How To Fix The World

Kaitzilla

Lord Croissant
Supporter
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
11,692
Location
America!
Fusion power would solve all of humanities' problems if it could be made to work.

Debt problems, global warming, food, fresh water, all those worries could be set aside.
The USA could give up on the middle east finally, and seize control the moon for that sweet Helium-3
 
Last edited:

Broken_Erika

Nothing
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
9,893
Location
Glasgnopolis, Grottland
Fusion power would solve all of humanities' problems if it could be made to work.

Debt problems, global warming, food, fresh water, all those worries could be set aside.
The USA could give up on the middle east finally, and seize control the moon for that sweet Helium-3
Thus beginning the Moon Wars.
 

Imaus

King
Joined
Sep 26, 2016
Messages
801
Location
NYC
The Expanse doesn't even touch the Moon, though. It's some semi-soft run-of-the-mill Humanity-gets-to-the-stars-by-no-part-of-its-own and huge, boring factions - a OWG UN, a Martian MCRN, and 'the Belt' which stretches out to Callisto or Ganymede but does nothing with that really.

To OP, for a New Zealander using 'Loony Left' really doesn't put you in the centre anymore now does it? Especially if you can, you know, explain what you think the 'Loony Left' is? The New Left? What, you're on the right-side of the culture wars but doesn't want to side with the Reps so you're trying to pull a Schultz?
 

Estebonrober

Deity
Joined
Jan 9, 2017
Messages
5,404
The Expanse doesn't even touch the Moon, though. It's some semi-soft run-of-the-mill Humanity-gets-to-the-stars-by-no-part-of-its-own and huge, boring factions - a OWG UN, a Martian MCRN, and 'the Belt' which stretches out to Callisto or Ganymede but does nothing with that really.

Ahh I quite liked it. Well it has factions, is about resource exploitation and mercenaries. True the moon itself is nto involved.
 

Zardnaar

Deity
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Messages
16,914
Location
Dunedin, New Zealand
The Expanse doesn't even touch the Moon, though. It's some semi-soft run-of-the-mill Humanity-gets-to-the-stars-by-no-part-of-its-own and huge, boring factions - a OWG UN, a Martian MCRN, and 'the Belt' which stretches out to Callisto or Ganymede but does nothing with that really.

To OP, for a New Zealander using 'Loony Left' really doesn't put you in the centre anymore now does it? Especially if you can, you know, explain what you think the 'Loony Left' is? The New Left? What, you're on the right-side of the culture wars but doesn't want to side with the Reps so you're trying to pull a Schultz?

My definition is roughly this. Not exclusive but the more boxes here you can tick the more off into left wing la la land you are.

1. Lefties so ideologically extreme that anything they disagree with is fake news.
2. They use disingenuous stats/comparisons etc to promote their world view.
3. The lie/get wrong/misinterpret things to promote their world view.
4. Wildly intolerant on a dissenting opinion even if that person is also left wing and agrees with 80 or 90% of what they are claiming.
5. Mindlessly support left wing dictatorships, my favourite was Venezuela where they claimed Guido was a right wing stooge but he belongs to a left wing Venezuelan party.
6. They justify left wing political violence, right wing violence= Nazis.

For example Harris and Warren in American terms are far left and they want to put tax up. But they have costed it out and even if you don't like it they have done their research. They can back it up.

Alexandria Orcasio Cortez just spouts mindless feel good rhetoric, gets caught out by fact checkers a fair bit, and seems more interested in building a national profile than running her electorate (all the other new members got their offices up and running, she claimed the shutdown stopped her but everyone else pulled it off).
 

Broken_Erika

Nothing
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
9,893
Location
Glasgnopolis, Grottland
My definition is roughly this. Not exclusive but the more boxes here you can tick the more off into left wing la la land you are.

1. Lefties so ideologically extreme that anything they disagree with is fake news.
2. They use disingenuous stats/comparisons etc to promote their world view.
3. The lie/get wrong/misinterpret things to promote their world view.
4. Wildly intolerant on a dissenting opinion even if that person is also left wing and agrees with 80 or 90% of what they are claiming.
5. Mindlessly support left wing dictatorships, my favourite was Venezuela where they claimed Guido was a right wing stooge but he belongs to a left wing Venezuelan party.
6. They justify left wing political violence, right wing violence= Nazis.

For example Harris and Warren in American terms are far left and they want to put tax up. But they have costed it out and even if you don't like it they have done their research. They can back it up.

Alexandria Orcasio Cortez just spouts mindless feel good rhetoric, gets caught out by fact checkers a fair bit, and seems more interested in building a national profile than running her electorate (all the other new members got their offices up and running, she claimed the shutdown stopped her but everyone else pulled it off).
This also works for inhabitants of right-wing la-la-land and/or Maga-Land. Just swap all instances of left and right and it's good to go.
 

Lexicus

Deity
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
28,513
Location
Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
Alexandria Orcasio Cortez just spouts mindless feel good rhetoric, gets caught out by fact checkers a fair bit, and seems more interested in building a national profile than running her electorate (all the other new members got their offices up and running, she claimed the shutdown stopped her but everyone else pulled it off).

Ironically, what the 'fact checkers' have mostly demonstrated in "catching her out" is that they actually know far less about economics than she does.
 

Zardnaar

Deity
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Messages
16,914
Location
Dunedin, New Zealand
Ironically, what the 'fact checkers' have mostly demonstrated in "catching her out" is that they actually know far less about economics than she does.

You mean her claim that they had 21 trillion in pcket change for the US military (which spends around 700+ billion per year).
 

Lexicus

Deity
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
28,513
Location
Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
You are aware of the definition of the word "mostly" I assume. In any case that is not a clear-cut example of a factually wrong statement as it is not totally clear what she was saying.

edit: lol, indeed, it's not very far into the WaPo article you posted:

“To clarify, this is to say that we only demand fiscal details [with health and education], rarely elsewhere,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a follow-up tweet.

So she is right, the fact-checker is just writing words about nothing. And that's because he doesn't understand the theoretical background of MMT which is what she is referring to.
 
Last edited:

Sommerswerd

Shades of the Sun
Supporter
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
21,573
Location
Murica
Incidentally, if I starved you for long enough I bet I could get you to admit that rice isn't necessarily worth less than gold.
Gold is worthless, except in terms of how much rice it can buy.
I am a 40 yo male... that considers himself a left of centre socially liberal voter. In American terms I would probably be a blue dog Democrat with some progressive tendencies. I don;t believe in everything the looney left gets up to nor do I believe in much form the conservative side of the equation but some ideas form the right I would be perfectly happy to adopt
From the perspective of an American Democrat, who's heard this exact description from guys so many times as to make it somewhat painfully cliche and repetitive... this is basically a long winded way of saying "I'm a Republican/Conservative"... the usual caveat being, that as per the norm, "who doesn't want to be labeled as such, because of the baggage that goes with that." Since you're not American, you'll just have to take my word for it I guess.. and again since you're not American I won't argue with you about whether you're "leftist" or "socialist" or "conservative" etc, as those distinctions are too varied between countries. Just know that from my perspective as an American Democrat, that's how it comes off. Conservatives/Republicans rarely self-identify as such on this forum, rather they usually self describe as considering themselves left of centre and/or socially liberal, while simultaneously referring to "the left" in derogatory terms and expressing belief/subscription to select conservative/right-wing ideologies. Most importantly, they continually stress that they don't agree with either "side" AKA "Both sides are bad".

So that's my first impression... To be fair, I haven't read the rest, so I'll go back and read the rest of what you said now... but that's where I stand so far.
 
Last edited:

adcarrymaokai

Emperor
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
1,616
Ironically, what the 'fact checkers' have mostly demonstrated in "catching her out" is that they actually know far less about economics than she does.
Frankly, most of the AOC criticism online that I have seen comes to: 1) "wow she is so dumb lololol"; 2) "wow she is so dumb she doesn't even understand econ 101, dude"; 3) "wow she is so dumb she just peddles populism" (the populism part coming from Trump supporters, no less); 4) "wow she is so dumb and ugly and stupid, and.. dumb" 5) "wow she is so dumb but she is also a hypocrite and is using social media to boost her ego" (also coming from the Trump crowd).

There are also photoshopped images of her where they try to make her eyes look bigger, as if she were crazy. There was even this: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez fake nude photos debunked by foot fetishist.

I actually love seeing these crowds throw hysterical hissy fits about AOC and her nonchalant replies to them.
 

Zardnaar

Deity
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Messages
16,914
Location
Dunedin, New Zealand
Frankly, most of the AOC criticism online that I have seen comes to: 1) "wow she is so dumb lololol"; 2) "wow she is so dumb she doesn't even understand econ 101, dude"; 3) "wow she is so dumb she just peddles populism" (the populism part coming from Trump supporters, no less); 4) "wow she is so dumb and ugly and stupid, and.. dumb" 5) "wow she is so dumb but she is also a hypocrite and is using social media to boost her ego" (also coming from the Trump crowd).

There are also photoshopped images of her where they try to make her eyes look bigger, as if she were crazy. There was even this: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez fake nude photos debunked by foot fetishist.

I actually love seeing these crowds throw hysterical hissy fits about AOC and her nonchalant replies to them.

AOC isn't dumb as such more inexperienced. She has charisma and it would be interesting to see if she is a potential future presidential candidate, or becoimes a left wing Sarah Palin no one cares about in 10 years time.
 

Zardnaar

Deity
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Messages
16,914
Location
Dunedin, New Zealand
Gold is worthless, except in terms of how much rice it can buy.
From the perspective of an American Democrat, who's heard this exact description from guys so many times as to make it somewhat painfully cliche and repetitive... this is basically a long winded way of saying "I'm a Republican/Conservative"... the usual caveat being, that as per the norm, "who doesn't want to be labeled as such, because of the baggage that goes with that." Since you're not American, you'll just have to take my word for it I guess.. and again since you're not American I won't argue with you about whether you're "leftist" or "socialist" or "conservative" etc, as those distinctions are too varied between countries. Just know that from my perspective as an American Democrat, that's how it comes off. Conservatives/Republicans rarely self-identify as such on this forum, rather they usually self describe as considering themselves left of centre and/or socially liberal, while simultaneously referring to "the left" in derogatory terms and expressing belief/subscription to select conservative/right-wing ideologies. Most importantly, they continually stress that they don't agree with either "side" AKA "Both sides are bad".

So that's my first impression... To be fair, I haven't read the rest, so I'll go back and read the rest of what you said now... but that's where I stand so far.

Shrugs. As I said I voted the the NZ Labour party last election and broadly speaking do not mind if taxes go up on the rich, at least to a certain extent. I voted for a 37 yo unmarried pregnant women and she is now PM. Some on the left here make my teeth itch though basically because they don;'t quite get it that people have a different opinion than they do and they don't understand why they lose elections and resort to things like The rights so blah blah blah".

IRL a lot of their Friends are all from the same echo chamber, they don't really get it that a lot of people don't like paying more in tax even if they are not rich. I have been on a factory floor and had people open their paychecks and see that they have paid $300 tax while someone else at the table qualifies for working for families and they don't or they have a friend who is on welfare and basically has no intention of getting a job or can't even hold a job down at say McDonalds. Some of them will vote right wing basically because even a $10 a week tax cut is better than nothing they get from the left or nothing+ extra tax. If you work a lot of overtime here for example and have a job where you get X1.5 or X2 rates on overtime you can end up in the top tax rate that week as the tax system looks at your weekly paycheck. Same thing if you get a bonus or are made redundant if you get a large sum of money you get taxed as if you earn that money each week. If you pay more tax than you should you do get a refund at the end of the financial year but it doesn't help that week and a few people don't realise this as tax refunds here are mostly automatic. When I got made redundant for example I paid 39% tax on 15k, I just rang the tax department and got the refund the following week as I knew how it worked. Said party I voted for in 1999 also put up the top tax rate from 33% to 39%- that is actually a lot more than Elizabeths Warrens tax the rich scheme. It was a flat 5% not 2 or 3%, and the base tax rate was also higher. I don't think Warren or Harris are extreme left (maybe in the USA IDK). Alexandriagets here facts and claims wrong at least that is what I read in the Washington Post that fact checked her.

Some of the Green voters also push the pro marijuana propaganda heavily. Basically I agree with them at least in terms of the war on drugs just isn't working and legalizing marijuana but I don't agree when they make all these pseudoscientific claims about pot being a wonder drug. Drug use to me is a social not criminal problem. Drug dealing is criminal.

My brother was a big ACT supporter here (kinda Libertarian socially liberal neo liberal party). He genuinely believed in the 90's that cutting taxes and deregulation was a good idea. Last year I met him he voted for a more moderate right wing party and he did say he considered voting left for the 1st time in his life and that trickle down doesn't work. Note the right wing over here is mostly socially liberal though unlike America they don't care to much about social issues just tax cuts, deregulation and pro business policies. The conservatives as such are 1-4% of the electorate.
 

Hygro

soundcloud.com/hygro/
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Messages
25,125
Location
California
Supply and demand is a model. Supply and demand is rational logic of economy maximizing agents. Supply and demand is rational logic for economy maximizing agents negotiating price and assigning ownership. The limits of the model can be expanded to describe any energy economy of interaction.
 

Sommerswerd

Shades of the Sun
Supporter
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
21,573
Location
Murica
Supply and demand is a model. Supply and demand is rational logic of economy maximizing agents. Supply and demand is rational logic for economy maximizing agents negotiating price and assigning ownership. The limits of the model can be expanded to describe any energy economy of interaction.
Blasphemy!!:mad: Suppy and demand IZ DE LAWLLL!!!

That's why they call it "The Law of Supply and Demand" duh!

 
Top Bottom