No.14651[Last 50 Posts]
File: 1730873338601.png (301.23 KB, 1079x1114, 1079:1114, Screenshot_20241106-010711.png) ImgOps Google
It looks like Trump won.
No.14655
>>14654house, senate, and the governors are all red.
What a time.
No.14659
>>14658The fact is no one cares what you look like, who you want to sleep with, or what fairy tail you want to pretend you're playing the leading role in. Identity politics has failed.
You being [whatever] doesn't mean people have to [destroy their country] because it might tangentially align with your interests just because you're part of [insert "marginalized" group here].
No.14660
>>14659Why can't I just live my life as normal? Go to my religious institutions? Go to grocery stores? Go to libraries? Go to pharmacies? Go to resturants? And so on?
Why am I not allowed to exist, and why should I be forcibly barred from all of those places due to something as stupid as my skin color or who I want to marry?
Why is certain people marrying an evil thing that's destroying America? Or us volunteering? Or us getting medical care? Or us living as neighbors? Why does us doing so murder America as you see it?
Why do you consider us to be life-unworthy-of-life in the first place? Why do you hate us so much? Why can't we just co-exist?
No.14663
>>14661>>14662The official government of the State of Texas is literally right, at this exact second, suing my own hospital (UT Southwestern) in order to not just prevent it from seeing transgender patients but punish it for having done so in the past.
Stop being fucking liars. I can't live. I can't exist.
You far-right fanatics are literally trying to destroy a fucking hospital, of all things, due to your hatred. My. Fucking. Hospital.
No.14665
>>14663If they hadn't been trans'ing the kids, they wouldn't be getting sued right now.
What does that have to do with you existing?
No.14666
>>14665The fuck are you talking about? The government is cracking down on us existing. It's getting rid of us. Because we shouldn't exist.
How are you not undertanding this?
If the government declared the same way that, say, Catholicism is an evil ideology and thus any children who go to a Catholic Church for something like, say, a bake sale to help the local nuns must be punished... would you be okay with that as well? Because it's an act of evil that's "Christianizing the kids"?
No.14667
>>14665>>14666Is your argument that I shouldn't care about my local hospital and my neighbor kids because I'm an adult and could just go to another hospital?
Does that mean that if somebody brought an AR-15 to your local Baptist church and shot all of the children present that you'd not care because you weren't there that day, and you're just going to find another church?
Are you mentally not capable of understanding human emotions?
No.14668
>>14666So the government currently under Joe Biden and Kamala Harris has been cracking down on you? Most interesting.
>>14667Maybe you should choose a hospital not involved in blatant ethics violations.
No.14669
>>14668Do you seriously not understand the concept that harming children is an inherently bad thing?
What exactly do you want done to children that you and people like you perceive as inferior, due to them being deaf or trans or in a wheelchair or whatever else?
Should they just be put into camps and gassed or something?
No.14670
File: 1730887688104.jpg (2.83 MB, 2766x1964, 1383:982, Stroop_Report_-_Warsaw_Ghe….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14668>>14669Is this the long term goal?
>Like what exactly do you except children to feel when you tell them that they parents didn't want them and wish that they'd never been born? That they're defective? That they're burdens on others? That they've got it in their DNA or otherwise in their natures to be lesser-than?
No.14675
>>14674I don't get it, like...
Do you seriously not have the basic human empathy that if, say, you're not deaf but your next door neighbor is deaf that you would actually help him or her if he or she needed help based on being different?
Or they were blind? Or in a wheelchair? Or whatever else?
No.14676
>>14674>>14675What exactly do you want the people that you believe to be inferior, including children, to do after they're born lesser?
Do you really not get that your ideology eventually implies genocide as its logical conclusion?
No.14677
>>14675What does this no sequitur have to do with literally anything?
>>14676First, you don't know what my "ideology" is.
Second, saving them from people like yourself willing to condemn them to a life of reliance on big pharma and childlessness all because they were going through a phase in adolescence.
No.14678
>>14677How is trying to kill children "saving them"?
Do you seriously think that medical care can make somebody straight who used to be gay, or cisgender who used to be transgender, or whatever else?
No.14684
>>14683You keep saying "ethics violations" as if a)those happened (they didn't) and b)those would justify committing acts of harm upon literally everybody in the premises (that makes no sense).
I just don't fucking get it, man.
Why do you want to hurt those kids so fucking badly? Why do you hate them so fucking much? Why do you hate people like me, who're just those kids grown up, so fucking much?
What did we ever do to you?
Like I would get this if I was a Muslim and your mother died on 9/11, by comparison. But this is just baffling. I wish you could explain it to me.
No.14685
File: 1730892081914.jpg (76.52 KB, 464x721, 464:721, Nagatoro hands under chin.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Kakakakakakakakaka
No.14690
>>14651I'm honestly in shock. I genuinely thought I'd go to sleep tonight and see trucks with 20 million votes for Kamala appear again, like last time.
I guess folk took it serious this time. It's a major relief. My pessimism was overblown.
No.14691
>>14658You know what the gays, transgender, black, Jewish, disabled, mentally ill, and females of our society need?
Food that doesn't break the bank.
Pay that can cover their bills.
An economy that doesn't put them out on the streets.
This is why so many of those groups voted for Trump. Why he's higher with blacks and Hispanics despite what the media had said for years. Why so many women voted for him.
Because despite the fear mongering of people like you, we've lived through 4 years of Trump, and we've lived through 4 years of Kamala as VP.
We know which one was harder.
No.14692
>>14666The difference is that going to a catholic church doesn't have long lasting physiological consequences like being permanently sterile.
Maybe if you were talking a religion that calls for castration of children, I'd agree with you.
But I'm not aware of the catholics doing such things.
No.14693
File: 1730912445432.png (531.13 KB, 640x897, 640:897, Bro you just posted anti s….png) ImgOps Google
>>14691>Food that doesn't break the bank.>Pay that can cover their bills.>An economy that doesn't put them out on the streetsI just want to be able to walk into a mcdonalds again and be able to walk out with a burger for a dollar again.
No.14696
File: 1730914050169.gif (2.56 MB, 640x426, 320:213, copium.gif) ImgOps Google
>>14695It's like you don't actually know who runs the media, the economy (politicians and who greases their palms), or most corporations for that matter
No.14697
>>14696I'd like to point out that the richest man in America, and also the would, is a ethnically Dutch white guy born in Africa who's an atheist.
Also, you're insane.
No.14704
>>14694>Explain to me why these major economic problems are the fault of Jews and disabled people as well as whatever other groups you guys are complaining about (black people, gays, etc)?Strawman City.
The only person inextricably linking identity to political party here, is you.
>"You didn't vote for my candidate, so you must hate the people I have associated with said candidate." (paraphrased)despite the fact that many of those same people you claim as part of your supposed monolith, themselves, voted against your preferred candidateLike I said, no one cares about your identity class. The illogical guilt trips will get you nowhere.
No.14706
>>14704>no one cares about your identity classHow many times are you going to tell this obvious lie?
Especially when your friend literally above you is ranting about how you both hate Jews?
No.14712
>>14709Hitler breathed air.
You breathe air.
You must be a Nazi!
No.14716
File: 1730915454911.jpg (1.18 MB, 4096x2560, 8:5, Donald Trump with astolfo.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14715In the art of war, you target the children first so they can't grow up to become a threat. They will inevitably fail to understand what is going on and learn to hate you. So you kill them first.
At least that's what I learned from Goblin Slayer.
No.14719
>>14716I almost admire how exactly you match Donald Trump himself in everything that you say, think, and do, which shows persistence and determination.
[The above is not a sarcastic statement.]
No.14721
File: 1730915714932.jpg (112.41 KB, 506x447, 506:447, Astolfo.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14717Relax anon. Right now, you're painting a massive target on your back that says, "Kick me." While I have my own personal beliefs about different groups of people, I couldn't help but mess with you a little. I can't speak for the other anon, and I haven't really been reading their posts.
It makes it hard to take you seriously. I do have a heart though, believe it or not, so I'll stop memeing around and give you the respect you deserve as a human being.
My apologies.
No.14724
>>14721>It makes it hard to take you seriously. I do have a heart though, believe it or not.Stop fucking lying like that.
Both here and in /pony/.
You and I both know that you don't give a fuck emotionally about anybody else.
Especially if they remind you of you, in terms of something like poverty and addiction, in which case you're a total retard and asshole.
Stop pretending to care.
This isn't about politics. I'm sick of you being a worthless shitbag in /pony/. You're making it far worse.
No.14725
File: 1730915972440.png (18.93 KB, 500x500, 1:1, but im still here.png) ImgOps Google
>>14724Anon, relax. Take a deep breath and step away for a moment or two. I'm not here to actually hurt you. It's just satire.
No.14726
>>14721>>14724You and I both know that I could post in /pony/ about a war veteran family member dying, and your response will be a sincere "fuck him".
Thus isn't political. You're just an evil person.
No.14727
File: 1730916115994.png (1.54 MB, 1024x1024, 1:1, dfx4rvy-225f3d73-0ccb-496e….png) ImgOps Google
>>14726If you knew me on a more personal level, you would know that I actually care deeply about the people around me. Including you; regardless of if we share different political opinions.
You have a right to feel the way you feel about things as do I; from personal experiences that have molded us into the people we are today, to the various influences we choose to look into.
No.14729
File: 1730916548888.jpg (57.72 KB, 1000x667, 1000:667, trump-victory.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
No.14730
File: 1730916626626.jpg (74.74 KB, 1024x1024, 1:1, Donald trump is a cat.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14729Let me tell you, folks, nobody loves cats like I do, believe me! I mean, it’s tremendous, absolutely tremendous. My love for cats is unmatched, far beyond anyone you’ve ever met. Cats are the best, nobody understands cats better than me!
No.14732
>>14694That's the point.
It's why Jews voted for Trump.
Why blacks voted for Trump.
Why women voted for Trump.
Everyone wants to be able to afford food.
No.14733
File: 1730921119076.jpg (30.04 KB, 474x332, 237:166, starswirl.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
To explain why Trump won, we have to go back to 2008. In 2008, Ron Paul raised the internet's awareness about things such as the federal reserve, fiat currency, and libertarianism. I believe on the dem side was Dennis Kucinich.
I don't know too much about Kucinich, but Ron Paul had a lot of support that the Republican Party suppressed.
In 2016, two popular movements to fix things emerged - one for Bernie Sanders and one for Donald Trump. Due to the two-party system, Bernie had to campaign with the Democrats. Even though Bernie Sanders had more support than Hillary Clinton in almost every metric, his campaign was suppressed by the Democratic Party in favor of Hillary Clinton because Bernie Sanders was part of a popular movement, and his election would upset their status quo. In polls of Bernie vs. Trump or Hillary vs. Trump, Bernie polled much higher as being the candidate who could win against him.
After the Democrats picked the weaker, establishment candidate, anti-authoritarian left voters had to decide which was more important to them - left-wing ideology or anti-establishment ideas. Many decided that anti-establishment ideas were more important, handing Trump the election. (Also note that had the popular candidate, Bernie Sanders, won, the Supreme Court would probably be 5/4, with a Democratic majority.)
In 2020, the Democratic party realized their mistake and had Bernie Sanders work with Joe Biden to scrape together enough anti-authoritarian left ponies to win. But due to Joe Biden's oldened mental faculties and the fact that he was no Bernie Sanders, enthusiasm for him declined; although he tried to implement progressive policies like Bernie Sanders might have done, he just didn't have the support he needed, especially after many former Bernie Sanders supporters and Republicans had galvanized around Trump.
In 2024, the remaining left anti-establishment voters had to make the same choice again - left, fairly establishment policies or anti-establishment policies? Many went with anti-establishment, as evidenced by Trump's likely winning of the popular vote.
In conclusion, in 2016 there was a left anti-authoritarian movement and a right anti-authoritarian movement. The left movement was suppressed and diverted by the Democratic Party. The right anti-authoritarian movement won, which galvanized it. In 2020, the Democratic Party tried to revive the movement, resulting in a narrow win. By 2024, anti-authoritarianism had won out and coalesced around Donald Trump, as evidenced by Trump's popular vote. The left anti-authoritarian movement has been dissolved.
This movement primarily includes (starting with the ideological core): anarchists (and related), (some) libertarians, capitalists, neofeudalists, Christian Nationalists, corporatists, and your mom and dad.
Each of these groups has different goals and visions for the U.S. People in positions of power in swing districts will also have to make sure not to go too far on these ideologies or risk getting voted out the next election cycle, when many Republican seats will be up for a vote.
Lastly, if the federal reserve is not abolished and the financial system based on fiat currency not restructured (maybe a cryptocurrency-based restructuring), then the entire movement will have been pointless.
No.14734
File: 1730921404888.jpg (537.95 KB, 1304x1243, 1304:1243, Screenshot_20211129-171810….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
I'm seriously scared everything is going to fall apart in my life again.
I don't believe Trump's economic plan will be anything but detrimental. He seems to fundamentally fail to understand what tariffs are or how they work, and being the petty little narcissist he is, refuses to understand lest he admits he's wrong and feels bad about himself. Tariffs are a tax on Americans that are paid by anyone who imports something, not the exporters. That won't have the effect those who support it hopes.
But beyond that I fear most for my family. I'm living in a state that's safe for transgender people, but my family who has always supported me through this live in Texas, and I am genuinely terrified of what might happen to them if this emboldens extremist actions against them for that. But even if they end up okay, there's also the possibility that I will never be able to return to Texas.
And in addition to that, there's the issue of my healthcare and health insurance. I have had diabetes since I was a teenager and that destroyed my humble dreams given the how much our health insurance system sucked and the need to pay for medications to not die from it. The Republicans have already said they are going to repeal the ACA, which would absolutely kill my ability to afford insurance should I lose my job. Which if tariff related inflation would almost surely do.
No.14735
>>14733Don't forget the Ron Paul Republicans and the other politically homeless resulting in the rise of the Tea Party. Many in the Ron Paul camp and the subsequent Tea Party registered as or were already registered in the Republican Party for political reasons. This included many libertarians who registered Republican so they could vote in primaries that actually mattered.
Despite the completely baseless smear campaign against the Tea Party, the Ron Paul and Tea Party Republicans effectively reshaped the Republican Party from the inside. Anyone who was a card-carrying member of the party at the time (as I was, for exactly this purpose - reshaping it from within) saw the swing in real time, as the party platform changed as a result of internal polling and its platform slowly skewed more libertarian. This is why modern leftists accuse current Republicans of things they don't and haven't supported in
over a decade, because these modern leftists don't have the slightest idea of what the plurality of present-day Republicans actually think.
As the establishment Republicans were split between the massive 2016 primary field, the outside-the-box Republicans coalesced around Trump and carried him to victory.
No.14736
>>14734Can't be worse than Biden. Groceries practically doubled in price, with his stuff. I'm not sure the terrif plan is perfect, but it will end up bringing more manufacturing local at least. Which should help with getting the lower-end wages up, again, with the cost of living.
End of the day, way I see it, at bear minimum the economy was way better under him than it was the last four years.
No.14737
File: 1730922904054.jpg (6.15 KB, 212x238, 106:119, veryinterest.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14734Their plan 8 years ago included coverage for pre-existing conditions, although I forget if it kept the Medicaid expansion - I think it might have but added work requirements with exemptions - not sure. But those in swing districts up for election next year (and there are more Republicans than Democrats) will have to think carefully about what their constituents want or risk getting voted out in two years.
>>14735Very interesting! I used to read Ron Paul forum stuff back in the day, so thanks for the update (on a humble pony imageboard, nonetheless).
No.14738
File: 1730924155995.jpg (652.92 KB, 1209x1366, 1209:1366, Screenshot_20210118-115603….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14736Inflation started during the Trump years, exacerbated by the tariffs that Trump imposed in the years before and of course how he fucked up the federal response to covid for seemingly petty partisan reasons.
Biden inherited Trump's mess and the entire right-wing media ecosystem gaslight everyone about it, just like they did with the great recession in 2008, which started under W.
And tariffs can't bring back manufacturing for things we can't even manufacture here or which depend on imported materials not available in the continental U.S.
One thing Trump doesn't seem to understand is that most manufactured goods sold in the US from overseas are often only
assembled overseas with parts assembled in many other parts of the world, including the U.S. itself. And likewise even many things still manufactured in the U.S. are manufactured with parts made in many other parts of the world.
Add to that that for for a president who claims he's going to prevent World War 3, placing massive tariffs on country's who's own economies are heavily dependent on exporting to the US and initiating a trade war wouldd only
further throw fuel on the fire.
Hopefully though, Trump is actually quite lazy and now old and increasingly enfeebled and will just play golf all day. But of course, Trump himself isn't the biggest threat in a Trump presidency, but all his cronies aligned with arrogant and ignorant Christian nationalist sycophants who also have infantile understanding of economics.
No.14739
File: 1730924637514.jpg (277.48 KB, 1133x978, 1133:978, Screenshot_20210129-095944….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14737>Their plan 8 years ago included coverage for pre-existing conditions, although I forget if it kept the Medicaid expansion - I think it might have but added work requirements with exemptions - not sure.Their plan for people with preexisting conditions was high-risk pools. I used to be
in a high-risk pool before the ACA went into effect. It cost me 400$ a month, and
barely covered anything. I was fortunate at the time that my parents could afford it, but that was almost 20 years ago.
>>14737>But those in swing districts up for election next year (and there are more Republicans than Democrats) will have to think carefully about what their constituents want or risk getting voted out in two years.That is assuming there will
be any more elections.
No.14740
File: 1730925114687.jpg (64.16 KB, 1190x873, 1190:873, 16WINSTONCOLUMNtableREDUX-….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14738That's simply wrong. Inflation existed well prior to Trump, and he had a lower rate of it throughout his presidency, and one projected to continue decreasing until Covid hit.
Under Biden, it massively accelerated.
I understand Biden and the left want to pretend otherwise, but, frankly, they had 4 years and it never got better.
It's still bad right now, right this very second. It is still worse than it was even during Covid.
It's a shoddy argument, and one of which even the left's largely abandoned, which is why during the campaign trail Kamala did her best to distance herself from Biden's disastrous policies.
>And tariffs can't bring back manufacturing for things we can't even manufacture here or which depend on imported materials not available in the continental U.S. Depends on how the tariffs are done.
I'll let you in on a little secret; Most these countries that manufacture our stuff don't produce the materials there, either.
No reason America can't buy the materials for manufacturing, as that's typically this type of thing. We've big tariffs on importing cars, for instance, but no trouble importing the various needed components even, let alone raw materials.
>only assembled overseas with parts assembled in many other parts of the world, including the U.S. itself.This isn't something that aids your case. It only hurts your case.
Yes. Overseas production is largely using raw resources from elsewhere.
Which is why production could very easily be done here, instead of, you know, with slave labor in China.
> placing massive tariffs on country's who's own economies are heavily dependent on exporting to the US and initiating a trade war wouldd only further throw fuel on the fire. Potentially. But the same applies for the massive sanctions imposed under Biden on a range of countries, not to mention the obvious adding of fuel by arming their enemies with trillions of dollars worth of equipment.
As it currently sits, Russia and China, two nations that should be natural enemies, and were throughout most of history, are now coming together because of the disastrous policies that do far more than mere tariff.
It's actively uprooting the control of the American dollar, globally. As pacs are quickly forming and treaties made to ensure the constant sanctions the US imposes no longer mean anything.
To be frank, I've little worry about tariffs in comparison to this.
No.14742
>>14739>Their plan for people with preexisting conditions was high-risk pools.I don't think their last attempt to repeal and replace (the skinny repeal) (no replace), which three Republicans voted against, had a high risk pool, although I could be wrong. More info:
https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/aca-skinny-repeal-explained-consequences/448014/. It looks like the Medicaid expansion was kept.
>>14739Republicans don't have the votes to do that - they would still need 60% in the Senate and House, I believe. In addition, if in the hypothetical event that a Trump dictatorship did become an issue, liberal states and cities would just secede from the union and work from home, as the digital era has made it less important to own land to conduct business.
No.14743
>>14733I just wish all these supposed anti-establishment people would vote libertarian. Like I legitimately went and checked out candidate websites yesterday before I voted to see what they presented.
Harris: A big plan for the economy that I don't really care about because honestly I haven't personally noticed this supposed killer inflation. I spent $80 on two weeks of food Sunday and $20 of that was on crab legs because they were on sale and I wanted to eat two pounds of crab legs. She didn't mention anything else on any other issue, and I have to assume it's because all of her opinions are bad and she didn't want us to hear them.
Trump had a pretty big list, some of which at least
sounded okay, though I'm not sure what his exact plans are for stopping the war in the Middle East and preventing World War 3. But he mentioned a "migrant invasion" and talked about deportations multiple times, and also made it a point to "keep men out of women's sports", which sounds at best unimportant and at worst sinister anti-trans stuff.
Chase Oliver, of the Libertarian party, meanwhile had a whole list of stuff that sounded great. A return to swift Ellis Island immigration to welcome more people to the country. Reforms for criminal justice, decriminalization of drugs. A focus on nuclear power. He can't really reinstate Roe v. Wade, but he wanted to encourage states to decriminalize abortions. Just everything sounded good!
But how many votes does he get? Zero votes. He never stood a chance, and it's not even a surprise, but man does it hurt every four years when I realize that my votes are fucking worthless and my opinions will never be represented by my country. I'm not worried that Trump is going to be some kind of disaster (though I can't entirely rule it out), but it's not going to be
good. I'm stuck hoping that nothing goes too horribly wrong.
No.14744
>>14741Every party is going to attempt to rework the system to keep themselves in power. There's a different route for each party because their votes come from different places. Republicans want harsher voter ID policies, because they've researched that people voting against them might not meet the requirements. Democrats want to allow felons to vote, because people in prison tend to lean blue. Libertarians want ranked choice voting, because we're convinced that if people weren't forced to vote only for red or blue, they'd vote yellow.
All of these things are reasonable noble suggestions on their own, but we can't pretend that we aren't trying to remove everyone else from the voting pool.
No.14745
>>147433rd parties are a joke.
Though, frankly, as a Libertarian, I'd never vote for the Libertarian Party anyway.
They've always struck me as just "liberal-lite". Which I think is exemplified by their focus on drugs, and total ignoring of the overreaching of the plethora of federal organizations.
I got into the Libertarian side of things not because I wanted to smoke weed in my appartment, but because I was sincerely opposed to the crazy bullshit going on in politics, from Big Pharma, to the DoD, to the plethora of insane cases by the ATF and FBI both.
Guys like these don't really appeal to me, because they've never got the backbone needed for serious change, even if they had the political backing.
No.14746
>>14744I suppose you and I have significant disagreements on such things, then. I'm not really sure what to say.
I wouldn't consider saying only citizens should vote to be anti-democratic, or put a risk of never having any more elections.
No.14747
>>14745No, that's true. Most of the party is absolutely a joke, and their ideas stop after drugs, guns, and taxation is theft. If you're really unlucky you'll get stuff like rebelling against licenses for your toaster.
But Harris was fundamentally establishment status quo, and I don't think Trump is competent enough to fix any of our systems or orgnizations. Votes are already counted now, so we'll see, maybe I'll be surprised. See if any of "the swamp" gets drained in round 2.
I'd rather have had Chase Oliver, though. Even if he wasn't some amazing cure-all for our broken system.
>>14746Like I said, on its face it's just a perfectly reasonable request. You should probably have an ID and it shouldn't be much work to show it. I had to show my ID to get tech help for my phone the other day, too, doesn't seem like a big deal. But no one would be pursuing it if they weren't confident it would get them more votes. If illegal immigrants were voting red then everyone would shut up about it.
No.14748
>>14747> and I don't think Trump is competent enough to fix any of our systems or orgnizations.Maybe, maybe not. This time around he's surrounding himself with a lot of competent guys, though. And, after last time, I know at the very least, he won't make the same mistake of trusting the establishment goons who'll lie to get into place and then screw him the moment he turns around.
It's gonna be a gamble. But, I mostly go for him due to the economy improvements.
> But no one would be pursuing it if they weren't confident it would get them more votes. Eh, yes and no.
It's not just "more votes". Or really, not "more votes" at all...
It's a fairly reasonable fear of cheating, especially after the last time.
>If illegal immigrants were voting red then everyone would shut up about it.Oh definitely not.
The left'd spin on that instantly, if that were the case.
No.14749
File: 1730931673872.jpg (257.27 KB, 1300x993, 1300:993, Screenshot_20210118-115452….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14740>That's simply wrong. Inflation existed well prior to Trump. Yes, that's how it usually works.
But we started seeing it rise precisely because of Trump's failed response to covid due to his dismantling the pandemic response team, seemingly just because it had been assembled by Obama.
>I understand Biden and the left want to pretend otherwise, but, frankly, they had 4 years and it never got better.No president can take full responsibility for the economy, they can influence it, and all of them inherit the economy of the prior administration. Like, Trump inhereted the Obama economy, and Biden inherited the Obama economy, and like with Obama during the great recession, political rhetoric takes advantage of the public's general tendency for specious reasoning believing that the office of president has more direct control of the economy than they actually do, even before they've had the chance to enact
any policy, which trump absolutely took advantage of to claim credit for the economy in 2017.
Biden certainly made some disastrous decisions, key among them being to not ease Trump's tariffs on key imports that were inflating in price. That's why I got my hopes up when Biden dropped out. Harris isn't Biden and was abandoning those policies, which was the reason I got my hopes up.
>It's still bad right now, right this very second. It is still worse than it was even during Covid.Last I checked the current annual inflation is at 2%, which is generally considered the optimal balance by econimist. Inflation isn't always a bad thing, it's not a black or white matter of if it is or isn't happening, but dependent on what else is going on in the economy and to what degree it's outpacing wage growth. It's certainly been bad during the past few years, which is, again, the reason I was enthusiastic for Harris to do things differently than either Trump or Biden did.
>Depends on how the tariffs are done.>I'll let you in on a little secret; Most these countries that manufacture our stuff don't produce the materials there, either.Trump has been floating the idea of a 20% tariff across the board on
all imports. And given his long history of driving all his businesses that he did not inherit or were not someone else's ideas into the ground, Trump is the last person I would have confidence in to do Tariffs in a way that won't fuck everyone over.
>>I'll let you in on a little secret; Most these countries that manufacture our stuff don't produce the materials there, either.I basically said that exactly, most manufactured goods' supply chains are spread around the world.
>>14740>No reason America can't buy the materials for manufacturing, as that's typically this type of thing. We've big tariffs on importing cars, for instance, but no trouble importing the various needed components even, let alone raw materials.Like I said, Trump is the last person I have confidence in to do this sort of thing.
>Which is why production could very easily be done here, instead of, you know, with slave labor in China.Not with Tariffs on
all imports as suggested by Trump.
>As it currently sits, Russia and China, two nations that should be natural enemies, and were throughout most of history, are now coming together because of the disastrous policies that do far more than mere tariff."Mere" Tariffs aren't going to change that.
Besides, Trump has been selling Tariffs as if they work like sanctions,
we pay those and implementing them all in one sweep like he wants to do as soon as he gets into office isn't going to instantly bring manufacturing back here, it'll just inflate prices even more. Hypothetically, you could potentially incentivise industries to bring manufacturing back with enough time before implementing them, but that not something I am confident that Trump is smart enough to do.
>>14741The guy basically campaigned on vengence for his enemies and has stated he wants to be able to attack any 'enemy within', and went on to include most of his political rivals and anyone else he's labeled 'the radical left' with the military if necessary. His Christian nationalist supporters and biggest congressional supporters want to use the unitary executive theory to dismantle the guardrails against his ability to do such a thing. The guy basically has no check on power at this point given the ruling by the Supreme Court in July granting him full immunity for 'official acts', effectively giving him pretense to do all sorts of destructive shit. That it's a possibility that he could use it to eliminate or outright prevent people from ever electing any checks on his power in Congress. And even
if he's being hyperbolic, the guy is basically letting whomever flatters him the most make these decisions for him. It's certainly a possibility that he might use those powers to undermine or cancel out local elections for basically any justification he can concoct.
>>14742>Republicans don't have the votes to do that - they would still need 60% in the Senate and House, I believe. In addition, if in the hypothetical event that a Trump dictatorship did become an issue, liberal states and cities would just secede from the union and work from home, as the digital era has made it less important to own land to conduct business.That latter possibility is the reason I fear never seeing my family again. If this leads to civil war, then the fact that I live in a blue state and they live in a red state means this all becomes really personal to me.
>>14744>Republicans want harsher voter ID policies, because they've researched that people voting against them might not meet the requirementsI'm pretty sure 'would you vote Republican?' would be the
only requirement.
>Libertarians want ranked choice voting, because we're convinced that if people weren't forced to vote only for red or blue, they'd vote yellow.Personally I would want ranked choice voting so that we could effectively have more than two parties to choose from and that voting could be less defensive. I didn't like Harris but ultimately voted for her defensively.
No.14751
>>14749>But we started seeing it rise precisely because of Trump's failed response to covid Which would explain some initial rise, but it wouldn't explain four years of rise.
Again; This is something that persisted well into Biden's presidency. Something that was going down under Trump, prior to Covid.
>which is, again, the reason I was enthusiastic for Harris to do things differently than either Trump or Biden did. Which I'd understand if she wasn't the VP under Biden for the last four years...
I mean, I guess you didn't get much choice, you gotta put stock where they let you, considering there was no primary. But still.
>Trump has been floating the idea of a 20% tariff across the board on all imports.Perhaps I've misheard or you're relying on something someone else's said, but I've not seen anything to suggest he was talking about it for "all" imports including things like oil or other raw materials...
That seems like it'd go directly contrary to his goals of bringing manufacturing into America.
And unlike you, I don't think he's an idiot, so I rather doubt he'd be taking the stance that it's ideal to cut the needed resources to manufacture too.
>"Mere" Tariffs aren't going to change that. Sure. They aren't really gonna influence it one way or the other. Though that's not the point.
The point is tarrifs aren't going to trigger WWIII like you think.
Especially not if the pile of sanctions that did far more than tarrifs ever would didn't.
> The guy basically has no check on power at this point given the ruling by the Supreme Court in July granting him full immunity for 'official acts',That was always the case. It's why Obama never went to prison, despite his plethora of questionable actions. You're just taking the media narrative without a thought.
End of the day, Trump wasn't the one who decided to arrest his political opponents.
That happened under Biden.
No.14754
File: 1730933709874.jpg (39.49 KB, 710x608, 355:304, 1493396192328.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14753It's just an article on a public statement from the NRF.
No.14755
File: 1730935279129.png (343.68 KB, 441x518, 63:74, p.png) ImgOps Google
>>14683>>14696I came in here expecting some shitty takes but holy fuck.
Actual antisemitism? Like, real actual antisemitism on a fucking My Little Pony imageboard? This isn't 2012 4chan. Go get a valid take and get back to us.
And people actually thinking being trans is 'a phase' and that medicating trans kids is morally bad because 'they can't consent'? What, should we also stop giving kids vaccines because they can't consent to those? Because that's the equivalent, but the disease is in the mind and doesn't manifest as anything visible so people like you are too dense to realise it fucking kills people if it's not treated.
No.14760
>>14743War produces opportunity for economic growth. In a way, Israel and America wanting to fuck up Palestien is a means of getting money through extortion and violence
The jews weren't content with stealing all of that land after the second world War from innocent people, and they want to steal more
No.14762
>>14758Right? Because these aren't contradictory? You can just look at some of the actions under Obama, irrespective of media narrative.
In fact, if anything, the media hated speaking ill of Obama. He got away with some insane stuff, because of it.
The near constant dronestrikes were probably the most infamous example. Then again, dems and republicans are rather unified when it comes to warhawk behavior.
No.14766
>>14755Sure, because autistic kids who already have a hard time fitting in haven't been getting pressured into transitioning as the solution to all their problems by those who promote transgenderism.
Or the "gender confused" adolescents who in earlier times would have very likely developed into gay/lesbian individuals who are now being selected out and put on a one way track to infertility. But let's be honest, the T in LGBT trumps everything else. Who cares about the LGB when you can add another case study to the T pile to support the personal sociopolitical whims of the morally bankrupt? It's not like it's their own lives they are ruining. After all it's just someone else's kid becoming a statistic.
No.14767
File: 1730949823380.jpg (27.7 KB, 480x480, 1:1, 1478231886806.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14766>It's not like it's their own lives they are ruining.Yeah, of course, this definitely doesn't apply to you, though, right?
You get to make yourself feel better that you're saving someone else's kid from "transgenderism" without having to find out if you're actually ruining their lives or not.
No.14770
File: 1730950602299.jpg (62.53 KB, 512x640, 4:5, Trump twerking.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
I've got the best bag, folks, the best bag, believe me! What’s that sound? It’s fantastic! I brought out the big guns, and everyone’s sitting down, okay? Look, I've got things now, things I never had before, I can brag—who wouldn’t? Got my lady a Louis bag, let me tell you, she's bragging like never before! And a Birkin too, she’s the queen of brats now! Now I’m in the best club, looking fabulous in a new bag! When I show up, you better believe things get wild, folks! Spin it around, baby, show them how it’s done! Tell the DJ to turn it up, let’s hear that sound! A Boogie is in the mix, always with the best stuff, unlike the others—so boring! When I roll in, it’s like vroom-vroom, only the best—can’t get enough! I rose up from the bottom, everybody knows it! Introduced the love of my life to my connections, now she thinks she’s on top—so true! First time I hit her up, no reply—can you believe it? Then saw her in the club, and I made my move—big league!
No.14772
>>14771>Like, is the sterilization the primary hangup?Yes. Foisting irreversible necessarily life-altering
elective procedures on those who legally can't consent and who can't fully grasp the magnitude of what they are deciding and how it will impact the entire rest of their lives is medical malpractice. We don't even let minors get tattoos, or smoke, or drink. Yet people are perfectly willing to let them choose to sterilize themselves and encourage them forward on a path to do so. Madness.
No.14775
>>14772>We don't even let minors get tattoos, or smoke, or drink.We probably should, though. I mean, the smoking and drinking happens regardless, but the tattoos should really be allowed.
You wanna talk weird shit we allow children to do, we gotta mention college, right?
No.14776
File: 1730953870074.png (213.77 KB, 600x630, 20:21, 1511263913871.png) ImgOps Google
>>14774>It starts with puberty blockers and hormone therapies which already result in irreversible changesYour "and" is kind of suspect, because they don't do the same thing and don't give the same results and can't be started at the same time.
How old does a child have to be in order to take hormone therapies? Are they given any information on this stuff? Are the parents involved? Does the child have to go through any amount of psychological evaluation and therapy beforehand?
No.14777
>>14775At what age should children be allowed to get face tattoos? I would then extrapolate that to all tattoos.
Most people are already adults by the time they enter college.
>>14776>How old does a child have to be in order to take hormone therapies?It depends on the jurisdiction.
>Are they given any information on this stuff?Yes. Whether it's adequate and whether a child can fully comprehend the implications is the real question.
>Are the parents involved?Ideally. But then again, leftists are generally pushing for kids to be able to undergo these procedures even when the parents are opposed, so where does that leave us?
>Does the child have to go through any amount of psychological evaluation and therapy beforehand?In theory. Though there have been documented instances of ideologues rubber stamping the process in the name of promoting transgenderism.
I am not saying that transgender people do not exist. And adults are free to do as they please. But when it comes to erring one way or the other in regards to children, I will always choose to err on the side of caution and oppose defaulting to the path of practical irreversibility.
No.14778
File: 1730955998565.png (162.55 KB, 540x604, 135:151, 1433955165077.png) ImgOps Google
>>14777>It depends on the jurisdiction.Any examples? It seems like it's an important consideration that we shouldn't leave to a vague "it depends".
>Yes. Whether it's adequate and whether a child can fully comprehend the implications is the real question.It took me a lot of digging to get to this if it was "the real question."
>But then again, leftists are generally pushing for kids to be able to undergo these procedures even when the parents are opposedI'm unaware of this. I've seen people say that, say, teachers shouldn't necessarily need to "out" a trans child to their parents regarding social transition/experimentation. And I've also seen things regarding abuse - also in regards to social transition - such as treating children like crap if they even so much as indicate questioning their gender, but that would also fall under like abuse if they questioned their sexuality.
>Though there have been documented instances of ideologues rubber stamping the process in the name of promoting transgenderism.If they have, then the proper response would be to demand better scrutiny regarding this, rather than just knee-jerk stop everything.
No.14779
>>14778>Any examples? It seems like it's an important consideration that we shouldn't leave to a vague "it depends".Specifically with regards to
hormone therapies, as young as 12 in the US but generally 16 (and banned in some states), 16 in the UK, 16 in Germany, not allowed for minors in Portugal. Puberty blockers start much earlier generally.
I'm not reading statutes. I'm just pulling this from Google's curated search results. You can Google this stuff yourself if you like.
That said, for my argument, the exact age doesn't matter. If 16 isn't an adult, then they can't consent. If you want 16 to be the age of majority then by all means make that argument.
>It took me a lot of digging to get to this if it was "the real question."We've been saying this entire time that the irreversibility and/or sterilization of those who can't legally or morally consent is the issue. Being able to comprehend the implications of one's life-altering actions is literally the foundation of informed consent. So yes, it is "the real question" as we've been saying all along. No one cares if adults want to undergo these procedures.
>I'm unaware of this. I've seen people say that, say, teachers shouldn't necessarily need to "out" a trans child to their parents regarding social transition/experimentation. And I've also seen things regarding abuse - also in regards to social transition - such as treating children like crap if they even so much as indicate questioning their gender, but that would also fall under like abuse if they questioned their sexuality.Are the parents supposed to be involved or aren't they? And if the parents disagree, should the child be transitioned or not?
>If they have, then the proper response would be to demand better scrutiny regarding this, rather than just knee-jerk stop everything.You can't stop ideologues who will necessarily insert themselves into positions where they can continue the process. And for those who are improperly transitioned as a consequence, it's already too late. So yes I fall on the side of knee-jerk stop everything. It is better for no one to be transitioned during adolescence than for some fraction of (would-be) non-trans people to be transitioned in error. People who are not transitioned as adolescents can start the process later, whereas those who are improperly transitioned are stuck with the results from before they were able to provide informed consent.
No.14780
>>14779>Specifically with regards to hormone therapies, as young as 12 in the US but generally 16 (and banned in some states)>I'm not reading statutes. I'm just pulling this from Google's curated search results. You can Google this stuff yourself if you like.Well, I'm not familiar with other countries, and this thread is specifically about Trump/US, so I'm not interested in those countries tbqf
And I did my own Googling which said generally that hormones can be given between 16 and 18 depending on the state, and
generally seem to require parental consent. I have no idea where "12 year olds can start HRT" comes from, so you'll have to show me that one because I'll be curious.
But also, I doubt that most 16 year olds get it like the same day as their birthday. And from my understanding of hormone therapies, any sort of irreversible sterilization doesn't happen until like.. taking them for a generally extended period of time. It's not like kids decide one day they're going to take a couple of estrogen pills and then become permanently infertile immediately. It's just literally not what happens.
>We've been saying this entire time that the irreversibility and/or sterilization of those who can't legally or morally consent is the issue.Yeah. And that's literally the issue
is that you've been saying it. It honestly comes across as exceedingly dishonest. This entire thread is like using the most alarming and scary language imaginable, despite the entire thing being extremely nuanced and having several considerations from every angle.
>No one cares if adults want to undergo these procedures.I can't help but just laugh at this, because I've seen the ways conservatives talk about transgender adults.
>Are the parents supposed to be involved or aren't they?Social transition and medical transition are entirely different things?!? Maybe if we stopped pretending like they were the same thing then this question would be way easier to answer.
>And if the parents disagree, should the child be transitioned or not?This seems like a made up hypothetical so I don't know???
>You can't stop ideologues who will necessarily insert themselves into positions where they can continue the process.Yes you can???
>So yes I fall on the side of knee-jerk stop everything. It is better for no one to be transitioned during adolescence than for some fraction of (would-be) non-trans people to be transitioned in error.But you've already muddied this entire fucking thing up by conflating social transitioning, puberty blockers, and full-on hormone replacement therapy.
>non-trans people to be transitioned in errorHow often does this happen?? What's the percentage, give it to me. Or is this a case of not caring how many trans youth lives you destroy in order to save even a single life like a noble soul?
No.14781
File: 1730960514549.jpg (173.15 KB, 864x1248, 9:13, 20241106_231718.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
I don't know about HRT, puberty blockers, etc, but I got a tattoo when I was 16. That shit is for life.
Some kids even get immancipated at an early age, and some even get married. The argument always boils down to whether or not a child is capable of fully understanding the ramifications and is responsible enough to make decisions for their selves. I mean fuck, the age of consent is like 16 in some states.
Ultimately the issue boils down to parenting. I don't know how it would work, but I think parents/future parents should be required to take a class if they have a child/are planning to have children.
You should have a license for it. Thats just how irresponsible most people are, and unfortunately it affects those around them that want nothing to do with children
No.14782
>>14780>And I did my own Googling which said generally that hormones can be given between 16 and 18 depending on the state, and generally seem to require parental consent. I have no idea where "12 year olds can start HRT" comes from, so you'll have to show me that one because I'll be curioushttps://www.plannedparenthood.org/blog/i-want-to-transition-how-old-do-you-have-to-be-to-get-hrt"Some health care providers require both parental consent and a minimum age requirement for people younger than 18. For example, some Planned Parenthood health centers only provide HRT to patients who have parental consent and are at least 16 years old, while others only provide HRT for ages 18+. Other doctors may prescribe hormones to patients who are 12 and up with parental consent.">any sort of irreversible sterilization doesn't happen until like.. taking them for a generally extended period of time.Once you start, you are on that path, even if it takes a while to reach the end. Getting off isn't as simple as deciding you've changed your mind, and at that point, a child has undergone irreversible effects.
>Yeah. And that's literally the issue is that you've been saying it.Should I just pretend that informed consent isn't the most important issue?
>It honestly comes across as exceedingly dishonest.I think pretending that everything is reversible and going with a medicate first, ask questions later approach is exceedingly dishonest.
>This entire thread is like using the most alarming and scary language imaginable, despite the entire thing being extremely nuanced and having several considerations from every angle.We did just have someone accusing us of being Nazis and wanting to genocide multiple groups who have literally nothing in common, all because some of us supported Trump in the election. So yes, there is quite a bit of alarmist and scary language in this thread.
>I can't help but just laugh at this, because I've seen the ways conservatives talk about transgender adults.Some, sure. Most don't care what people do on their own time. And as long as it's kept away from the kids, of course.
>Social transition and medical transition are entirely different things?!? Maybe if we stopped pretending like they were the same thing then this question would be way easier to answer. Are you in favor of keeping parents in the dark regarding social transition, but those same parents must now be fully on board and involved in their child's life for medical transition? Do you see how this is logically incongruous?
>This seems like a made up hypothetical so I don't know???No; there are literally cases where one parent wants the child to transition and the other does not. Who should get the final say?
>Yes you can??? You literally can't. People can and do lie. In the same manner as teachers bragging on video that they have intentionally infiltrated schools to indoctrinate kids, those with a transgenderism agenda can do the same for the sake of promoting their agenda, whether they choose to publicly say so or not.
>But you've already muddied this entire fucking thing up by conflating social transitioning, puberty blockers, and full-on hormone replacement therapy.No child should be taking puberty blockers or full-on hormone replacement therapy, as they can't consent to it and the effects are irreversible. Puberty blockers don't
just delay puberty which then proceeds as if nothing had happened; they too have irreversible effects. So both should be banned for the purposes of transitioning children.
Whether parents should be kept in the dark about their child socially transitioning is a different question but also highly suspect from an ethical standpoint.
>How often does this happen?? What's the percentage, give it to me.I don't know. It's impossible to tell because many who transition in error will not report as such.
The social stigma of detransitioning, the sunk cost fallacy, and the physiological difficulty in doing so, will be enough that most people will keep their mouths shut even if they are unhappy with the results.
>Or is this a case of not caring how many trans youth lives you destroy in order to save even a single life like a noble soul?Like you said, they can socially transition all they want since that is different from puberty blocking or HRT and
is not irreversible. Maybe they should do that until they become adults and can make an informed decision in the matter?
>>14781>You should have a license for it. Thats just how irresponsible most people are, and unfortunately it affects those around them that want nothing to do with childrenAgreed.
No.14783
File: 1730965671430.jpg (73.17 KB, 575x596, 575:596, 1521250636923.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>14782>Other doctors may prescribe hormones to patients who are 12 and up with parental consent.Wow you quotes the planned parenthood website. Now, what does this mean? What odes "orther doctors" mean?
>Once you start, you are on that path, even if it takes a while to reach the end. Getting off isn't as simple as deciding you've changed your mind, and at that point, a child has undergone irreversible effects.Getting off is as simple as stopping depending on how long it's been going on.
>I think pretending that everything is reversible and going with a medicate first, ask questions later approach is exceedingly dishonestThat's because you're a dishonest piece of shit, really. No one said "medicate first" except you, you dishonest fuck. You literally don't give a shit about what's best for transgender teenagers. You just assume random fucking shit and assume you know the best.
>We did just have someone accusing us of being NazisYou aren't beating the allegations lmao.
No.14784
>>14783>Wow you quotes the planned parenthood website. Now, what does this mean? What odes "orther doctors" mean?Maybe you should e-mail Planned Parenthood and find out? Or are you suggesting that the very left-leaning, abortion- and transition- supporting organization is lying to you? You can find out yourself. I already fulfilled your request for the source.
>Getting off is as simple as stopping depending on how long it's been going on.Depending.
>That's because you're a dishonest piece of shit, really.That's very rude.
>No one said "medicate first" except you, you dishonest fuck.That's also very rude. What do you call prescribing puberty blockers to children and putting them on the path to transition, especially by rubber-stamping ideologues, if not medicating first? especially when the notion that it's reversible is the excuse for doing so.
>You literally don't give a shit about what's best for transgender teenagers.I don't give preferential consideration to transgender teenagers at the expense of autistic, LGB, and otherwise misdiagnosed ones. Sorry to burst your bubble there.
>You just assume random fucking shit and assume you know the best.What am I assuming?
>You aren't beating the allegations lmao.I was unaware that transgenderism implied one's position on fascism, liberal democracy and parliamentary systems, Antisemitism, Communism, Slavism, the Romani, white supremacy, or the desire for Lebensraum. The more you know.
I would say the pro-transgenderism crowd actually has much more in common with the Nazis, since the notion of turning children into eunuchs does seem to follow with the eugenics theme.
No.14785
>>14784>Maybe you should e-mail Planned Parenthood and find out?Maybe you should??????
>That's very rude.Cry me a river.
>What do you call prescribing puberty blockers to children and putting them on the path to transition, especially by rubber-stamping ideologues, if not medicating first?I call it making fucking shit up, that's what I call it. Because in some instance where you were not some anti-trans lunatic and this were actually happening, you would be just for more regulation instead of, as you put it, knee-jerk, like a little bitch.
>I don't give preferential consideration to transgender teenagers at the expense of autistic, LGB, and otherwise misdiagnosed ones.You aren't the kid's doctor, fucker.
>What am I assuming?That you know what these teens need best???
>I would say the pro-transgenderism crowd actually has much more in common with the NazisLMAO holy shit, you are actually a fucking moron. I don't give a shit about decorum anymore. Lmao. The Third Reich was
excplicitly anti-transgender. The German Nazis explicitly burned the books of the Institute for Sexual Science and explicitly targeted transgender individuals.
Fuck you, you piece of shit lmao.
No.14786
>>14785>Maybe you should??????Why would I? You're the one who asked the question. I gave you the information you asked with the appropriate disclaimers, and then I provided an appropriate source as requested. If you want to know the answer from the source itself, stop being lazy and send them an e-mail. Otherwise stop moving the goalpost.
>I call it making fucking shit up, that's what I call it.I'd find more sources for you, but frankly I don't care to appease you at this point.
>Because in some instance where you were not some anti-trans lunaticI'm quite ambivalent on "trans." In this instance I am simply laying out the logical and moral problems with "trans" as regards children. That said, what I don't appreciate is when, like earlier, someone tries to use "trans" as justification to shoehorn other completely unrelated policies (or candidates, or moral positions, or fallacies) down people's throats. There are much, much, much more important issues in this world than "trans." It's nothing more than an intellectual exercise here.
>and this were actually happening, you would be just for more regulation instead of, as you put it, knee-jerk, like a little bitch.It did happen, on a massive scale, in the UK as I recall. It is foolish to presume it hasn't happened elsewhere.
>You aren't the kid's doctor, fucker.Neither are you, thankfully.
>That you know what these teens need best???You are only concerned with "these teens" and I am concerned with "teens." That's the difference.
>LMAO holy shit, you are actually a fucking moron. I don't give a shit about decorum anymore. Lmao. The Third Reich was excplicitly anti-transgender. The German Nazis explicitly burned the books of the Institute for Sexual Science and explicitly targeted transgender individuals.Therefore anyone who disagrees with your assessment of what is best for trans individuals, absent any other considerations for any reason, is a Nazi. Brilliant reasoning.
>Fuck you, you piece of shit lmao.How very rude. But what should I expect from a typical leftist with NPC talking points?
No.14787
>>14785i do not pretend not to have biases: Otter, i agree with your perspectives, but not your candor.
Please consider that townhall has rules about decorum, but please also consider that baiting another into losing their cool is an not uncommon debate tactic.
i will ask that you take a break from the discussion perhaps, in lieu of moderator action, and maybe return to this when you are feeling a bit better, if you want to, that is.
No.14788
>>14771Among other permanent changes as consequence of taking these drugs, yes.
Turns out blocking puberty can have massive side effects. Go figure.
The whole thing feels predatory, too. At least from what I've seen, it doesn't seem like you stop taking pills with these things.
Adults can make the choice to do these kinds of things to their bodies if they so choose.
But children cannot.
It's for the same reason as why it's wrong to have sex with a child; They lack the maturity to give informed consent.
No.14789
>>14778>It took me a lot of digging to get to this if it was "the real question."To be frank, if that's the case, I don't think you were paying attention.
The focus was set on kids from the start for a reason, after all. And the problems of informed consent as well as the permanent effects on their bodies was brought up multiple times prior to this point.
No.14790
>>14783>getting off is as simple as stopping>... depending on how long it's been going onYour point is self defeating.
Nobody thinks sterilization happens after one pill.
It's not an issue of a short time, though even a short time can have other permanent effects.
You could easily quit a lot of hard drugs without ill effect early on. But we all still say it's probably a bad idea to do heroine or smoke Crack, right?
Those are all well understood to be damaging to your health, regardless.
No.14792
>>14783>Has no idea what a nazi actually is Honestly, if Germany had won the war and America didn't get involved, they would have been painted as the good guys. I don't really see how calling someone a nazi is an insult in the first place. That shit happened almost 100 years ago. What's next? You're gonna compare people to Genghis Khan?
Hell, Israel is arguably doing the same thing in a much more efficient and hush-hush manner than the Nazis ever did in the first place. Well, more of an open hush-hush with all of the money they give to American politicians and lobbyists. At this point they can pretty much kill whoever they want and when they get accused of genocide and war crimes, they cry about something that didn't even personally happen to them with a group of people (the actual nazis) that aren't even alive to today.
No.14795
File: 1731001671435.png (1.21 MB, 1041x1226, 1041:1226, 3 steps ahead.png) ImgOps Google
>>14780>>14779Transitioning is purely cosmetic. It involves drugs and possibly surgery down the line, but at the end of the day it's all about appearances in order to satisfy the mind.
The only issue I can see with 'parental permission' are those disgusting people who try to force their kids to be gay or trans for social media clout. "My baby is gay and trans!" No. Your child is probably more concerned with playing fortnite and skibity toilets
No.14796
>>14792"It says here in this history book that luckily, the good guys have won every single time. What are the odds?”
I don't think they're exactly 'good guys', but at bear minimum, you can see the disconnect between this and how we treat communism.
If Germany wasn't at war with the US, they would'vebeen given at the very least a far lighter touch.
No.14798
>>14797Nah, I think that's fair. The number constantly spiking throughout the years always results in the thing being suspect. Did it happen in some places? Sure, no doubt. Especially as problems of logistics and supply went through, much as any losing nation faces. Hell, look at the US Civil War and some of the prison conditions there, after Sherman burned down half the south. What a surprise, but prisoners weren't on the priority list for food.
There's good reason to be suspicious, especially since it seems like the number gets conflated or at least expanded by the number of slavic people as the Germans were invading eastwards. It seems to me much of them had been lumped together as "jews", when that is probably not at all the case. Some of that, too, will end up being resistance fighters, dissidents, and rebels, killed for those reasons and not simply because of any particular characteristic.
Frankly, the 6 million number always struck me as something that does more harm than good to the whole narrative.
A bit like when global warming folk say the world's gonna end at X or Y date.
They want it to be big and dramatic, but that just makes it unbelievable. Folk start to stop buying into it. Especially when it's bashed over their head continually.
No.14799
>>14798I remember seeing a plaque a long time ago that was made after the war and it said something along the lines of 1 million. Then a news heading from around the time that said 2 shortly after the war. In reality, I don't think anyone actually knows how many people died. Someone just said "Six million!" And people clung to it.
Hot take: I also don't think every single nazi (or even a majority of them) were blood thirsty demons. A shit load of countries to this day commits genocides and war crimes, but it the average individual soldier isn't exactly going to buy into everything their boss tells them or even support the cause 100%.
Sort of like with Israel today. (Though a lot of IDF I've talked to seem to support it without question. Maybe because it's also religiously charged? I don't know.)
No.14800
File: 1731018556436.jpeg (266.63 KB, 1290x1234, 645:617, q0xlvsdj6ezd1.jpeg) ImgOps Google
Watching the US plunge itself into the dark ages will give us all a chuckle.
Well, at least until we all go down with this ship.
No.14801
>>14800If I am reading that right...
..psychedelics are a good treatment for PTSD = good news
..stem cell therapy has been restricted to the rich and its development slowed/halted for decades due to Pharma wanting to keep people on prescription drugs, as there's more profit = good news
..herbal supplements are not currently covered by health insurance, due to present laws = good news if they will be
No.14804
>>14801I am sure that some of those things turn out fine, but I don't think I can look past how this was framed regardless. Like even if we think the FDA has made some mistakes, which is very likely, I don't think they're carrying out a "war on public health". I'm 100% certain the FDA is not "aggressively supressing" sunshine or exercise, and depending on exactly what he means they are also not holding back "vitamins" and "clean foods". I'm skeptic of what he thinks ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine are good for, and raw milk is just actually not good for anything, that is a TikTok meme that will die out in a year. And in the end he fully cinches it with his own aggression against what are probably some really ordinary workers at whatever alphabet soup building. The tone he's taken and the specific things he's listed as the problem just make him sound like he's gone mad and bought into too many conspiracies.
And again, has the FDA made mistakes? Yeah, absolutely. I think a lot of stuff could be deregulated. Like just actual prescription drugs maybe shouldn't need so many prescriptions. We should be able to import drugs to force big pharma to compete with cheaper alternatives in other countries. But with the exception of maybe psychedelics, he didn't really mention any of that.
No.14805
>>14803Because you've defined the free exchange of goods and services as "bureaucracy".
Nobody else regards free-market capitalism as "bureaucracy".
No.14810
>>14808Like... do you know literally one single thing about their organization and anything about U.S. economic history...
I know from past conversations that you're a very deluded person with a lack of attachment to reality at the mental illness level, but you're still kind of shocking me right now.
No.14812
>>14803>>14805So, hold up again, we've focused on the bureaucracy word rather than the intent of the post.
Butterfly, do you think it is okay for big business to keep medicine away from people but not okay for the FDA to keep medicine away from people?
No.14817
>>14815Sure.
But there's still a difference between them.
