, and the deaths from air pollution, which are around 100 million every decade, or 10 million a year.. in premature deaths. Maybe he might wanna stop ignoring his fellow economists who did that research, instead of being continuing the tradition of fervent zealotry that is starting to come undone in that profession thanks to the hard work of several reality based economists.

On January 10 2024 10:24 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On January 03 2024 08:14 Stroggoz wrote: I actually agreed with you that it was full of unproductive parasites. Neoliberalism is a watered down version of anarcho capitalism really. There's no debating that Neoliberal policies ravaged most of the world's economies in the 80s and 90s and caused argentina to collapse in 2001. Anarcho capitalism would destroy all of civilization because it doesn't deal with externalities. The fact that neoliberalism has always failed isn't an argument for stronger version of it. You know Austrian economics is an anti reality discipline right. It's hard coded into their axioms. I certainly think that the left is largely corrupt cunts when in power and the neoliberals are uncivilized savages who destroy whole economies just like in 2001. As if an anarcho capitalism would be any better? Saying neoliberalism is a watered down version of anarcho capitalism or libertarianism is saying social democracy is a watered down version of soviet communism, the thing they got in common is privatization and international markets the big difference is the size of the state, the US has a massive state with a super tight regulative control of everything and it pales in comparison to Argentina I mean, Milei deleted 380,000 regulations in one day I mean how in the fuck do you even write that many regulations its beyond me, there is nothing remotely free in Argentinas market if you say that you clearly have no idea what you are talkinga bout its one of the most restrictive bureocratic economies in the fucking world. Also its ridiculous to say neoliberalism has always failed, while pushing hard left wing ideologies, the irony is off the charts.

What left-wing ideologies? Like doing something about the environment/economy, inequality or promoting democracy? That's my agenda, and I dont feel the need to push them at all, since most people agree with me. I'd hardly call it an ideology, since i'm not ideological about it. The view that neoliberalism has completely failed is accepted by mainstream economists these days. Its considered to be left-centre viewpoint now. The IMF publishes papers agreeing with that, and saying inequality slows growth, and the former world bank economist Joe Stiglitz says that the neoliberals were "wrong about almost everything they claimed". I agree with his assessment, because its factual. I also said that the former people in charge of Argentina (on the "left" ) were complete pieces of shit, (because i recognize their corruption).

The main issue is just a lack of education. I never try to convince someone that they should be pro-democracy. Rather im more about getting people to understand why they'd say they are anti democracy while simultaneously saying they dislike anti democratic institutions. That sort of thing. Very few people can be fucked listening to me, but that's the way it is and as it should be. I think its largely a waste of time to try convince people of an ideology. Like im not here to convince you for example. Mostly just shooting the breeze here. I can just provide them with facts and thoughts and let them act on it if they want to.

No idea whether the regulations were bad or good, but there's no way anyone can read through all those regulations, having a nuanced opinion on their merit and decide whether to keep them or not. It takes a lot of dogma to say "All regulations are bad, so lets get rid of all of them". I'm not that principled even on things like democracy, and human rights. Theres always counter examples to democracy. There are clearly a lot of good regulations out there, that prevent people from overfishing, or cutting down trees until there's none left, or safety checks in mines. There are some very bad ones as well. Millei doesn't strike me as the kind of person who gives a shit, and his logical conclusion starts by ignoring what scientists and society has to say about this.

On January 12 2024 04:12 Stroggoz wrote: Don't think anyone here killed a few hundred million people lol. I'm pretty sure stalinist/maoist and other authoritarian regimes topped at joint combined 100 million at most, if that's what you mean. Which is awful enough, so no need to exaggerate.

My bad... you commies killed aroud 100 million*

There's actually a lot of nuance to it if you look into it, but at the very least you cannot go around saying "person X and person Y in political systems x and y both died to structural violence but only person Y counts"

Its pretty hard to get a fair opinion on this, but capitalism is surely a giant killing machine in terms of both structural and direct violence (tens of millions in straight violence like war) I wouldn't say capitalism is worse even though its killed far more. That would be ideological as well, since its had more time to kill. Mostly though I think its irrelevant. There are always alternatives to any of these systems that people can promote, and have promoted.[/quote]

Its not even remotely close, a tiny fraction of the world has tried communist for brief moments in history and it has ended in the worst catastrophes in mankind in modern history, sure capitalism and any system will cause death and suffering, but no capitalist policy has caused the starvation of 40 million people in a short timeframe like in China despise having like 100x the sample size

Millei is a climate change denier. He may want to look into the number of deaths that influences, and the deaths from air pollution, which are around 100 million every decade, or 10 million a year.. in premature deaths. Maybe he might wanna stop ignoring his fellow economists who did that research, instead of being continuing the tradition of fervent zealotry that is starting to come undone in that profession thanks to the hard work of several reality based economists.

And Merkel was all about climate change and turned Germany into a CO2 chimney lol, if global warming is your concern you should focus on Xi and Modi and not Milei who is in no position to do anything about it at all.

On January 12 2024 04:29 Stroggoz wrote: What left-wing ideologies? Like doing something about the environment/economy, inequality or promoting democracy? Yes.jpg How dare I call you a leftist when you support a state enforced redistribution of wealth, how dare I lol. [quote] Like im not here to convince you for example. Mostly just shooting the breeze here.

same here bud

No idea whether the regulations were bad or good, but there's no way anyone can read through all those regulations, having a nuanced opinion on their merit and decide whether to keep them or not. It takes a lot of dogma to say "All regulations are bad, so lets get rid of all of them". I'm not that principled even on things like democracy, and human rights. Theres always counter examples to democracy. There are clearly a lot of good regulations out there, that prevent people from overfishing, or cutting down trees until there's none left, or safety checks in mines. There are some very bad ones as well. Millei doesn't strike me as the kind of person who gives a shit, and his logical conclusion starts by ignoring what scientists and society has to say about this.

They were bad, they werent safety or environmental regulations they were mostly market regulations like price controls, rent controls, import/export controls and entires industries controlled by the state, for example travel agencies were controlled and you needed a permit to pen one, obv the agencies and the government were colluded to remain a monopoly and that is pretty much in every corner in argentias economy.

The only regulations unrelated to market controls that he removed were the that previously lethal force to defend yourself was insta-prison regardless of the situation, now you can defend yourself and he also removed hate speech laws regarding misgendering

On January 12 2024 08:52 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On January 12 2024 04:12 Stroggoz wrote: Don't think anyone here killed a few hundred million people lol. I'm pretty sure stalinist/maoist and other authoritarian regimes topped at joint combined 100 million at most, if that's what you mean. Which is awful enough, so no need to exaggerate. My bad... you commies killed aroud 100 million* There's actually a lot of nuance to it if you look into it, but at the very least you cannot go around saying "person X and person Y in political systems x and y both died to structural violence but only person Y counts" Its pretty hard to get a fair opinion on this, but capitalism is surely a giant killing machine in terms of both structural and direct violence (tens of millions in straight violence like war) I wouldn't say capitalism is worse even though its killed far more. That would be ideological as well, since its had more time to kill. Mostly though I think its irrelevant. There are always alternatives to any of these systems that people can promote, and have promoted.

Its not even remotely close, a tiny fraction of the world has tried communist for brief moments in history and it has ended in the worst catastrophes in mankind in modern history, sure capitalism and any system will cause death and suffering, but no capitalist policy has caused the starvation of 40 million people in a short timeframe like in China despise having like 100x the sample size

Millei is a climate change denier. He may want to look into the number of deaths that influences, and the deaths from air pollution, which are around 100 million every decade, or 10 million a year.. in premature deaths. Maybe he might wanna stop ignoring his fellow economists who did that research, instead of being continuing the tradition of fervent zealotry that is starting to come undone in that profession thanks to the hard work of several reality based economists.

And Merkel was all about climate change and turned Germany into a CO2 chimney lol, if global warming is your concern you should focus on Xi and Modi and not Milei who is in no position to do anything about it at all.[/QUOTE]

I actually do focus on those people. Only thing is rikd bought up mellei and I ran with it. He's fairly inconsequential tbh. I agree that Merkel was bad on the environment. Shes probably worse than mellei, even given that he's a climate denier. Germany could cut far more emissions than argentina simply by putting a 100km speed limit on the autobahn. She couldn't even do that. I judge countries largely off the climate change performance index. Germany is one of the worst ranked countries in mainland Europe if I recall correctly.

Some of modis policies were OK imo. His initial development policies were environmental. India is really not that bad on the environment compared to most countries and certainly not on china's level. If you wanna know who i think the two worst politicians are on the environment, imo they are Scott Morrison and Justin Treudo.

Somehow you've come to the conclusion I'm a commie that sides with Stalin? The reason I hate societies criticism of nazis and commies is the hypocrisy behind it, not because I support any of them lol.

Don't think you should put fake quotes from me btw since someone else will read that and think I said that.

Here is a lost of countries that protected their economies from international capitalism on tha path to development: Japan, USA, Britain, South Korea, China, Germany. So no, I don't think letting an economy get dictated by the so called free market is gona work that well when the above countries got rich by doing the opposite. There's kind of a joke in economics though that goes like this: there are four types of economies; rich ones, poor ones, argentina and Japan. The later two being ones that have behaved completely differently to pretty much any other economy.

I believe the Chinese famines were around 30 million and Britain certainly came close during the 1870s with their free market policies. Laye Victorian holocaust, it's called. And there were many others. But like I said, there are far more endemic deaths, and the life expectancy in India was lower than cave man times in the early 20th century, whereas life expectancy in China went up quite fast during that developmental phase. I don't see a reason for accepting a system that kills even one person, but I find most of the critique of China to be legitimate but hypocritical.

I think you formated your post wrong with the quote tags.

lol @ the 100kmh autobahn speed limit, absolutely god awful approach, how about not closing down all the nuclear plants? but I've talked ad naseum about the way to go regarding energy production, all these draconian degrowing ideas are retarded.

I know you dont support Stalin, but you were the one saying neolilberals are watered down anarcho capitalist so as I said then what you believe is watered down soviet communism, can't have it both ways.

What fake quotes?

All those countries while still had restrictions they were among the freest economies in the world how did they fare compared to more restricted ones? and are now only surpassed in free trade by countries like Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, I think I see a pattern here... also the country with the freest trade in latinamérica is Chile, wich happens to also be the richest country in latinamerica, funny how that works

On January 11 2024 10:10 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On January 03 2024 21:38 Loco wrote: But just like every religious kook out there, Milei is anti-abortion and anti-suicide, because he has a feeling that life is wonderful, and everyone deserves to be stuck in it. Only an insane tyrant would hold these absolutist positions, putting all else aside. Hard disagree with him on those ones, but to say anyone who is anti-suicide or abortion is an insane tyrant is hyperbolic to put it midly, these are complex subjects and disagreeing doesnt make you a monster, you are not 20 anymore. Anyway we finally got our batter up, you commies have had a few turns and you swung and missed hard with a few hundred millions of death, now lets see if it works out, fingers crossed.

Your aunt is not an insane tyrant if she is a pronatalist/antisuicide idiot. We're talking about someone who holds the greatest power in the country and can prevent people who are terminally ill from being helped to exit a life of unendurable pain because it is treated as a criminal act. There is no argument to be made that this is not tyrannical.

On January 13 2024 01:52 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On January 11 2024 10:10 Baalim wrote:   On January 03 2024 21:38 Loco wrote: But just like every religious kook out there, Milei is anti-abortion and anti-suicide, because he has a feeling that life is wonderful, and everyone deserves to be stuck in it. Only an insane tyrant would hold these absolutist positions, putting all else aside. Hard disagree with him on those ones, but to say anyone who is anti-suicide or abortion is an insane tyrant is hyperbolic to put it midly, these are complex subjects and disagreeing doesnt make you a monster, you are not 20 anymore. Anyway we finally got our batter up, you commies have had a few turns and you swung and missed hard with a few hundred millions of death, now lets see if it works out, fingers crossed. Your aunt is not an insane tyrant if she is a pronatalist/antisuicide idiot. We're talking about someone who holds the greatest power in the country and can prevent people who are terminally ill from being helped to exit a life of unendurable pain because it is treated as a criminal act. There is no argument to be made that this is not tyrannical.

In a world full of actual insane tyrants It's not productive to label in the same category somebody who isn't for suicide

On January 13 2024 01:23 Baalim wrote: I think you formated your post wrong with the quote tags. lol @ the 100kmh autobahn speed limit, absolutely god awful approach, how about not closing down all the nuclear plants? but I've talked ad naseum about the way to go regarding energy production, all these draconian degrowing ideas are retarded. I know you dont support Stalin, but you were the one saying neolilberals are watered down anarcho capitalist so as I said then what you believe is watered down soviet communism, can't have it both ways. What fake quotes? All those countries while still had restrictions they were among the freest economies in the world how did they fare compared to more restricted ones? and are now only surpassed in free trade by countries like Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, I think I see a pattern here... also the country with the freest trade in latinamérica is Chile, wich happens to also be the richest country in latinamerica, funny how that works

Taiwan and Singapore are not examples in your favour lol. The research on the east Asian miracle is the opposite. Hong Kong is kind of an outlier of a nation and its pretty hard to judge.

If you think curbing a significant amount of emissions by driving less than 100kmh is draconian then that's childish. Most countries have that kind of speed limit and the cost to peoples every day lives is miniscule compared to the environmental impact.

On January 13 2024 01:52 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On January 11 2024 10:10 Baalim wrote:   On January 03 2024 21:38 Loco wrote: But just like every religious kook out there, Milei is anti-abortion and anti-suicide, because he has a feeling that life is wonderful, and everyone deserves to be stuck in it. Only an insane tyrant would hold these absolutist positions, putting all else aside. Hard disagree with him on those ones, but to say anyone who is anti-suicide or abortion is an insane tyrant is hyperbolic to put it midly, these are complex subjects and disagreeing doesnt make you a monster, you are not 20 anymore. Anyway we finally got our batter up, you commies have had a few turns and you swung and missed hard with a few hundred millions of death, now lets see if it works out, fingers crossed. Your aunt is not an insane tyrant if she is a pronatalist/antisuicide idiot. We're talking about someone who holds the greatest power in the country and can prevent people who are terminally ill from being helped to exit a life of unendurable pain because it is treated as a criminal act. There is no argument to be made that this is not tyrannical.

Most of these ancap/libertarian types basically fake conservative beliefs anyways to pull the votes. I would definitely expect that of someone such as him. We had a guy who was pretending to be a libertarian that was pretending to be racist/homophobe almost become prime minister in 2005~, and his whole email correspondence with his PR advisers was leaked because his own party thought he was a douche. All of his emails were full of exchanges saying how much he disagreed with the things he was saying haha.

On January 13 2024 05:19 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On January 13 2024 01:23 Baalim wrote: I think you formated your post wrong with the quote tags. lol @ the 100kmh autobahn speed limit, absolutely god awful approach, how about not closing down all the nuclear plants? but I've talked ad naseum about the way to go regarding energy production, all these draconian degrowing ideas are retarded. I know you dont support Stalin, but you were the one saying neolilberals are watered down anarcho capitalist so as I said then what you believe is watered down soviet communism, can't have it both ways. What fake quotes? All those countries while still had restrictions they were among the freest economies in the world how did they fare compared to more restricted ones? and are now only surpassed in free trade by countries like Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, I think I see a pattern here... also the country with the freest trade in latinamérica is Chile, wich happens to also be the richest country in latinamerica, funny how that works Taiwan and Singapore are not examples in your favour lol. The research on the east Asian miracle is the opposite. Hong Kong is kind of an outlier of a nation and its pretty hard to judge. If you think curbing a significant amount of emissions by driving less than 100kmh is draconian then that's childish. Most countries have that kind of speed limit and the cost to peoples every day lives is miniscule compared to the environmental impact.

They are pretty authoritarian for sure but they are examples of the prosperity brought through free markets.

Yes they are draconian, paternalistic and minimum common denominator laws, that aren't there for the environment but for safety (Yes in some cases to save oil during war time) and the fact that they've remained virtually unchanged despise cars being vastly safer now at higher speeds shows typical state illogical overreach, also absolutely retarded way reduce CO2 production ask Germans if they rather drive at miopic grandma speed at the autobahn or they would rather not close a nuclear plant lol.

On January 13 2024 15:13 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On January 13 2024 01:52 Loco wrote:   On January 11 2024 10:10 Baalim wrote:   On January 03 2024 21:38 Loco wrote: But just like every religious kook out there, Milei is anti-abortion and anti-suicide, because he has a feeling that life is wonderful, and everyone deserves to be stuck in it. Only an insane tyrant would hold these absolutist positions, putting all else aside. Hard disagree with him on those ones, but to say anyone who is anti-suicide or abortion is an insane tyrant is hyperbolic to put it midly, these are complex subjects and disagreeing doesnt make you a monster, you are not 20 anymore. Anyway we finally got our batter up, you commies have had a few turns and you swung and missed hard with a few hundred millions of death, now lets see if it works out, fingers crossed. Your aunt is not an insane tyrant if she is a pronatalist/antisuicide idiot. We're talking about someone who holds the greatest power in the country and can prevent people who are terminally ill from being helped to exit a life of unendurable pain because it is treated as a criminal act. There is no argument to be made that this is not tyrannical. Most of these ancap/libertarian types basically fake conservative beliefs anyways to pull the votes. I would definitely expect that of someone such as him. We had a guy who was pretending to be a libertarian that was pretending to be racist/homophobe almost become prime minister in 2005~, and his whole email correspondence with his PR advisers was leaked because his own party thought he was a douche. All of his emails were full of exchanges saying how much he disagreed with the things he was saying haha.

So what you are saying is that Milei is infact is pro abortion and pro euthanasia? even better

On January 15 2024 22:25 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On January 13 2024 05:19 Stroggoz wrote:   On January 13 2024 01:23 Baalim wrote: I think you formated your post wrong with the quote tags. lol @ the 100kmh autobahn speed limit, absolutely god awful approach, how about not closing down all the nuclear plants? but I've talked ad naseum about the way to go regarding energy production, all these draconian degrowing ideas are retarded. I know you dont support Stalin, but you were the one saying neolilberals are watered down anarcho capitalist so as I said then what you believe is watered down soviet communism, can't have it both ways. What fake quotes? All those countries while still had restrictions they were among the freest economies in the world how did they fare compared to more restricted ones? and are now only surpassed in free trade by countries like Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, I think I see a pattern here... also the country with the freest trade in latinamérica is Chile, wich happens to also be the richest country in latinamerica, funny how that works Taiwan and Singapore are not examples in your favour lol. The research on the east Asian miracle is the opposite. Hong Kong is kind of an outlier of a nation and its pretty hard to judge. If you think curbing a significant amount of emissions by driving less than 100kmh is draconian then that's childish. Most countries have that kind of speed limit and the cost to peoples every day lives is miniscule compared to the environmental impact. They are pretty authoritarian for sure but they are examples of the prosperity brought through free markets. Yes they are draconian, paternalistic and minimum common denominator laws, that aren't there for the environment but for safety (Yes in some cases to save oil during war time) and the fact that they've remained virtually unchanged despise cars being vastly safer now at higher speeds shows typical state illogical overreach, also absolutely retarded way reduce CO2 production ask Germans if they rather drive at miopic grandma speed at the autobahn or they would rather not close a nuclear plant lol.

Yes speed limits are mostly a safety thing, but cars becoming safer isn't a reason to skimp on them, because the goal should be to reduce traffic deaths, not to keep them at a constant rate.

Like if the speed limit is 110khm and 100 people die on that road every year and then cars become safer over a 20 year period and you have the choice between a) now having 40 people die at that road but keeping it at 110 or b) still having 100 people die but now having the speed limit at 130 kmh then keeping the speed limit at 110 isn't draconican.

I mean the point is, there such a speed limit in Germany would reduce emissions by more than the amount Uganda produces every year. At least if that eesearch was to be believed. I just gave that as one example of a clear cut policy that would have a significant effect at minimal cost.

So its a far bigger effect than reducing deaths from a few crashes. That's another point that can be argued though and yes irs obviously a fallacy.

There's no paternalism behind the idea since the goal is to show people the data on this and let them decide. 100km an hr is not grandma speed either. And yes some Germans are that selfish. However democracy means everyone who's effected should have a say in decisions that effect them. That means I should have some degree of influence on German policy. Most people laugh at this idea even though it follows from the definition of democracy.

Most Russians should have a say in US elections because their lives are influenced by them. Totally a pro democracy view. Same for the other direction. If not elections then I has to be global governance institutions. I rarely ever meet someone thats legitimately pro democracy