President Trump & the USA

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Donald Trump getting stick for his weight

 

It seems the rage towards Trump is Calaban's rage at seeing himself in a mirror

Well, he could get stick for his dogwhistle-but-not-really encouraging of the alt-right, his blatant disregard for the environmental future of civilisation and his total lack of ability to reign in those in his party who believe nonwhites and LGBT folks are inherently inferior to them and that women exist only to be controlled...but I think those areas, among others, have been covered already.

 

On the positive side, he's actually got the Norks talking rather than rattling the saber and he's taking spaceflight programs at least reasonably seriously, so guess that's something.

Edited 15 February 2019 by leicsmac

[Collymore]

On 13/02/2019 at 12:24, leicsmac said:

And a rather splendid social media find earlier on - wish I'd wrote it tbh because it says everything I want to say about the guy (especially the punching down part):

 

"Someone on Quora asked "Why do some British people not like Donald Trump?" Nate White, an articulate and witty writer from England wrote this magnificent response.

A few things spring to mind.

Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem.

For instance, he has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace - all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed.

So for us, the stark contrast does rather throw Trump’s limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief.

Plus, we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing - not once, ever.

I don’t say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility - for us, to lack humour is almost inhuman.

But with Trump, it’s a fact. He doesn’t even seem to understand what a joke is - his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty.

Trump is a troll. And like all trolls, he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers.

And scarily, he doesn’t just talk in crude, witless insults - he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness.

There is never any under-layer of irony, complexity, nuance or depth. It’s all surface.

Some Americans might see this as refreshingly upfront.

Well, we don’t. We see it as having no inner world, no soul.

And in Britain we traditionally side with David, not Goliath. All our heroes are plucky underdogs: Robin Hood, Dick Whittington, Oliver Twist.

Trump is neither plucky, nor an underdog. He is the exact opposite of that.

He’s not even a spoiled rich-boy, or a greedy fat-cat.

He’s more a fat white slug. A Jabba the Hutt of privilege.

And worse, he is that most unforgivable of all things to the British: a bully.

That is, except when he is among bullies; then he suddenly transforms into a snivelling sidekick instead.

There are unspoken rules to this stuff - the Queensberry rules of basic decency - and he breaks them all. He punches downwards - which a gentleman should, would, could never do - and every blow he aims is below the belt. He particularly likes to kick the vulnerable or voiceless - and he kicks them when they are down.

So the fact that a significant minority - perhaps a third - of Americans look at what he does, listen to what he says, and then think 'Yeah, he seems like my kind of guy’ is a matter of some confusion and no little distress to British people, given that:

Americans are supposed to be nicer than us, and mostly are.
You don't need a particularly keen eye for detail to spot a few flaws in the man.
This last point is what especially confuses and dismays British people, and many other people too; his faults seem pretty bloody hard to miss.

After all, it’s impossible to read a single tweet, or hear him speak a sentence or two, without staring deep into the abyss. He turns being artless into an art form; he is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of shit. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum.

God knows there have always been stupid people in the world, and plenty of nasty people too. But rarely has stupidity been so nasty, or nastiness so stupid.

He makes Nixon look trustworthy and George W look smart.

In fact, if Frankenstein decided to make a monster assembled entirely from human flaws - he would make a Trump.

And a remorseful Doctor Frankenstein would clutch out big clumpfuls of hair and scream in anguish:

'My God… what… have… I… created?

If being a twat was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set."

To be fair I found him pretty funny here at the time...

 

 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

He's well funny. Thats a fact.

 

Has he done anything yet thats ****ed his country as much as Cameron has ****ed ours?

[leicsmac]

23 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

He's well funny. Thats a fact.

 

Has he done anything yet thats ****ed his country as much as Cameron has ****ed ours?

TBH that depends on who you ask over there - there's certainly as much division and polarisation based on him as there is on Cameron's decision to hold a referendum and the outcome of it in the UK.

 

Edited 16 February 2019 by leicsmac

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

TBH that depends on who you ask over there - there's certainly as much division and polarisation based on him as there is on Cameron's decision to hold a referendum and the outcome of it in the UK.

 

Thats true, but is that opinions on his character or has he done something that has actual long term ramifications that are particularly bad? Comparable to the referendum as far as bringing in chaos?

 

Of course the wall idea is absurd, if that happens, that just seems like the policy of a troll

 

The man is bizarre as a president, but have to ask what has been irking people so much that he got elected

 

I have become so disillusioned with the left recently I find it hard to censure Trump and feel like now he's made it even easier for leftists to get on a high horse and lose touch with any sensible mission their political perspective should have, and i mean that as a criticism of them and how reactionary they are rather than criticism of him

 

I say this as someone who has always been naturally left leaning until recently. I can see why the trolls are doing so well

[leicsmac]

50 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Thats true, but is that opinions on his character or has he done something that has actual long term ramifications that are particularly bad? Comparable to the referendum as far as bringing in chaos?

 

Of course the wall idea is absurd, if that happens, that just seems like the policy of a troll

 

The man is bizarre as a president, but have to ask what has been irking people so much that he got elected

 

I have become so disillusioned with the left recently I find it hard to censure Trump and feel like now he's made it even easier for leftists to get on a high horse and lose touch with any sensible mission their political perspective should have, and i mean that as a criticism of them and how reactionary they are rather than criticism of him

 

I say this as someone who has always been naturally left leaning until recently. I can see why the trolls are doing so well

It's fair to think that there is so much hyperbole that it is difficult to differentiate between that and real issues going on.

 

However, I think I can help with cutting through some of that and answering the question you pose with three things that IMO could have long-term bad ramifications that he is responsible for (sort of covered them in a jokey way a few posts back):

 

- Downplaying or flat-out ignoring the threat of climate change and legislative measures to that effect (like quitting the Paris Agreement). As anyone who knows me on here knows damn well, this is the biggie for me. For the wealthiest, most powerful nation on the planet (and the largest emissions per capita) to simply ignore how the Earth is and could change for whatever reason is practically criminally irresponsible; even if humans have zilch to do with the rise of CO2 levels in the atmosphere (and that's really unlikely) then the US government should at least be looking at analytical work on what that means and contingency plans to defend against the very real changes that can and will happen. Instead, Trump and his administration choose to do nothing. It also sends a message to nations like China and India who do a fair amount of pollution themselves that the US administration are totally OK with them continuing to pollute, which is also obviously harmful. It's short-sighted, short-term self-interest at its worst and it has the potential to be catastrophic.

 

- Not seeking to reign in the "alt-right". Though he may try to put some distance between him and them by disavowing their actions in statements, Trumps administration has done precious little to actually address the problem of white supremacists getting involved in various ideologically-motivated attacks in the US, resulting in a fair few deaths. Most of these guys think he's the Second Coming, and they have taken full advantage of the current political climate to do the kind of things they consider "fun", with law enforcement no longer focusing as much on tracking them down. Race relations in the US seemed to be progressing better before Trump took power, but since the dividing lines have only gotten deeper, as evidenced by the aforementioned attacks and the increasing two-sides polarisation. This has long-term consequences from formenting so much division that it will take a long time for divides based on race to heal once again once Trump leaves office.

 

- The Supreme Court picks thus far. Supreme Court justices serve for life, so by definition such decisions will be long-term...and fundies of various stripes see Trumps picks so far as a means to challenge both Roe v Wade and Obergefell v Hodges at the highest level. Though Trump isn't responsible for those challenges directly, that he picked two Justices who those fundies think ideal to mount such a challenge speaks volumes. Now, such challenges haven't really arisen yet; indeed, they might never do so, but that these picks offer an increased chance for such challenges worries a lot of women and a lot of LGBT folks that at least some of the rights they spoke for, marched for and often fought for, might be taken from them.

 

If you're seeing a recurring theme here, you'd be right: Trump isn't doing bad bad stuff by himself (climate change ignorance aside), but the decisions he makes act as a conduit through which others can do very bad things in the long term.

 

I hope that clears things up a little about where things stand.

 

As an aside, the wall is a vanity project IMO and it doesn't concern me in terms of becoming a reality nearly as much as the three things given above.

[Captain...]

On 15/02/2019 at 10:09, MattP said:

We will.

 

I find it genuinely baffling anyone wants to increase costs on anything for the working or middle classes to be honest, if that means I have a victim complex then so be it, it's a pretty good one to have.

Fine let’s tax the Rich more!

 

Nobody is saying let’s hurt the poor, but what good is cheap flights for the working classes around a dying planet.

 

The closest similar example is tax on cigarettes, they bad for the individual, bad for the collective whole. The more people smoke the worse off we all are. Increasing taxes on cigarettes hurts the poor more than the rich. The purpose of the tax is not punitive but to compensate for the burden placed on the state by smokers.

 

The same for any tax on airlines, airports, aviation fuel. It is not punitive it is preventative.

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

It's fair to think that there is so much hyperbole that it is difficult to differentiate between that and real issues going on.

 

However, I think I can help with cutting through some of that and answering the question you pose with three things that IMO could have long-term bad ramifications that he is responsible for (sort of covered them in a jokey way a few posts back):

 

- Downplaying or flat-out ignoring the threat of climate change and legislative measures to that effect (like quitting the Paris Agreement). As anyone who knows me on here knows damn well, this is the biggie for me. For the wealthiest, most powerful nation on the planet (and the largest emissions per capita) to simply ignore how the Earth is and could change for whatever reason is practically criminally irresponsible; even if humans have zilch to do with the rise of CO2 levels in the atmosphere (and that's really unlikely) then the US government should at least be looking at analytical work on what that means and contingency plans to defend against the very real changes that can and will happen. Instead, Trump and his administration choose to do nothing. It also sends a message to nations like China and India who do a fair amount of pollution themselves that the US administration are totally OK with them continuing to pollute, which is also obviously harmful. It's short-sighted, short-term self-interest at its worst and it has the potential to be catastrophic.

 

- Not seeking to reign in the "alt-right". Though he may try to put some distance between him and them by disavowing their actions in statements, Trumps administration has done precious little to actually address the problem of white supremacists getting involved in various ideologically-motivated attacks in the US, resulting in a fair few deaths. Most of these guys think he's the Second Coming, and they have taken full advantage of the current political climate to do the kind of things they consider "fun", with law enforcement no longer focusing as much on tracking them down. Race relations in the US seemed to be progressing better before Trump took power, but since the dividing lines have only gotten deeper, as evidenced by the aforementioned attacks and the increasing two-sides polarisation. This has long-term consequences from formenting so much division that it will take a long time for divides based on race to heal once again once Trump leaves office.

 

- The Supreme Court picks thus far. Supreme Court justices serve for life, so by definition such decisions will be long-term...and fundies of various stripes see Trumps picks so far as a means to challenge both Roe v Wade and Obergefell v Hodges at the highest level. Though Trump isn't responsible for those challenges directly, that he picked two Justices who those fundies think ideal to mount such a challenge speaks volumes. Now, such challenges haven't really arisen yet; indeed, they might never do so, but that these picks offer an increased chance for such challenges worries a lot of women and a lot of LGBT folks that at least some of the rights they spoke for, marched for and often fought for, might be taken from them.

 

If you're seeing a recurring theme here, you'd be right: Trump isn't doing bad bad stuff by himself (climate change ignorance aside), but the decisions he makes act as a conduit through which others can do very bad things in the long term.

 

I hope that clears things up a little about where things stand.

 

As an aside, the wall is a vanity project IMO and it doesn't concern me in terms of becoming a reality nearly as much as the three things given above.

Thanks for that, thats stuff that could be said to reasonably  incur ire

 

The only one of your points which I have any thoughts on would be climate change, the others I dont feel informed enought to comment. Not that im informed about climate change either haha

 

Climate change is a more complicated one than many make out. We've got Democrats in America with a supposedly ludicrous green new deal suggestion (havent actually read it, but apparently its been roundly judged to be a joke). We dont really have a way of changing quick enough it seems, which is such a difficult problem that offered solutions to fix it seem are ridiculous because its such a tough problem, and that creates space for someone like Trump to just come in and dismiss the whole thing, which long term yes, could be terrible as when/if technology comes along that could really help the situation if there is no political will to utilise it due to Trump's policy then thats a disaster

 

Having said that, i heard Jordan Peterson suggest that people dont care about climate until they earn a certain amount, so it may be good to try to get as many people out of poverty as possible which will increase the number of those who can afford to care and also the number of those in a position to innovate, innovation being the only thing that can truly help (i dont know how valid these claims of his are, its interesting from a devil's advocate pov)

 

Idk f*** all about climate change though so am susceptible to the opinion of whichever convincing speaker i last heard on the topic.

 

As far as race relations go. Havent they been pretty poor under Obama? Have you heard Candace Owens speak on the topic of race in America? She claims the democrats have been awful for black people and she has some compelling arguments, along with others who say that leftist policies have been far worse for race issues than the alt right

 

Think you're spot on about the wall. Its very strange that they have a president obsessed with such a weird vanity project

 

 

 

 

Edited 16 February 2019 by AlloverthefloorYesNdidi

[Captain...]

52 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Thanks for that, thats stuff that could be said to reasonably  incur ire

 

The only one of your points which I have any thoughts on would be climate change, the others I dont feel informed enought to comment. Not that im informed about climate change either haha

 

Climate change is a more complicated one than many make out. We've got Democrats in America with a supposedly ludicrous green new deal suggestion (havent actually read it, but apparently its been roundly judged to be a joke). We dont really have a way of changing quick enough it seems, which is such a difficult problem that offered solutions to fix it seem are ridiculous because its such a tough problem, and that creates space for someone like Trump to just come in and dismiss the whole thing, which long term yes, could be terrible as when/if technology comes along that could really help the situation if there is no political will to utilise it due to Trump's policy then thats a disaster

 

Having said that, i heard Jordan Peterson suggest that people dont care about climate until they earn a certain amount, so it may be good to try to get as many people out of poverty as possible which will increase the number of those who can afford to care and also the number of those in a position to innovate, innovation being the only thing that can truly help (i dont know how valid these claims of his are, its interesting from a devil's advocate pov)

 

Idk f*** all about climate change though so am susceptible to the opinion of whichever convincing speaker i last heard on the topic.

 

As far as race relations go. Havent they been pretty poor under Obama? Have you heard Candace Owens speak on the topic of race in America? She claims the democrats have been awful for black people and she has some compelling arguments.

 

Think you're spot on about the wall. Its very strange that they have a president obsessed with such a weird vanity project

 

 

 

 

You don’t have to be an expert on climate change to be worried about it or start to do something about it.

 

What frustrates me is that there is so much that can be done now but is getting bogged down in legislation and political posturing.

 

1 example is make all new builds have integrated solar panels. Baffles me that that isn’t the case.

 

 

[leicsmac]

10 hours ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Thanks for that, thats stuff that could be said to reasonably  incur ire

 

The only one of your points which I have any thoughts on would be climate change, the others I dont feel informed enought to comment. Not that im informed about climate change either haha

 

Climate change is a more complicated one than many make out. We've got Democrats in America with a supposedly ludicrous green new deal suggestion (havent actually read it, but apparently its been roundly judged to be a joke). We dont really have a way of changing quick enough it seems, which is such a difficult problem that offered solutions to fix it seem are ridiculous because its such a tough problem, and that creates space for someone like Trump to just come in and dismiss the whole thing, which long term yes, could be terrible as when/if technology comes along that could really help the situation if there is no political will to utilise it due to Trump's policy then thats a disaster

 

Having said that, i heard Jordan Peterson suggest that people dont care about climate until they earn a certain amount, so it may be good to try to get as many people out of poverty as possible which will increase the number of those who can afford to care and also the number of those in a position to innovate, innovation being the only thing that can truly help (i dont know how valid these claims of his are, its interesting from a devil's advocate pov)

 

Idk f*** all about climate change though so am susceptible to the opinion of whichever convincing speaker i last heard on the topic.

 

As far as race relations go. Havent they been pretty poor under Obama? Have you heard Candace Owens speak on the topic of race in America? She claims the democrats have been awful for black people and she has some compelling arguments, along with others who say that leftist policies have been far worse for race issues than the alt right

 

Think you're spot on about the wall. Its very strange that they have a president obsessed with such a weird vanity project

 

 

Climate change is a complex issue, which makes things difficult as politics right now seems to be all about the simple dichotomies.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the GND is a light-pencil proposal that has some good ideas but needs to be more seriously and carefully structured before being put forward as serious policy - and that is happening. As far as the cost goes, it's a fair argument but the way I see it we either pay a fair amount now or pay much more later to a much more unforgiving entity. I think that humanity can innovate and change quickly when the situation demands it, but often that change doesn't come until disaster is staring them in the face and that lack of foresight might mean that by the time the effects of climate change becoming evident enough for action to be taken it's already too late to address adequately.

 

Encouraging developing nations to build their own economies in a sustainable fashion is a good idea - but that means actual collaboration and cooperation, something that seems to be dirty words to the Trumps of this world right now.

 

If you want to know more about what's going on, I'm happy to answer questions or direct you to places and people that have answers of their own.

 

As for race relations, IMO they improved under Obama with the exception of those who couldn't hack the idea of a black guy being President and kicked up a fuss about it. There's certainly a fair few black folks with conservative/Repub views batting about (Ben Carson being another one who comes to mind) and Dem policies are sometimes much more hand-holding and patronising than some folks might like but quite frankly it isn't elements of the Dem voters who think that black folks (and those of other skin colours than white) are inherently lesser than them. And they're not going tooled up into churches and schools and opening fire on them, either.

 

Again, it's a complex issue - more complex than many make it out to be - and there's no magic wand to solve it, and often the contents of your wallet have a big effect on what kind of privilege you have in the US. However, I do still think that divisions based on skin colour are a massive issue in the US and some of those behind Trump are nurturing that division for their own ends, viz. basic race hate.

[Guest MattP]

On 14/02/2019 at 07:34, MC Prussian said:

Why submit redacted phone records, though?

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/jussie-smollett-empire-chicago-attack-phone-records-police-505732161.html

 

Also, the alleged attack took place in an area inhibited mostly by black people and gays.

 

So, could it be that either the attack did not take place at all or the motive isn't a racial one?

Is starting to look like another hate crime hoax.

 

https://m.jpost.com/Diaspora/Jussie-Smollett-accused-of-planning-homophobic-racist-assault-on-himself-580889

[leicsmac]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

Is starting to look like another hate crime hoax.

 

https://m.jpost.com/Diaspora/Jussie-Smollett-accused-of-planning-homophobic-racist-assault-on-himself-580889

To expand:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47269827

 

Guess we'll see in court. Frankly, if it does turn out Smollett is spinning a yarn here it's totally bloody stupid, there's enough real racially motivated attacks going on in the timeline of this administration than to discredit legit cases by making one up.

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

To expand:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47269827

 

Guess we'll see in court. Frankly, if it does turn out Smollett is spinning a yarn here it's totally bloody stupid, there's enough real racially motivated attacks going on in the timeline of this administration than to discredit legit cases by making one up.

To be honest I don't even blame him, got him some PR and in the era of Trump you know the media will swallow this without any question.

 

Even if he has made it up they'll be many who still see him as a victim.

[MC Prussian]

22 hours ago, leicsmac said:

To expand:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47269827

 

Guess we'll see in court. Frankly, if it does turn out Smollett is spinning a yarn here it's totally bloody stupid, there's enough real racially motivated attacks going on in the timeline of this administration than to discredit legit cases by making one up.

What are you on about?

 

Racially motivated attacks in the US do happen on a more or less regular basis (not really difficult with the heterogenous population mix and 325+ million people living in the country), it has little to nothing to do with the current presidency.

That is just you saying "Trump makes racism happen", which is rather laughable.

Racists do not care about whom is president, they did not wait until Trump took office, only then for all hell to break loose.

What you consider causality is quite the stretch.

 

Also, no word on the media?

a) for printing that story before facts are/were known

b) for exploiting a story that fits the media's bias in their fight against Trump

c) for printing a "story" that - at least in my eyes - fades when you look at the more pressing issues in the country - an actor allegedly making up a racially motivated attack is gutter journalism

 

Not a big fan of the US media in general. Too much bi-partisanship going on, little independent outlets available.

[The Doctor]

23 hours ago, MattP said:

Is starting to look like another hate crime hoax.

 

https://m.jpost.com/Diaspora/Jussie-Smollett-accused-of-planning-homophobic-racist-assault-on-himself-580889

Except of course Chicago police had already denied that was the case: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-jussie-smollett-idUSKCN1Q32IG when it was reported by local TV there. What you've posted is national papers picking up already outdated local news and running with it to get the clicks anyway.

[leicsmac]

4 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

What are you on about?

 

Racially motivated attacks in the US do happen on a more or less regular basis (not really difficult with the heterogenous population mix and 325+ million people living in the country), it has little to nothing to do with the current presidency.

That is just you saying "Trump makes racism happen", which is rather laughable.

Racists do not care about whom is president, they did not wait until Trump took office, only then for all hell to break loose.

What you consider causality is quite the stretch.

 

Also, no word on the media?

a) for printing that story before facts are/were known

b) for exploiting a story that fits the media's bias in their fight against Trump

c) for printing a "story" that - at least in my eyes - fades when you look at the more pressing issues in the country - an actor allegedly making up a racially motivated attack is gutter journalism

 

Not a big fan of the US media in general. Too much bi-partisanship going on, little independent outlets available.

Allow me to clarify then: there has been a marked rise in hate crimes reported by law enforcement over the past couple of years, as noted by those same law enforcement agencies:

 

https://www.justice.gov/hatecrimes/hate-crime-statistics

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/us/hate-crimes-fbi-2017.html

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/11/13/hate-crimes-in-the-united-states-increased-last-year-the-fbi-says/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1c0e361ee710

 

Now, of course this might be merely coincidental and correlation does not equal causation and of course racists have always existed and FWIW I think that Trump himself isn't directly prejudiced (if anything his most likely prejudice is based on the amount of cash you've got).

 

However...it isn't too much of a stretch, given all of the rhetoric that has been displayed around and about this administration, that them being in the ascendant has allowed those with such racist feeling to feel bolder and thus more likely to carry out such crimes. It's not what you'd call clear and convincing proof, but thankfully we're not in a courtroom and this isn't a scientific peer review hearing either - I can say the balance of probability favours a link between this administration and an increased incidence of hate crimes, you can dismiss the link entirely (unless you want to challenge the veracity of the figures themselves which seem fairly clear). It just seems reasonably simple to me that someone who the (majority) of racists like getting himself elected would give strength and validation to those same racists, even if the guy himself has tried to distance himself from them.

 

WRT the media, the polarisation is massive as you say, and as such I think this is just another part of that - there is always areas of the media who are going to try and smear politicians with whom they disagree, and I don't see this particular event being noteworthy in that regard.

 

And one more thing: when it comes to the more pressing issues in the country, the Repubs haven't got a leg to stand on because the most pressing issue of all is one about which they either deny there's a problem at all or acknowledge it but don't care as they think they'll be dead before it affects them.

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

On ‎17‎/‎02‎/‎2019 at 02:56, leicsmac said:

Climate change is a complex issue, which makes things difficult as politics right now seems to be all about the simple dichotomies.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the GND is a light-pencil proposal that has some good ideas but needs to be more seriously and carefully structured before being put forward as serious policy - and that is happening. As far as the cost goes, it's a fair argument but the way I see it we either pay a fair amount now or pay much more later to a much more unforgiving entity. I think that humanity can innovate and change quickly when the situation demands it, but often that change doesn't come until disaster is staring them in the face and that lack of foresight might mean that by the time the effects of climate change becoming evident enough for action to be taken it's already too late to address adequately.

 

Encouraging developing nations to build their own economies in a sustainable fashion is a good idea - but that means actual collaboration and cooperation, something that seems to be dirty words to the Trumps of this world right now.

 

If you want to know more about what's going on, I'm happy to answer questions or direct you to places and people that have answers of their own.

 

As for race relations, IMO they improved under Obama with the exception of those who couldn't hack the idea of a black guy being President and kicked up a fuss about it. There's certainly a fair few black folks with conservative/Repub views batting about (Ben Carson being another one who comes to mind) and Dem policies are sometimes much more hand-holding and patronising than some folks might like but quite frankly it isn't elements of the Dem voters who think that black folks (and those of other skin colours than white) are inherently lesser than them. And they're not going tooled up into churches and schools and opening fire on them, either.

 

Again, it's a complex issue - more complex than many make it out to be - and there's no magic wand to solve it, and often the contents of your wallet have a big effect on what kind of privilege you have in the US. However, I do still think that divisions based on skin colour are a massive issue in the US and some of those behind Trump are nurturing that division for their own ends, viz. basic race hate.

Maybe Trump has stirred things up somehow and thats exacerbated some racial issues in a country famous for it, but is he more than a superficial contributor?

 

Perhaps Trump has exarcerbated things somehow, but this article I've read recently is much more shocking than anything i've read about Trump.  How could the educational establishment be in such a state for such stupid reasons?  The teacher writing this piece says its not funding thats the issue, but the approach of the educational establishment... if they cant teach the kids the basics anymore how are they supposed to tackle something is monumental as climate change...

 

https://quillette.com/2019/02/10/public-educations-dirty-secret/

 

 

 

[leicsmac]

12 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Maybe Trump has stirred things up somehow and thats exacerbated some racial issues in a country famous for it, but is he more than a superficial contributor?

 

Perhaps Trump has exarcerbated things somehow, but this article I've read recently is much more shocking than anything i've read about Trump.  How could the educational establishment be in such a state for such stupid reasons?  The teacher writing this piece says its not funding thats the issue, but the approach of the educational establishment... if they cant teach the kids the basics anymore how are they supposed to tackle something is monumental as climate change...

 

https://quillette.com/2019/02/10/public-educations-dirty-secret/

 

 

 

Interesting read, that.

From the same site :

 

https://quillette.com/2019/01/25/the-right-needs-to-grow-up-on-environmentalism/

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

12 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Interesting read, that.

From the same site :

 

https://quillette.com/2019/01/25/the-right-needs-to-grow-up-on-environmentalism/

Aye, Trump invoking that stupid 'the weather is cold today so the climate isnt warming' argument is ridiculous

 

 

[Captain...]

3 hours ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Maybe Trump has stirred things up somehow and thats exacerbated some racial issues in a country famous for it, but is he more than a superficial contributor?

 

Perhaps Trump has exarcerbated things somehow, but this article I've read recently is much more shocking than anything i've read about Trump.  How could the educational establishment be in such a state for such stupid reasons?  The teacher writing this piece says its not funding thats the issue, but the approach of the educational establishment... if they cant teach the kids the basics anymore how are they supposed to tackle something is monumental as climate change...

 

https://quillette.com/2019/02/10/public-educations-dirty-secret/

 

 

 

It’s an interesting question. Which came first the racist president or the racist electorate. I’m aware neither Trump nor the American people as a homogeneous mass are actually racist, but has the increase in racial tensions lead to a rich white man with questionable views replacing a black man at the top. Or has having a rich white man with questionable views in charge empowered the racist elements of US society?

 

Or is it all just coincidence?

 

I do wonder how much the president and their views influence American society. If you think of POTUS as a boss, are you more likely to make a risqué borderline racist joke/comment at work with a black man as your boss or an older white guy who doesn’t seem that bothered by race relations? Does that approach extrapolate out over a country?

 

Seemingly racially motivated crimes are on the increase in the US and whether influenced directly or indirectly by the Donald he certainly doesn’t seem to be in a hurry to do much about it.

[The Doctor]

1 hour ago, Captain... said:

It’s an interesting question. Which came first the racist president or the racist electorate. 

This is only a difficult question to answer if we acknowledge that most presidents were racist. If we're just referring to Trump:
 

www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2009/racist-backlash-greets-president-barack-obama

 

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/11/01/u-wisconsin-criticized-over-response-costume-depicting-lynched-obama

 

https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/305749-republicans-employ-double-standard-to-discredit

 

 

 

America has a long history of heavy racist elements in its electorate, and the election of Trump was a backlash from those troglodytes for Obama's crime of being president while black - which is why even though he was your standard American war hawk, they still consider him a traitor (something they oddly don't extend to Trump, a president who blatantly colluded with hostile forces to get elected)

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

On ‎16‎/‎02‎/‎2019 at 10:57, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

,Thats true, but is that opinions on his character or has he done something that has actual long term ramifications that are particularly bad? Comparable to the referendum as far as bringing in chaos?

 

Of course the wall idea is absurd, if that happens, that just seems like the policy of a troll

 

The man is bizarre as a president, but have to ask what has been irking people so much that he got elected

 

I have become so disillusioned with the left recently I find it hard to censure Trump and feel like now he's made it even easier for leftists to get on a high horse and lose touch with any sensible mission their political perspective should have, and i mean that as a criticism of them and how reactionary they are rather than criticism of him

 

I say this as someone who has always been naturally left leaning until recently. I can see why the trolls are doing so well

Ah Labour, the party of the left, with the extreme right hand views.

Edited 18 February 2019 by DANGEROUS TIGER

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

I don't know how many of you have seen "The Purge" films, but I reckon the Trump administration would really like to carry it out.

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

5 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said:

Ah Labour, the party of the left, with the extreme right hand views.

Who said anything about labour?

[MC Prussian]

20 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Allow me to clarify then: there has been a marked rise in hate crimes reported by law enforcement over the past couple of years, as noted by those same law enforcement agencies:

 

https://www.justice.gov/hatecrimes/hate-crime-statistics

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/us/hate-crimes-fbi-2017.html

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/11/13/hate-crimes-in-the-united-states-increased-last-year-the-fbi-says/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1c0e361ee710

 

Now, of course this might be merely coincidental and correlation does not equal causation and of course racists have always existed and FWIW I think that Trump himself isn't directly prejudiced (if anything his most likely prejudice is based on the amount of cash you've got).

 

However...it isn't too much of a stretch, given all of the rhetoric that has been displayed around and about this administration, that them being in the ascendant has allowed those with such racist feeling to feel bolder and thus more likely to carry out such crimes. It's not what you'd call clear and convincing proof, but thankfully we're not in a courtroom and this isn't a scientific peer review hearing either - I can say the balance of probability favours a link between this administration and an increased incidence of hate crimes, you can dismiss the link entirely (unless you want to challenge the veracity of the figures themselves which seem fairly clear). It just seems reasonably simple to me that someone who the (majority) of racists like getting himself elected would give strength and validation to those same racists, even if the guy himself has tried to distance himself from them.

 

WRT the media, the polarisation is massive as you say, and as such I think this is just another part of that - there is always areas of the media who are going to try and smear politicians with whom they disagree, and I don't see this particular event being noteworthy in that regard.

 

And one more thing: when it comes to the more pressing issues in the country, the Repubs haven't got a leg to stand on because the most pressing issue of all is one about which they either deny there's a problem at all or acknowledge it but don't care as they think they'll be dead before it affects them.

You can skew any statistics in your favour. 

 

The term "hate crime" is rather modern and a bit of a muddy one, as the subjective perception of "hate" comes into play, the categorization isn't that easy, and what some would consider a "hate crime" is simply an offense to others or not a crime at all. Just because these "crimes" were reported doesn't mean they were legit or the people in question persecuted.

It's not as simple as saying that there's an increase in "hate", it's also down to the "victims" perceiving simple opinion or an offense as "hate". You could thus equally say that some people have developed a lower level of tolerance once they feel offended. The term "Snowflakes" springs to mind.

 

Also, as you can see in the links you provided, "hate crimes" in the US have been on the rise for three consecutive years (2015, 2016, 2017) - two out of those years under the Obama administration, and the trend in all likelihood starting as early as 2014....

 

And to top it all off, the 7'100 reported "hate crimes"in the US fade in comparison to 1.2 million violent crimes for the same year - we're talking 0.85% here:

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2017-crime-statistics-released-092418

 

I just find it odd you tend to think Trump acts as a catalyst for all things racist - or at least that's how it comes across. That's a simplistic view of things.

 

As for the "more pressing issues", I was referring to US-specific problems, such as education, equality of opportunity, welfare, border control, infrastructure, health insurance, minimum wage, but also a flaming conflict between extremists on the left and the right, etc.

 

Edited 19 February 2019 by MC Prussian