Donald Trump
" The people would be satisfied if the illegal immigration was shut down, which is not all that hard logistically. It may seem difficult to outsiders who aren't intimately familiar with the situation, the territory and the various US military forces already operating in that area, but it could be done for under 2 Billion dollars in 2 years time, and it wouldn't require a wall. The political will to enforce the border has never been there, because anyone who seriously tried to address the problem would never get reelected. The economic will has dictated the political will, as the US would be in dire financial straits WITHOUT many of the immigrants. It is a capacity problem now, and that part is remedied rather simply, without a lot of violence. The deportation part of Trump's clarion call would be satisfied (to the voter's minds) easily enough by simply deporting the violent illegals, and creating criminal penalties (with jail time) for any administrative or elected officials who try to shield the violent offenders. Call it Accessory to Flagrant Immigration and establish a minimum of 5 years in a federal prison and a maximum of 30 years. Guess who else would need to fall in that criminal bracket? The businesses that facilitate by knowingly hiring or assisting illegal immigration. Sorry, Giant Company X CEO -you get 27 years, here's your orange jump suit and tube of lube. There would need to be penalties on the Mexican border side for facilitating illegal immigration as well. The impetus for Mexico to comply would be shutting off the bulk of money being sent back to Mexico. If Mexico tried to play hardball, then the US simply goes back to the original borders of the Gadsden Purchase and gains a new sea port city -Puerto Penasco.
Spoiler
The southern border of Arizona was supposed to extend horizontally to the west and include the port area - but the cowards in charge of defending Arizona at the time claimed the couldn't defend the territory and so the border was revised. Wikipedia is missing a lot of information on this - but for a free resource, it covers a decent chunk of ground.
" This election? Sheesh, it has been a very long time since we have had anyone really worth voting FOR and not just against. I'm still of the mindset that every ballot needs to include a "None of the above" box, and if the None of the Above box wins the election, than all the candidates are removed from the ballot and forbidden to run for any elected office for 10 years. It may take several election cycles for the parties to realize that the voters are tired of party shills and ethically compromised pawns as official candidates, but after we send a few hundred of their "best and brightest" hopes to the 10 yr penalty box, they will change their tunes. If Rasputina does manage to get elected, Russia and China will have a field day doing just about whatever they want in the international arena. The economic fade will continue, and crime will soar to new heights, though not quite to Robocop levels. What we need are better educated voters, but the people running the education system have their own agenda and have become a dogmatizing force rather than a democratizing force. The value of critical thinking and individual dissent is being systemically purged from the political pipelines. The popularity of the Sanders and Trump is a direct visceral response of the public to the current powers who think they are the Dad and Mom and every voter is their five year old child. The long term solution? Not sure yet, but in some fashion it will involve a diverse online educational system, full disclosure of candidates and all alignments they have(financial and otherwise)and some sort of accountability piece for free speech. Accomplishing the last part without destroying the function of free speech won't be easy, and will probably require a constitutional amendment so that full political libel and slander are no longer permissable. Whether it is CNN, Fox, a 3rd grade teacher, or a one person blogger - people who knowingly spit out lies for the direct purpose of political gain need to feel the wrath of the law. For the worst, it may mean significant jail time. It won't be that many either - the number of people who create the fabrications aren't all that great, even if the number of people who unknowingly spread the false information is enormous. In the end, most of these problems are just a lack of accountability. Currently, our elected leaders (and non elected administrators) in the US have none - at least not at the practical level. PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910 Last edited by DalaiLama#6738 on Feb 25, 2016, 12:28:34 AM
|
|
" I am not sure you understand how desperate people can be to immigrate. Here in Europe, people cross the Mediterranean sea in deplorable conditions in order to get to our coasts, sometimes at the cost of their lives. And this situation is nothing new, it's existed for at least decades. |
|
|
Spoiler
" Is it worth the 2 billion dollars, though? From the outside, the US inmigration process looks like soviet era paperwork, yet the economy depends on illegal labor to work. I think US should accept the reality that they can't just choose high skilled people for inmigration, even if they don't have to completely open their borders. Wanting just the best is somewhat protectionist. About the money being sent back to Mexico, seems draconian as it is. Not all the money is involucrated with facilitating illegal inmigration.
Spoiler
" Honestly, I think that the better educated part can only be so dependent on the system. I think people have forgotten that they have the power to learn by themselves, even people that can pay that education. Better education is not a bad goal, though, :P The online education systems can introduce more competence to the market, but there is going to be always an agenda (also, online tends to be worse than presential, specially because of a weaker feedback loop), so I'd rather rely in citizens taking some responsability if they are in shape to do that (that means, not poor). Why there is a need for an amendment? Free speech is great, but regulating it doesn't seem to need for an amendment. If something that someone said has a easily quantifiable negative externality, it should be a target for regulation (for example, systematic harassment of someone to the point of suicide). About the accountability, at the end of the day, there is only one true source of it: citizens. You can't just rely on laws. Citizens are the ones that must discern truth no matter how many lies are fed. Add a Forsaken Masters questline https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2297942 Last edited by NeroNoah#1010 on Feb 25, 2016, 9:26:10 AM
|
|
|
Welcome to poli Sci 201 students
Don't forget to drink your milk 👌
|
|
" I have studied something different, so it´s not more than just personal opinion, but ofc everyone is welcome. Actually I would like to know, if any "poli sci student" would agree to this(I think so): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kpd9p-tUUdw&index=7&list=PL_krLerM6RpKFPMBXqPl3Y1RIs3XA7mlN (this is what I meant with "preacher of hate" earlier) |
|
" No clue tbh, I did take some poli sci but only as electives. I used my time in class to do homework for my core classes. There was always that small group of 3-4 students that were wayyy to into it and just dominated the discussion, broken up periodically by the teacher's excessive eye rolls Don't forget to drink your milk 👌
|
|
" I agree that the US needs a significant influx of immigrants - which is why I stated "the US would be in dire financial straits WITHOUT many of the immigrants". The number coming here needs to be reduced not stopped. The target numbers have to be set at realistic levels and the illegal immigration halted. The 2 billion cost would easily outweigh current losses by a factor of 50 to 100. " Agreed. That money flow would only be shut off if the Mexican government didn't cooperate. I may not have made that aspect clear. Whether corrupted or not, few governments like to have their money taken away, and if the loss is great enough, they will respond.
Spoiler
" The way the laws and Constitution are set up here, it is very difficult to go after such things, except for public shaming and firing someone from their job. Furthermore, it is now considered fashionable and honorable to spread lies to further an agenda. Both sides (in power) and many big social and political movements have become so inured to the smearing process that it doesn't even register in their conscious as something bad. The backpedaling PR machines can usually smooth out anything flagrant that they get caught in, and then it is time to move on to the next smear on the agenda. Without an amendment, this tactic is completely legal. Only the rarest, most obvious cases of patently false willful disparagement can be successfully taken to court. This concept has served us well for a very long time, but now it is being systematically abused. " When they are misfed information from kindergarten on, it becomes difficult to discern what is real or fabricated. There is also the visceral effect, where once people are trained to believe one thing, they will react emotionally towards it and disregard any contrasting facts automatically. If people had one brain system, instead of three, it wouldn't be so complex. " I do grasp that desperation. Anyone willing to risk cooking themselves by hiding between the hood of a car and a hot car engine isn't thinking clearly. The logistics are quite different for the US and immigrants trying to get here though, and can be controlled. Part of the solution will be eliminating the Mexican government's complicity on the illegal side (such as supporting the staging areas just before the border). Part of it (the dangerous part) will be confronting and eliminating any cartels foolish enough to try to protect their 'routes'. That part will have to be done by the US military, with a hands off attitude from the US civil government, and the cooperation of Mexico. Unfortunately, I do not see any peaceful resolutions with the cartels. They will have to be taken down without remorse, and there will be a very high number of "innocent" deaths. Some of those innocents will be passively involved with the cartels, though most will only be guilty of trying to stay alive and live nearby. The number of initial deaths will be very high, but once the lower level of cartel employees realize that it is all coming down and that they are just bomb fodder for A-10s, they will desert their leaders, and the cartels will come tumbling down. The cartels aren't stupid, and with a strong governmental commitment out the outset, many will realize that they are not going to win this war (and it cannot be just a police action)and back down their operations. They would still be able to smuggle drugs across, so the bulk of their income wouldn't be affected anyways. PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
|
|
|
He won't be president but richer... I want a woman for president. Hopefully a meteor or alien won't bother us. As every movie I've watched with a female president/council has some sort of apocalypse.
"Another... Solwitch thread." AST
Current Games: :::City Skylines:::Elite Dangerous::: Division 2 "...our most seemingly ironclad beliefs about our own agency and conscious experience can be dead wrong." -Adam Bear |
|
" The video is correct in one aspect only - that Trump is tapping into the public frustration. The video is completely wrong where the speaker says that he thinks the current US is worse than Germany was at the time of Hitler's rise. The speaker completely missed the idea that a lot of voter frustration in the US is directed towards a non functional government that has repeatedly failed to even try to tackle the problem. For the most part, Bernie Sanders is tapping into the very same types of frustration. The reality is that people are tired of the government dealing with petty issues (the ones that bring tax money back to their district, or look good with a minimal amount of effort.) instead of trying to tackle the bigger problems. Trump isn't saying anything new to the American public. He isn't fanning any flames or suggesting things that haven't been suggested time and again over the past 10+ years. The only thing he is doing that is dramatically different is that he is saying it from a potentially much higher level of government. IMO, the speaker of this video does more of the very actions he condemns (by tapping into and festering hate with his own falsehoods)than the targets of his vitriol do. The 400 level PolySci classes are where you really start looking at the details of given political movements, their evolution, factions and historical precedents. The more you look across global history, the more similarities you begin to see. It's the minute differences, motivations and specific application that make the difference. For instance, at first glance the same video speaker above **could** say Trump was starting another Yellow Turban rebellion because he was pushing against the labor surplus. He could say Bernie was trying to begin another Meiji restoration with his educational push. Here's something to think about - if the immigration problem was on the north USA border, and Trump wanted to build a wall and exclude millions of illegal Canadians from coming to the US, would these 'analysts' still be comparing him to Hitler? Would they still be calling him racist? It is kind of like saying that someone who is against free but poorly written mobile apps is anti-cellphone (can't call them a Cellist since that word is already in use) because the vast majority of these apps are on phones. Short answer - the video speaker isn't even close to the truth. No facts, no studies, no research, no substantiation with other reliable opinions etc. He doesn't even bother substantiating his own thoughts: Example (rough summary) Trump is acting like H. H said this. (no mention of Trump's actual words in comparison) At 1:29 - 1:33 you think the speaker will do this as he starts out "..now Trump is doing EXACTLY the same thing.." What the speaker does is backtrack and say "in my opinion he is connecting exactly the same way.." and then the speaker goes on to talk about H again. at 2:05 the speaker makes a very weak comparison by suggesting that Trump is primarily connecting with the uneducated and unemployed as H did. I really wish I could find the statistical analysis they just did on Nevada and South Carolina which show the opposite, that Trump is gathering a larger percentage of educated and higher income voters than his opponents. Google needs an image search option "-faces" In any case, the speaker's point is not only unfounded, and illogical, but has been refuted. From 2:11 to 2:16 the speaker says " Trump..who is by ANY standards a Very VERY ignorant man.." So ... let's analyze that. Should we set the bar at very very ignorant as someone who did not complete high school? Can we (the imperial we) agree that most people would say that someone with a bachelor's degree wouldn't automatically be considered very very ignorant? Trump graduated with from an Ivy League school - the University of Pennsylvania, so I would say by the standards of most people he isn't very very ignorant. Bombastic, offensive, etc, maybe, but uneducated no. Simply put, a video with someone doing a Bear Gryll's imitation and gargling you know what is more informative than this video. My suggestion (if you aren't already doing so_ would be to follow or listen/watch analysts who cite actual data, studies, examples, and have links to the data they cite on their website so you can look at the data and come to your own conclusions. Follow those links, and follow the links from the links. Now put the authors of these websites and data into Google and add in some very negative terminology to get their detractors. Follow the links to see what the opponents say, and follow a series of links until you have a good idea of who is saying what and who is backing up what they say with verifiable facts, and who is twisting the facts. Pretend like you are new to Earth, and you don't know, trust or hate anyone here. Now do some critical thinking on what you've learned by these links, factoring in how your own biases affect that thinking. Now look back and when you continue following that topic, you will have a good insight as to what is going on behind the scenes. You will have an instinct for what a person is NOT TELLING the public, and those omissions can be as damning as lies. It is a pain in the butt to have to go to this much work, but the alternative is letting the media use our brains as their urinal. PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
|
|
" If we follow the Hollywood script then... Trump will get elected to two terms, and Hillary in 2024, and the asteroid will hit in 2029 during her second term when Russia moves up it's plan to test out ICBMS on Apophis. On Friday the 13th of April, of course. http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/russia-wants-to-target-asteroids-with-icbms/ 
Spoiler
2009-Apr-29: This animation illustrates how the unmeasured physical parameters of Apophis bias the entire statistical uncertainty region. If Apophis is a RETROGRADE rotator on the small, less-massive end of what is possible, the measurement uncertainty region will get pushed back such that the center of the distribution encounters the Earth's orbit.
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
|
|
