Politics thread (USA Elections 2016) - Page 206

On March 01 2020 17:15 Stroggoz wrote: I don't get the critique over trump for his intelligence or business skills. none of the policy failure's i listed about trump are intellectual failures. I don't have much against his business or intellectual skills, or his 'competency' in politics. They are somewhat important but the big failures of his have been moral, and do not have much to do with his intelligence and finance skills. (he obviously knows climate change is real and caused by people) I'm still sticking with my view that Trump is morally the worst person in history, going off only one of his policies: (total climate denial).

really, the worst

Think of how much suffering total climate denial causes.

On February 29 2020 01:13 Loco wrote:

Went back and watched the first hour. It was a bit of a mess. Oh wellz. I might check out Matt's writing though so I guess it may have worked.

See this is the disadvantage of democracy over dictatorships and monarchies
- All politicians have a huge incentive to enact policies that are good for the short term
And do what their voters want - and normal people have a short term bias

All leaders in history have been guilty of this to some extent - and in democracy it's especially tempting to focus on benefiting people in their now and lifetimes, because you are judged in elections every 2-5 years that decide if you get power. And voters have been short term oriented.

Take the industrial revolution - in London the fog from burning coal was so thick that you'd have to light a match in daylight to read a sign, building were black from ash live stock and people were directly visibly affected and literally dying by the thousands and cutting their lifespans, did that slow anyone's coal usage down? - No, because it made life comfortable in the moment. But it was obviously and visibly terrible for the mid long run and the environment...

Same With the US when Europeans got there they expected thick forests for building material. There were plenty, but also surprisingly vast regions had grassland and almost English looking parks - turns out the Native American burned massive forest areas purely so they can harvest Bison more conveniently...


This is the reason why people told AOC to say world will end in 10 years of we don't act radically
- They are trying to do the right thing for the long run, and lie so they also get elected in the short.


Man made climate change won't create large scale disasters in most people's lifetimes, certainly not kill 5% or more of the population in their lifetime

You either need a change in short term incentive bias in the political system. Have politicians who willingly hurt their careers for long term good on both sides

Change in society as a whole where people will start caring about impact of their decision have 100+years from now on in humanity.

Or societies that change their values and stop thinking about humanity as something superior and more about the planet in the first place - and do more right things on a daily basis because they are right for the environment, not because a few hundred million people might die 100 years from now.


The latter is already happening in society and just has to become mainstream when the current generations that are at the helm die out
And even short term incentivised politicians will have to follow suit to get elected

So I don't judge Trump in the least. He's there to win, and his game is to get elected. He's always been very face up about that yet gets to office anyways.
And he just does what the voters want
And historically the state of the immediate economy has always been a driving force in re-elections, not long term environmental policies. Unless the voter Base or system change you will keep getting politicians like that.

And if you mean that he will do what it takes to get elected and pushes morals aside
And if large majority of voters were environmentally conscious he'd be all up in there at his rallies boasting about how he's the best for the environment and improving it big league.
You're obviously right - and you could say that about almost any politician.

Even Bernie to some extent - he knows he has to play the game, although he has been one of the most consistent people when it comes to his public beliefs regardless of political tides.

Lemon what a bunch of bullshit you just wrote, how can u be so wrong on every single statement you make is beyond me. (apart from the very obvious ones)

Man made climate change won't create large scale disasters in most people's lifetimes, certainly not kill 5% or more of the population in their lifetime

You should show how you're measuring that, really interested

See this is the disadvantage of democracy over dictatorships and monarchies - All politicians have a huge incentive to enact policies that are good for the short term And do what their voters want - and normal people have a short term bias

Opposite to dictatorships and monarchies who are well known for their great longterm policies

On March 03 2020 09:20 Spitfiree wrote: Lemon what a bunch of bullshit you just wrote, how can u be so wrong on every single statement you make is beyond me. (apart from the very obvious ones)

Do you really expect me to read the rest of your post when you start like this?

There's really no evidence that any democratic countries in the world exist, you either live in a type of oligarchy or dictatorship. One way which democracy is undermined is through Public Relations, and as you know one of it's acheivements has been to convince the public that climate change is a hoax. So yes, i think under conditions of actual democracy, where PR and the corporate controlled media don't exist, you would have a public that cares far more about the future than dictators like MbS, Xi Jinping, and Putin.

I think e.g. the Soviet union was a drastic dictatorship and they got to just push a long term agenda that was supposed to lead to communism eventually

It's just easier when you don't have to make the public not only actively like you but get up off their ass and vote for you.

It's the same In China - They get to push long term thinking programs that are unpopular because they lack the pressure of elections, their main pressure is just regime overthrow.

On March 03 2020 10:25 LemOn[5thF] wrote: Show nested quote + On March 03 2020 09:20 Spitfiree wrote: Lemon what a bunch of bullshit you just wrote, how can u be so wrong on every single statement you make is beyond me. (apart from the very obvious ones) Do you really expect me to read the rest of your post when you start like this?

you don't offer any facts to what your saying. Putin is a climate denier for example, that's one example of a dictator who doesn't care about the future when it comes to climate change. Mohammid Bin Salmon and other MENA dictators don't care obviously. These dictators have gained unimaginable wealth from fossil fuels. China is a mixed story, however. It's the biggest emittor but it's also the worlds factory for EU/US corporations and it is at least investing quite significantly in wind, solar, EV's, and cut meat consumption.

On March 03 2020 12:44 Stroggoz wrote: There's really no evidence that any democratic countries in the world exist, you either live in a type of oligarchy or dictatorship. One way which democracy is undermined is through Public Relations, and as you know one of it's acheivements has been to convince the public that climate change is a hoax. So yes, i think under conditions of actual democracy, where PR and the corporate controlled media don't exist, you would have a public that cares far more about the future than dictators like MbS, Xi Jinping, and Putin.

Well I might live in a bubble
Hmmm I definitely do actually when I think about it more
I'm having a birthday party this month with 15 people, everyone has a bachelor's degree minimum and most work in corporations when looking at the attendance list....So this is just anecdotal with a tainted sample (EDIT: Hidden brag I guess yes lol)

But it feels like my and the one below generation are radically more aware of both caring about the environment as a core value and not just about humans, and of limitations of free will and how marketing and media constantly attempts to manipulate their habits.
On top of that Psychological flexibility seems to be starting to seep into the mainstream culture in that generation also...

Sure, the Trumps of the world do have their agenda behind them of helping their rich friends
But people like him and standard politicians are in politics for the sake of winning and having power for power's sake right?
And if at least what I see of my peers and the upcoming generation becomes mainstream they will just mimic those opinions with policies as it will give them power and put them into office.

On March 03 2020 14:28 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On March 03 2020 10:25 LemOn[5thF] wrote:   On March 03 2020 09:20 Spitfiree wrote: Lemon what a bunch of bullshit you just wrote, how can u be so wrong on every single statement you make is beyond me. (apart from the very obvious ones) Do you really expect me to read the rest of your post when you start like this? you don't offer any facts to what your saying. Putin is a climate denier for example, that's one example of a dictator who doesn't care about the future when it comes to climate change. Mohammid Bin Salmon and other MENA dictators don't care obviously. These dictators have gained unimaginable wealth from fossil fuels. China is a mixed story, however. It's the biggest emittor but it's also the worlds factory for EU/US corporations and it is at least investing quite significantly in wind, solar, EV's, and cut meat consumption.

I was talking in a principle
When you have no elections to worry about
You can focus way more on your long term agenda whatever it is.
I don't think there has been a dictator that was environment centered
But there could be technically

Well
Maybe it is all bull, and the tech companies and governments will just mold public opinion without most people realizing.
My country has pretty much a Czech Bloomberg prime minister who just won by hiring amazing marketing companies and pumping money in
But their voters are older people and people less educated...

I do have hope. There was a good discussion on this one
Well harari had a discussion, Zucc was just defending facebook stances but definitely worth the watch

i was wrong!!

Lol they've done it it seems
DNC Just digging their own graves
Biden will win
Bloomberg dropped out, endorsed him and will pump money into his campaign

I don't see how Biden can beat Trump

No Clinton voter who challenged Trump's mental state can possibly be excused for voting for someone as obviously gone as Biden

there's no excuse for voting trump either way though, so I guess everybody should just stay home.

^ sure there is, if you're an accelerationist

voting for biden is much better than staying home, vs trump. The ethical argument for lesser evilism is strong imo.

On March 04 2020 17:57 Stroggoz wrote: voting for biden is much better than staying home, vs trump. The ethical argument for lesser evilism is strong imo.

This will be the same as with Hillary
Turns out anti something people are a lot less likely to actually go through the process of voting for someone they don't care about

Warren Bernie and everyone else kept repeating they need highest voter turnout in history to win
it's just not happening for Biden


Btw people that know him - are his gafs and spacing out something that shows his age or has he alwas been doing that?