Biden calls Cuba a ‘failed state’, and communism a ‘failed system’

[jvikings1]

10 minutes ago, WVProgressive said:

Also, in regards to our, debt, yes, as a raw number, we have way, way, way more debt than anyone else. However, if we look at the debt as a percentage of our GDP, our 102% may look bad at first glance, but when we look at other comparable first, and second world nations, we're doing relatively well. Nobodies banging the drum about the imminent collapse of the British, French, Japanese, or Canadian economies, and societies, and personally, I'd rather live in America, Japan, or England, over China, India, or Russia, despite the fact that the latter three countries have Debt GPD% far better than any 1st world country, with the exception of the Netherlands.

Our debt to GDP ration is actually above 120%. But if you consider our terrible unfunded liabilities numbers, we are in an incredibly worse state of affairs.

[Timur]

3 hours ago, Patine said:

I've never said it was anywhere NEAR the worst!

Well you sometimes talk like it is.

 

[Timur]

4 hours ago, Patine said:

The biggest problem facing Canada that must be addressed, that is potentially extistential to it as a nation-state as we know it (and the UK, too, growingly) is regional alienation and separatism. Indigenous anger and alienation are also growing issues of major concern in Canada, rapidly eclipsing their analogs in Australia and New Zealand. These are VERY serious issues, and very much worry me. I never said the U.S. was unique in facing issues threatening it's collapse, or at least great diminishment on the global stage as a power.

 

6 hours ago, Patine said:

Faith rather than action is such a monastic point of view. I don't say what I say because of cackling glee of a Saturday Morning Cartoon villain or a nihilistic, cynical, deconstructionist, Frankfurt-school pretentious Goth, like you seem to portray. There are very real - and ignored - problems of monumental proportions that are, "inconvenient truths," - unaddressed, because doing so would undermine the current political and plutocratic elite - not because they aren't valid, or even very worrisome problems. And Trump used superficially similar terminology, yes - but only for a cynical power grab that made things worse, not to fix anything. I am nothing like this. Did it not occur to you, when criticizing my motives, what's at stake for me? The U.S. is, "too big to fail," but if - and probably when - they do, there's no one CAPABLE of a bailout, and the whole globe, other than maybe some Brazilian Amazon Rainforest unconnected tribes and isolated people in the highlands of New Guinea, are going with you into a global Dark Age of monstrous proportions! Do not think my concern is pleasure, doom-and-gloom for it's own sake, or other such disingenuous and insulting accusations. I want to the course bettered and steered with a steady hand on the tiller and a clear head as much as any sane and rational person should!

I had better study the economic theories of Lyndon LaRouche and his prophecies of the coming apocalyptic economic collapse.

And yes, the US will fall, maybe collapse economically as well. All countries existing will probably do so sooner or later.

Edited July 17, 2021 by Timur

[Timur]

3 hours ago, Patine said:

If you did read those posts, I can't comprehend how you cannot see it.

I view things with a different lens. Also, I do not view that he was asking you to idolize Mr. Peterson, just to look at the video, but you did not even look at it and then make your criticisms, but proceeded to call him a "hack" (maybe true or not, but I think it's being way too blunt).

It is certain that we don't view things from the same perspective.  Maybe your getting angry because of the word "boomer" is because you're older and Pringles is younger.  I still remember getting (ridiculously) offended/insulted because of the word "dude."

Edited July 17, 2021 by Timur

[Timur]

@DakotaHale, I feel this thread might get more toxic, so I would be glad if it gets locked.

[Timur]

Just now, Timur said:

I view things with a different lens. Also, I do not view that he was asking you to idolize Mr. Peterson, just to look at it, but you did not even look at it and then make your criticisms.

It is certain that we don't view things from the same perspective.  Maybe your getting angry because of the word "boomer" is because you're older and Pringles is younger.  I still remember getting (ridiculously) offended/insulted because of the word "dude."

Also, I was gone for a while, so I'm not acquainted with all the fights with Anthony, and I haven't taken time to read many of the posts by PoliticalPundit (Toxic behavior for certain. He did behave terribly in the Kanye West thread for certain (but I read that thread, so I know.))

[Timur]

2 hours ago, Patine said:

He expected that my capitulation to accepting the vapid, zeitgeist catchphrase and it's validity would be a guarantee just because it endorsed by Petersen, whom he was practically worshipfully of. He was angry I wasn't interested in Petersen's opinion (much less being, "converted," by it), and he abused the tools of moderation to make an example of me and try to prove his rhetorical supremacy, creating the final nail in already ruined credibility as deserving to be called a, "moderator," without insulting those on other Internet forums who actually earn the title and have a degree of legitimacy. I think, "petulant censor," is a better title there for Anthony than, "moderator."

Like @Pringles, you obviously don't know that I'm Generation X, not a Boomer, but since the latter term is being used in an inflammatory way, anyways, I don't see a reason to cut it any slack and not view it as a personal attack from either of you. I never commented on the term, "dude."

Maybe, maybe not. Not sure.

Actually, the boomer thing is not an inflammatory term nor meant to be, but you merely think it is. It's really meant to be a lighthearted joke.  I'm comparing this to my previous impression that the people using "dude" at me were insulting/mocking me when they weren't.

Edited July 17, 2021 by Timur

[Timur]

2 hours ago, Patine said:

I am bone sick of the toxic trend that unpopular or uncomfortable opinions must be ratcheted up being conflated with among with extreme possibly and remotely relative near examples to disingenuously smear them. Concern of economic mismanagement, even with dire consequences MUST be tied to Lyndon LaRouche. Criticizing the lack of competitiveness, the unfair setup, and institutional suppression of Third Party and Independent candidates in the U.S. MUST be tied to Trumpists, the LEAST representative of such critics, as Trump already won the broken and non-fully-free-and-fair election system, manipulating the way the GOP Primaries worked and winning by losing the popular vote, but is bitter he didn't get the re-election (after benefitting the almost universal tradition of an incumbent running for re-election rarely being allowed significant opposition in their Party Primary for re-nomination) he felt entitled to. And there are many other ridiculous examples too, of which I have unfairly plastered with quite a few. Such tactics HURT the integrity of your - and other's who use them - arguments, in case you were unaware...

The suppression, etc. of Third Party candidates was done by the two parties, I can get that. Like the 15% required for debate.

The LaRouche statement was partly a joke. It was just that your seeming apocalyptic statements reminded me of LaRouche. Also, your rather peculiar wording somewhat reminded me of it. And yes, I think you are being too apocalyptic.

Edited July 17, 2021 by Timur

[pilight]

Under fiat currency, federal debt isn't debt in the same sense that individuals have debt.  The feds always have money if they want or need it.  The federal debt is just a total of how much US money exists in the system.  The worry isn't that the US will default, that can't really happen.  The worry is that US dollars will lose value.

[jvikings1]

2 hours ago, pilight said:

Under fiat currency, federal debt isn't debt in the same sense that individuals have debt.  The feds always have money if they want or need it.  The federal debt is just a total of how much US money exists in the system.  The worry isn't that the US will default, that can't really happen.  The worry is that US dollars will lose value.

Correct, which is what we’ve seen with this significant inflation spike throughout the year so far (and likely for a while into the net future as well). And with some of these spending proposals, there’s a good chance that it gets even worse

[pilight]

19 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

Correct, which is what we’ve seen with this significant inflation spike throughout the year so far (and likely for a while into the net future as well). And with some of these spending proposals, there’s a good chance that it gets even worse

Yes.  If the inflation can't be controlled through interest rates, the proper response would be to raise taxes.  That would take money out of the system, thereby increasing its value.

[Pringles]

4 minutes ago, Patine said:

14 hours ago, Patine said:

Like @Pringles, you obviously don't know that I'm Generation X, not a Boomer, but since the latter term is being used in an inflammatory way, anyways, I don't see a reason to cut it any slack and not view it as a personal attack from either of you. I never commented on the term, "dude."

 

Just to clarify, I was only laughing at this part. 😞 

5 minutes ago, Patine said:

The "insane laughter at of the Batman villain," at something not at all funny, and not at all appropriate to laugh at, strikes again, eh, @Pringles. I think I must reiterate my suggestion to seek psychiatric help. As some who has sought it myself in my youth, I can highly recommend it, despite the social stigma.