LuckyPierre @ LuckyPierre @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

59

Joined

8 mo. ago

Tuberculosis is also carried in unpastuerised milk. The US currently has the largest outbreak in its history.

The US cannot "annex" or "invade" Canada.

Both are key members of NATO. That means that all other members must defend any fellow country if it's invaded. Almost the entire western world - INCLUDING AMERICA - would have to defend Canada.

It's just Trump spreading lies and misinformation to distract from him stealing American's money. Same as always.

The NATO Alliance consists of 30 member states from North America and Europe. Article Five of the treaty states that if an armed attack occurs against one of the member states, it should be considered an attack against all members, and other members shall assist the attacked member, with armed forces if necessary.

If, as most economists agree, tariffs hurt the importing country most - why would Canada do that to its own people?

I get the feeling many of these people are also preppers and actively yearn for a crash to justify spending their lives readying for it.

Democracy isn't about getting your own way.

True democracy (Direct Democracy) can't happen - you'd need to vote in every single decision. Without everyone's decision, nothing could get done. It's bad enough for a family of four to agree what movie to watch, let alone a whole country. It would be democratic if most people watched what they wanted, but the logistics for a country ain't gonna work.

That's why most Western countries in the world have Representative Democracy - we elect people to do that stuff on our behalf, and are aware of affecting factors. And by and large, it works. Sure, there are always failings and scandals and someone can point these out, because human beings like to cheat and have their own agendas, and of course, power corrupts. Sadly, there is no form of government that is safe from subversion.

If you don't like a decision, vote for a representative that you think will do more of what you want. Or form an effective protest.

Poor guy.

Imagine qualifying as a lawyer - spending years learning the legal system and full of hope and promise. You're going to change the world and make it a better place. Your life is spent working your way up in seniority until you land the ultimate case - prosecuting an ex president for fraud and corruption. You expose the lies and illegal manipulation and prove them beyond reasonable doubt. And against all odds, you win! Best day ever. Everyone slapping your back and telling you what a great guy you are, so clever, and this piece of shit is really going to get his comeuppance.

And then, despite knowing that they're voting for a criminal, half the voting people of your country still elect him into office, knowing full well that he's going to continue being the same awful human being that you proved him in court to be.

Justice, the system you've spent your life believing in and working for is pushed aside. The sentence is reduced to nothing - less than a starving person would get for stealing a loaf of bread to feed their family.

How the fuck do you continue after that?

How can you believe in any system that lets that happen?

Obviously he couldn't, and I respect that. I'd be heading into the woods to get away from everyone.

Actually, I think you have a point. The candidacy selection is rigged. The whole fundraising and insane costs of electioneering is absolutely crazy - most other countries have laws specifically to limit campaigning funds, explicitly to stop rich people buying the top position.

What chance does an independent have to be president? Is the American Dream of a poor person being able to reach presidency still possible? Zero unless they get very rich, or have super rich friends.

It's not hard to see why America is accused of being an Oligarchy - that's exactly how it's upper tier of politics is designed to operate.

I'm certain it's not - but it doesn't matter. Trump has proved that he is beyond the law in every way.

Clinton got impeached for lying and it ruined his credibility. Trump lies all the time and gets re-elected, but has no credibility to ruin.

Then I'd have someone else accusing me of ripping off this guy.

The guy is never going to run out of dead cats to grab headlines and avert attention from more important things.

You should do this for other countries too. America isn't the only country with an idealised view of what other people think of them.

Nor the television (Scottish). Nor the radio (Canadian and Italian).

They're being shaken down. Same as Mark Zuckerberg being summoned to a meeting with Trump and the next day paying $1m to the same fund.

I'm betting these meetings went something like, "You don't want a president as an enemy, do you? Cough up."

And don't think of it as a tax on the rich - it's not going towards the benefit of the American people. It's extortion.

Americans have got to learn how to vote for their own interests.

When one candidate as actively campaigning on the basis of ripping apart a healthcare system put in place by the previous one (Trump with Affordable Care Act) and then wins, twice, it's hard to understand why they're surprised that they're in this situation.

Dude, even if OP is a guy, he might still be in love with him.

And how much of that will find its way into his personal funds? So many big donations from big companies already - he's going to milk this for all the money he can.

Huh? Isn't he entitled to the best defence he can get?

Innocent until proven guilty, remember.

Same in the UK - and in part it's encouraged by the regulatory body, the Charity Commission to ensure competent senior staff. (Not usually as high as the example you give, but certainly most large charities pay senior grade around £100k and upwards.

You can kind of see that point, but most people would be shocked and dismayed to know how little difference their individual donation makes.

I always encourage people to check this information as you've done for your country before donating. Many charities can do a huge amount of good with small donations, but it's the big ones that can make effective change through lobbying.

But the more cynical amongst you will realise that charities exist on paper to solve problems. There is an inherent contradiction that if they do solve those problems, everyone that works for them is suddenly out of work.

I tried it a few years ago and gave up after an hour of not knowing what to do. But I had this week off and tried it again, it I'm really enjoying it this time. It's not like anything else, and once that initial bump is passed its learning curve is really quite good.

Fun fact: Where I live (Devon, England), every common person once had to spent two days a month working for their local Lord for free, maintaining the roads. That's as well as paying rent to them, of course. Plus, they had to provide tithes to the Church as well as grow or raise enough food for their family. And if they had any strong sons that might be particularly useful in working their meagre strip of land, they'd be conscripted for the Crown's armies.

They worked 7 days a week. Incredibly hard and long days by our standards. The only half day they got off was to go to church, which wasn't really optional. (You weren't forced, but the whole community turned against you if you didn't)