AndreiChekov wrote:This just helps to prove my point. I haven't actually said anything about my personal political stance, but because I could be a Trump supporter my post is dumb.
The dumbest thing here is that you somehow don't think you said something about your personal political stance. You're accepting a bunch of trivially falsifiable conservative talking points at face value, immediately telling us that you are the exactly the kind of thoughtless idiot who believes these things truth-be-damned. I mean, let's just pick some highlights:
AndreiChekov wrote:4. Trump supports tariffs on foreign businesses, which would make it cheaper to run a factory here...
No it doesn't. The cost to run a factory in the U.S. is exactly the same before and after an import tariff on foreign manufacturing goods, because "foreign manufacturing is more expensive" does fuck all to make your labor or your raw materials cheaper. The cost to run a factory in the U.S. is
higher after an import tariff on domestic raw materials. The cost to run a factory in the U.S. is
higher after a retaliatory export tariff by our former trading partners on their exported raw materials. Import tariffs do not make domestic goods cheaper. That's fucking gibberish. They make foreign goods more expensive, which makes domestic goods more competitive by comparison. Those are very, very different things. There are two things that will happen when you do this:
1) Prices will go up. You made the cheapest option more expensive, so now things just cost more. That's how it works. The truth is that America's access to cheap plastic shit is maintained entirely by access to third world slave labor. That's... kind of depressing, but it's true. We will be a poorer nation - at least in terms of the material wealth of our citizens - without trade.
2) You might create some manufacturing jobs. I say might, because in all honesty we HAVE had a small manufacturing resurgence and it created basically fuck all jobs. Do you want to know why? Because the factories that are opening in the U.S. today are automated to hell and back and don't need a significant amount of labor to operate. The problem isn't just that Chinese labor is cheaper than U.S. labor;
machine labor is cheaper than U.S. labor. So you can either declare that we're going to race both the Chinese
and the robots to the bottom (in terms of wages) or you can accept that manufacturing has gone the way of the weaver and the loom; we have
machines for that now and you can't reasonably expect to be able to do that for a living.
So it's not only that you fucking BUTCHERED the conservative talking point in the stupidest way possible, but even once I fixed it for you it's still a fucking stupid unrealistic pipe dream that falls apart at the first brush with reality.
AndreiChekov wrote:I know most of you think its the "woman's body and therefore her choice" but it is simply a matter of who you think needs to be protected more.
AndreiChekov wrote:It isn't fucking racist to say that Islam causes problems.
It's really weird to see someone 180 between empathizing with an "ethical" stance on abortion and empathizing with a "pragmatic" stance on Islam. Unsafe abortions kill about 69k women annually. Islamic terrorist attacks kill about 28k people annually. That's globally, so the numbers are a fuckton higher than someone like you is ever likely to experience. In the U.S., fatalities caused by lightning strikes outnumber fatalities caused by Islamic terrorist attacks almost every single fucking year. They are very, very small numbers and the only reason people care about them is because
brown people are scary. And pragmatically, the anti-abortion, anti-Islam guy is going to kill more people than he saves - in that he probably won't save any, and a bunch of women will die attempting to induce abortions without medical supervision. Practically, banning abortions has never done anything except kill a bunch of women - and it's far more successful at it than Islamic terrorists are.
AndreiChekov wrote:Modern economies are an idea that has failed us. I'm up for trying something that worked before. I mean, it worked when jefferson did it.
... Our poverty rate is ~15%. In Jefferson's time, the percent of the population living as slaves was ~18%. For every five people living in poverty today, there were six people who were literally someone else's property when Jefferson was alive. On top of that, you had a bunch of indentured servants living in perpetual debt bondage, but weren't technically slaves, and then you had a bunch of free people who were just fucking poor. You know fuck all about our economic history. Absolutely fuck all. It's embarrassing.