US Politics Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
SWP's back said:
But sure Dax, the US definitely isn’t lurching far right.

Click to expand...

We’re clearly lurching right and it’s a do nothing system. Biden will do nothing of substance and lose both sides of Congress in November and then blame the voters for not voting hard enough. They’ll do nothing until 2024 but the US will have a small bounce back and R’s will take everything. They left will say we aren’t doing enough and fight back. We will slowly rebound (as we always naturally do) and repeat. It’s comically obvious. That’s fine though. Pensions will rebound and grow like they always do and nothing will get done for normal people.

@Dax777
 
ADegenerate said:
We’re clearly lurching right and it’s a do nothing system. Biden will do nothing of substance and lose both sides of Congress in November and then blame the voters for not voting hard enough. They’ll do nothing until 2024 but the US will have a small bounce back and R’s will take everything. They left will say we aren’t doing enough and fight back. We will slowly rebound (as we always naturally do) and repeat. It’s comically obvious. That’s fine though. Pensions will rebound and grow like they always do and nothing will get done for normal people.

@Dax777
Click to expand...
Whether or not you believe we are lurching to the right, it's probably best to not base that judgment on some article posted by SWP. He almost always never reads or examines those claims he promotes here...

The most cursory of examination would have told him that was a false story by a lying left leaning news organization. I know many don't think those exist. But they do. Sadly they do.

I mean 2 posts down from the tweet was this Politifacts post debunking it.

www.politifact.com

Florida law requires public universities to survey students

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill on June 23 requiring an annual assessment of "intellectual freedom and viewpoint
www.politifact.com www.politifact.com


On a side note, I'm trying not to get dragged into these political discussions anymore. I come, read, laugh at some ridiculous takes. Then move on.

I came here for City and have decided to enjoy that. I get enough of the political and culture stuff everywhere else.

I'll leave it at that. See you on the football related threads :)
 
ADegenerate said:
We’re clearly lurching right and it’s a do nothing system. Biden will do nothing of substance and lose both sides of Congress in November and then blame the voters for not voting hard enough. They’ll do nothing until 2024 but the US will have a small bounce back and R’s will take everything. They left will say we aren’t doing enough and fight back. We will slowly rebound (as we always naturally do) and repeat. It’s comically obvious. That’s fine though. Pensions will rebound and grow like they always do and nothing will get done for normal people.

@Dax777
Click to expand...
 


One of the best bits of policy I've seen in a long time. This should reduce the cost of insulin from $6000 per year to ~$200. It will create hundreds of jobs. It will save lives. It will make them a lot of money.

That money can then go to the next drug in high demand where pharma companies are taking the piss.

And the prospect of losing 40,000,000 Californians as customers might well be enough to force the industry into reigning in their prices of other drugs.

It's reminiscent of Mark Cuban's pharma company that does the same thing - produces pharmaceuticals for 5-10% profit instead of the price gouging into hundreds of percent profit done by the rest of the industry.
 
Last edited:
Interesting take on the corrosive impact of social media on American society.


I agree with most of Jonathan Haidt's points, but disagree with his view that social media need not be regulated per se, but rather that the algorithms which lead to sensational posts becoming viral needs to change.

For starters, isn't this algorithmic change of necessity going to come about by regulation? - social media companies are out to make money - they won't change this on their own.

Secondly, it's not just sensational posts that are the problem - at all. Rather, it's the spread of disinformation as I've posted numerous times above. If one can view non-factual posts in support of ones views and such posts are completely unregulated - no warning at all as to veracity or in extreme cases removal of posts - then viewers of such content are never, ever, ever going to change their minds. Content regulation is a key to informing voters of what is fact.
 
Dax777 said:
I mean 2 posts down from the tweet was this Politifacts post debunking it.
Click to expand...
Oh the irony!

You decry Politifacts as unreliable whenever they're proving your viewpoint wrong... but wham! Any source at all will do - including those you deem "unreliable" - so long as the source agrees with you.

So what is it, Dax? Politifacts is unreliable and politically biased - as you previously stated? - or, is it a neutral entity concerned only with truth which you rely upon to fact-check political statements?
 
Last edited:


I'm sure the GOP do the same. I'd use it as a election point if the opposition party were paying for ads to promote me.
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Interesting take on the corrosive impact of social media on American society.


I agree with most of Jonathan Haidt's points, but disagree with his view that social media need not be regulated per se, but rather that the algorithms which lead to sensational posts becoming viral needs to change.

For starters, isn't this algorithmic change of necessity going to come about by regulation? - social media companies are out to make money - they won't change this on their own.

Secondly, it's not just sensational posts that are the problem - at all. Rather, it's the spread of disinformation as I've posted numerous times above. If one can view non-factual posts in support of ones views and such posts are completely unregulated - no warning at all as to veracity or in extreme cases removal of posts - then viewers of such content are never, ever, ever going to change their minds. Content regulation is a key to informing voters of what is fact.
Click to expand...

While you raise some points that need debating in general I think those that make money both at a corporate and individual level underestimate that in the end common sense and critical thinking albeit many believe they are often in short supply on social media will dictate what one believes but more importantly how they act and respond to such belief.

I agree there is a lot of disinformation on social media as there is in MSM but in the end you have to make up your own mind what is relevant and important in your life.

Preaching misinformation might get some the notoriety they seek for a while but in the end the mob will ignore them.

Cults were around in various guises long before social media gained some prominence and always will be.

For me its like watching TV if you don't like the program for what ever reason or the commercial tune out , its free and harmless.
 
mancity1 said:
For me its like watching TV if you don't like the program for what ever reason or the commercial tune out , its free and harmless.
Click to expand...
"Free and harmless"?

Is or is not the Capital invasion a direct result of "free and harmless" unregulated mistruth?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top