Needed: Counterpart to 'Woke'

[Elixir]

He also doesn't have a weird laugh and that makes all the difference.

FIFY

 

[Derec]

The riots in 2014 was where the word was "first adopted"??? That's what you said.

Wrong. I said that that is when this word first entered the mainstream lexicon.

What you said and what I responded to:

No, it was first adopted as a "slur" because for one it is just a ridiculous sounding word and second, it was used in earnest by people with ridiculous positions that were ripe for ridicule.

Read more carefully.

No, it was first adopted as a "slur" because for one it is just a ridiculous sounding word and second, it was used in earnest by people with ridiculous positions that were ripe for ridicule.

[emphasis changed]
This sentence was talking about when the term "woke" was adopted as a "slur", i.e. as a term of ridicule by those critiquing those who labeled themselves as "woke". That happened after the 2014 riots.

It would be plain to see above but you conveniently and deliberately did not include the quote that demonstrated that. A very dishonest debate tactic if you ask me.

No, I clarified what I wrote in this thread on this topic. Clarifying my position is not dishonest.

I then demonstrated how the word was really first adopted by black culture of the 1930s.

Nobody was disputing that though, least of all I.

The only way you could actually have been right was by totally dismissing the origin in black culture. I wish that was something that was beneath you but considering your statements in this thread about woke and BLM I highy doubt it.

I did no such thing.
Again:
- term "woke" was invented sometime around 1930s in the black community.
- during the 2014 #BLM riots, the term "woke" entered the mainstream lexicon through its use by #BLM activists.
- sometime after that, the term "woke" was used as a term of derision by those who were critical of those who used the term in earnest, i.e. the #BLM activists and fellow travelers.

All clear now?

 

[Gospel]

I want to take a quick step back and say I respect and appreciate @RVonse for thoughtfully sharing their perspectives on America’s pressing economic and social issues. The detailed points on producing more domestically, reducing government spending, improving public health, securing borders, promoting family values, and ensuring economic transparency is a part of the national conversation. I don't believe @RVonse was necessarily making an argument for Trump (though I could be mistaken); my response was simply phrased that way.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

thoughtfully

Press X to doubt.

 

[RVonse]

MAGA stands for make America Great Again. What is so wrong with that? It once was a normal goal for an American to desire their country be great. Because if you don't think the country you live in should be great then pray tell us just why you think your country should suck? And if your goal is for the country you live in to suck, just what would you change to make it suck? More wokeness perhaps?

Well, that's rich. MAGA stands now for what it stood for 8 years ago: belligerence, calls for violence, insulting and obscene language about its opponents (hence the karma in labeling them as whatever infuriates them the most), xenophobic scare-mongering, homophobic scare-mongering, zany conspiracy theories about Democrats drinking baby blood, running child prostitution rings, etc., etc., etc. It is the last refuge of spineless Repub pols who, for a brief window in '15 and '16, and an even briefer one in '21, told the truth about this revolting movement and its leader. They are a stain on our history and traditions.

I'm honestly not that sophisticated as to be able to relate all those embellishments into the average person wearing a MAGA hat. I very much think it depends on the eye of the beholder. In your eyes they are obviously all lumped into the lowest scum on this planet. But in the eyes of the average MAGA hat wearer, all they are hoping for is an America that is great again. Some MAGA supporters like RFK jr probably do not like Trump much better than you but since the current trajectory got us to a place they do not like they are willing to wear a slogan that promises making America great again. So yet I think those people literally believe what MAGA stands for and when you infer something drastically different there exists a lot of confusion.

The left would do far better to promote a slogan (rather than MAGA) that actually addresses the xenophobic scare-mongering calls for violence that (Im guessing) 99% of everyone is against anyway. Communication would be much better anyway.

That all sounds very nice but it makes little sense. In what way does the average MAGA wish the USA to become great again? I ask, because e even the average MAGA supporter's real income is larger than it was 8 years ago. People have better access to health care on average. While we are not quite the envy of the rest of world, a big chunk of that is due to their savior, Donald Trump.

1. America needs to be a producer again and not a consumer. America needs to produce more than it consumes!

Why? If you are referring to trade balances, that is simply not possible to do forever.

I was referring to private and public debt versus our collective productive output. Do we produce more than we consume without borrowing the money? But that being said, why is it not possible (on average) for the US to export the same amount of goods/services that we import? Under normal trade relations it should be a macro and micro goal for the US to produce as much as it consumes without the use of debt or financial engineering. Today our biggest export is the paper currency that our fed abuses and prints in order to purchase our imports. Very similar to the patterns of downfall stage of all previous empires (Spain, Dutch, Britian).

We should be producing what we consume and not printing the money to purchase what we import.

 

[RVonse]

MAGA stands for make America Great Again. What is so wrong with that? It once was a normal goal for an American to desire their country be great. Because if you don't think the country you live in should be great then pray tell us just why you think your country should suck? And if your goal is for the country you live in to suck, just what would you change to make it suck? More wokeness perhaps?

Well, that's rich. MAGA stands now for what it stood for 8 years ago: belligerence, calls for violence, insulting and obscene language about its opponents (hence the karma in labeling them as whatever infuriates them the most), xenophobic scare-mongering, homophobic scare-mongering, zany conspiracy theories about Democrats drinking baby blood, running child prostitution rings, etc., etc., etc. It is the last refuge of spineless Repub pols who, for a brief window in '15 and '16, and an even briefer one in '21, told the truth about this revolting movement and its leader. They are a stain on our history and traditions.

I'm honestly not that sophisticated as to be able to relate all those embellishments into the average person wearing a MAGA hat. I very much think it depends on the eye of the beholder. In your eyes they are obviously all lumped into the lowest scum on this planet. But in the eyes of the average MAGA hat wearer, all they are hoping for is an America that is great again. Some MAGA supporters like RFK jr probably do not like Trump much better than you but since the current trajectory got us to a place they do not like they are willing to wear a slogan that promises making America great again. So yet I think those people literally believe what MAGA stands for and when you infer something drastically different there exists a lot of confusion.

The left would do far better to promote a slogan (rather than MAGA) that actually addresses the xenophobic scare-mongering calls for violence that (Im guessing) 99% of everyone is against anyway. Communication would be much better anyway.

That all sounds very nice but it makes little sense. In what way does the average MAGA wish the USA to become great again? I ask, because e even the average MAGA supporter's real income is larger than it was 8 years ago. People have better access to health care on average. While we are not quite the envy of the rest of world, a big chunk of that is due to their savior, Donald Trump.

1. America needs to be a producer again and not a consumer. America needs to produce more than it consumes!

Why? If you are referring to trade balances, that is simply not possible to do forever.

2. Washington needs to spend within its means again - Yes I know both sides get away with not paying large deficits, that Clinton was the only one in modern history balancing the budget, and that Trump is the king of spending. That being said, the MAGA movement is most concerned about this and Trump has agreed to put Musk in charge of trimming down government excess. It is estimated Musk could probably lay off half of government and most of us would not know the difference except the deficits would could be halved. As with Twitter, the government would probably start running better with less administrators.

The MAGA movement embraces Trump who has a long track record of deficit spending and failing business. But your estimates are unreal, Most gov't spending is not on wages and salaries of non-defense employees. It is on SS, Medicare, and interest payments and the military.
There are a little less than 3 million employees. Half of that is 1.5 million. If each of those laid off employees was compensated at the exorbitant rate of $200,000 per year, that saves $300 billion out of a federal deficit of $1.8 trillion or about 17% not half. Moreover, roughly 75% of federal employees work in the military. So either the entire federal civilian workforce has to go along with a 1/4 of the military, or an even larger cut to our military strength would have to occur.

I guarantee that getting rid of half of federal employees would be noticeable.
Federal civilian jobs including air traffic controllers, park rangers, air marshalls, federal judges, etc... Losing even half of them would have noticeable effect on everyone's lives.

At the minimum, federal government employees should at least be compensated at the average rate of the private sector including pension and medical benefits. Why do federal employees enjoy pensions and medical far in excess of the average private worker? The average MAGA supporter would love to see a Musk investigation on how government could be run more effeciently.

 

[cycomiko]

MAGA stands for make America Great Again. What is so wrong with that? It once was a normal goal for an American to desire their country be great. Because if you don't think the country you live in should be great then pray tell us just why you think your country should suck? And if your goal is for the country you live in to suck, just what would you change to make it suck? More wokeness perhaps?

Well, that's rich. MAGA stands now for what it stood for 8 years ago: belligerence, calls for violence, insulting and obscene language about its opponents (hence the karma in labeling them as whatever infuriates them the most), xenophobic scare-mongering, homophobic scare-mongering, zany conspiracy theories about Democrats drinking baby blood, running child prostitution rings, etc., etc., etc. It is the last refuge of spineless Repub pols who, for a brief window in '15 and '16, and an even briefer one in '21, told the truth about this revolting movement and its leader. They are a stain on our history and traditions.

I'm honestly not that sophisticated as to be able to relate all those embellishments into the average person wearing a MAGA hat. I very much think it depends on the eye of the beholder. In your eyes they are obviously all lumped into the lowest scum on this planet. But in the eyes of the average MAGA hat wearer, all they are hoping for is an America that is great again. Some MAGA supporters like RFK jr probably do not like Trump much better than you but since the current trajectory got us to a place they do not like they are willing to wear a slogan that promises making America great again. So yet I think those people literally believe what MAGA stands for and when you infer something drastically different there exists a lot of confusion.

The left would do far better to promote a slogan (rather than MAGA) that actually addresses the xenophobic scare-mongering calls for violence that (Im guessing) 99% of everyone is against anyway. Communication would be much better anyway.

That all sounds very nice but it makes little sense. In what way does the average MAGA wish the USA to become great again? I ask, because e even the average MAGA supporter's real income is larger than it was 8 years ago. People have better access to health care on average. While we are not quite the envy of the rest of world, a big chunk of that is due to their savior, Donald Trump.

1. America needs to be a producer again and not a consumer. America needs to produce more than it consumes!

Why? If you are referring to trade balances, that is simply not possible to do forever.

I was referring to private and public debt versus our collective productive output. Do we produce more than we consume without borrowing the money? But that being said, why is it not possible (on average) for the US to export the same amount of goods/services that we import? Under normal trade relations it should be a macro and micro goal for the US to produce as much as it consumes without the use of debt or financial engineering. Today our biggest export is the paper currency that our fed abuses and prints in order to purchase our imports. Very similar to the patterns of downfall stage of all previous empires (Spain, Dutch, Britian).

We should be producing what we consume and not printing the money to purchase what we import.

I'm confused so help me out. Does the fed pay for the goods/services that we import and then we, the consumers, buy it from the fed?

 

[RVonse]

.

Real incomes (buying power) is higher now that it was 8 years ago. There is no such thing as "honest" money - all forms of money have fluctuated in value.

It should be the goal for whoever controls the treasury to stabilize the currency they make us use to pay our taxes. So that neither savers nor borrowers are affected in a material way over time. We have just the opposite right now where it is utter stupidity to hold dollars in a savings account in a time of chronic high inflation and low interest. We have a government who controls stock and asset prices more than the market does today. If that is not dishonest I don't know what is.

 

[cycomiko]

MAGA stands for make America Great Again. What is so wrong with that? It once was a normal goal for an American to desire their country be great. Because if you don't think the country you live in should be great then pray tell us just why you think your country should suck? And if your goal is for the country you live in to suck, just what would you change to make it suck? More wokeness perhaps?

Well, that's rich. MAGA stands now for what it stood for 8 years ago: belligerence, calls for violence, insulting and obscene language about its opponents (hence the karma in labeling them as whatever infuriates them the most), xenophobic scare-mongering, homophobic scare-mongering, zany conspiracy theories about Democrats drinking baby blood, running child prostitution rings, etc., etc., etc. It is the last refuge of spineless Repub pols who, for a brief window in '15 and '16, and an even briefer one in '21, told the truth about this revolting movement and its leader. They are a stain on our history and traditions.

I'm honestly not that sophisticated as to be able to relate all those embellishments into the average person wearing a MAGA hat. I very much think it depends on the eye of the beholder. In your eyes they are obviously all lumped into the lowest scum on this planet. But in the eyes of the average MAGA hat wearer, all they are hoping for is an America that is great again. Some MAGA supporters like RFK jr probably do not like Trump much better than you but since the current trajectory got us to a place they do not like they are willing to wear a slogan that promises making America great again. So yet I think those people literally believe what MAGA stands for and when you infer something drastically different there exists a lot of confusion.

The left would do far better to promote a slogan (rather than MAGA) that actually addresses the xenophobic scare-mongering calls for violence that (Im guessing) 99% of everyone is against anyway. Communication would be much better anyway.

That all sounds very nice but it makes little sense. In what way does the average MAGA wish the USA to become great again? I ask, because e even the average MAGA supporter's real income is larger than it was 8 years ago. People have better access to health care on average. While we are not quite the envy of the rest of world, a big chunk of that is due to their savior, Donald Trump.

1. America needs to be a producer again and not a consumer. America needs to produce more than it consumes!

Why? If you are referring to trade balances, that is simply not possible to do forever.

2. Washington needs to spend within its means again - Yes I know both sides get away with not paying large deficits, that Clinton was the only one in modern history balancing the budget, and that Trump is the king of spending. That being said, the MAGA movement is most concerned about this and Trump has agreed to put Musk in charge of trimming down government excess. It is estimated Musk could probably lay off half of government and most of us would not know the difference except the deficits would could be halved. As with Twitter, the government would probably start running better with less administrators.

The MAGA movement embraces Trump who has a long track record of deficit spending and failing business. But your estimates are unreal, Most gov't spending is not on wages and salaries of non-defense employees. It is on SS, Medicare, and interest payments and the military.
There are a little less than 3 million employees. Half of that is 1.5 million. If each of those laid off employees was compensated at the exorbitant rate of $200,000 per year, that saves $300 billion out of a federal deficit of $1.8 trillion or about 17% not half. Moreover, roughly 75% of federal employees work in the military. So either the entire federal civilian workforce has to go along with a 1/4 of the military, or an even larger cut to our military strength would have to occur.

I guarantee that getting rid of half of federal employees would be noticeable.
Federal civilian jobs including air traffic controllers, park rangers, air marshalls, federal judges, etc... Losing even half of them would have noticeable effect on everyone's lives.

At the minimum, federal government employees should at least be compensated at the average rate of the private sector including pension and medical benefits. Why do federal employees enjoy pensions and medical far in excess of the average private worker? The average MAGA supporter would love to see a Musk investigation on how government could be run more effeciently.

You're in luck. Federal employees often make LESS than private sector employees. I work with Air Force civilians all the time and they get poached by private sector companies very easily. These are "educated" professionals I'm talking about. Maybe Musk can give those people a raise so the govt can keep the good one.

According to the CBO (https://www.cbo.gov/publication/60235):
In 2022, the difference between the wages of federal civilian employees and those of similar private-sector employees varied widely—as they have in previous years—depending on the employees’ educational attainment.

• Federal workers with no more than a high school education—about 13 percent of the federal workforce—earned about 17 percent more, on average, than their private-sector counterparts.
• Federal workers whose education culminated in a bachelor’s degree—about one-third of the federal workforce—earned about 10 percent less, on average, than similar workers in the private sector.
• Federal workers with a professional degree or doctorate—about 10 percent of the federal workforce—earned about 29 percent less, on average, than their private-sector counterparts

 

[RVonse]

MAGA stands for make America Great Again. What is so wrong with that? It once was a normal goal for an American to desire their country be great. Because if you don't think the country you live in should be great then pray tell us just why you think your country should suck? And if your goal is for the country you live in to suck, just what would you change to make it suck? More wokeness perhaps?

Well, that's rich. MAGA stands now for what it stood for 8 years ago: belligerence, calls for violence, insulting and obscene language about its opponents (hence the karma in labeling them as whatever infuriates them the most), xenophobic scare-mongering, homophobic scare-mongering, zany conspiracy theories about Democrats drinking baby blood, running child prostitution rings, etc., etc., etc. It is the last refuge of spineless Repub pols who, for a brief window in '15 and '16, and an even briefer one in '21, told the truth about this revolting movement and its leader. They are a stain on our history and traditions.

I'm honestly not that sophisticated as to be able to relate all those embellishments into the average person wearing a MAGA hat. I very much think it depends on the eye of the beholder. In your eyes they are obviously all lumped into the lowest scum on this planet. But in the eyes of the average MAGA hat wearer, all they are hoping for is an America that is great again. Some MAGA supporters like RFK jr probably do not like Trump much better than you but since the current trajectory got us to a place they do not like they are willing to wear a slogan that promises making America great again. So yet I think those people literally believe what MAGA stands for and when you infer something drastically different there exists a lot of confusion.

The left would do far better to promote a slogan (rather than MAGA) that actually addresses the xenophobic scare-mongering calls for violence that (Im guessing) 99% of everyone is against anyway. Communication would be much better anyway.

That all sounds very nice but it makes little sense. In what way does the average MAGA wish the USA to become great again? I ask, because e even the average MAGA supporter's real income is larger than it was 8 years ago. People have better access to health care on average. While we are not quite the envy of the rest of world, a big chunk of that is due to their savior, Donald Trump.

1. America needs to be a producer again and not a consumer. America needs to produce more than it consumes!

Why? If you are referring to trade balances, that is simply not possible to do forever.

I was referring to private and public debt versus our collective productive output. Do we produce more than we consume without borrowing the money? But that being said, why is it not possible (on average) for the US to export the same amount of goods/services that we import? Under normal trade relations it should be a macro and micro goal for the US to produce as much as it consumes without the use of debt or financial engineering. Today our biggest export is the paper currency that our fed abuses and prints in order to purchase our imports. Very similar to the patterns of downfall stage of all previous empires (Spain, Dutch, Britian).

We should be producing what we consume and not printing the money to purchase what we import.

I'm confused so help me out. Does the fed pay for the goods/services that we import and then we, the consumers, buy it from the fed?

Not directly. But that is the end result what happens when our currency gets printed and counterfeited by the fed.

 

[cycomiko]

Sorry to continue the derail. This is a thread about "woke" and I know better.

 

[RVonse]

5. We need to promote our own population reproducing again. That means a lot less "wokeness" and a lot more traditional family values. Which I know is all krytonite to the liberals... but what else can be suggested to get the incels out of their parents basement and back to getting layed by women again. A whole bunch of incels not getting married, layed, or in the whole of society is the guaranteed recipe for shootings and unnecessary violence.

I am simply speechless about the above. Procreation is separate from sex. If "incels" are having trouble attracting willing sex partners, what exactly could a national government do to improve the situation? Their lack of sexual activity is not due to wokeness but attractiveness.

It appears the "woke" solution to the incels issue is for the Democrats to wage more sporting wars and draft registrations to dispose of incels as cannon fodder. Im guessing they consider that the best solution to the problem than embracing any traditional conservative values.

Or if you disagree with the aforementioned, what would be your solution to the problem? Just ignoring it and being offended by conservative suggestions?

 

[laughing dog]

MAGA stands for make America Great Again. What is so wrong with that? It once was a normal goal for an American to desire their country be great. Because if you don't think the country you live in should be great then pray tell us just why you think your country should suck? And if your goal is for the country you live in to suck, just what would you change to make it suck? More wokeness perhaps?

Well, that's rich. MAGA stands now for what it stood for 8 years ago: belligerence, calls for violence, insulting and obscene language about its opponents (hence the karma in labeling them as whatever infuriates them the most), xenophobic scare-mongering, homophobic scare-mongering, zany conspiracy theories about Democrats drinking baby blood, running child prostitution rings, etc., etc., etc. It is the last refuge of spineless Repub pols who, for a brief window in '15 and '16, and an even briefer one in '21, told the truth about this revolting movement and its leader. They are a stain on our history and traditions.

I'm honestly not that sophisticated as to be able to relate all those embellishments into the average person wearing a MAGA hat. I very much think it depends on the eye of the beholder. In your eyes they are obviously all lumped into the lowest scum on this planet. But in the eyes of the average MAGA hat wearer, all they are hoping for is an America that is great again. Some MAGA supporters like RFK jr probably do not like Trump much better than you but since the current trajectory got us to a place they do not like they are willing to wear a slogan that promises making America great again. So yet I think those people literally believe what MAGA stands for and when you infer something drastically different there exists a lot of confusion.

The left would do far better to promote a slogan (rather than MAGA) that actually addresses the xenophobic scare-mongering calls for violence that (Im guessing) 99% of everyone is against anyway. Communication would be much better anyway.

That all sounds very nice but it makes little sense. In what way does the average MAGA wish the USA to become great again? I ask, because e even the average MAGA supporter's real income is larger than it was 8 years ago. People have better access to health care on average. While we are not quite the envy of the rest of world, a big chunk of that is due to their savior, Donald Trump.

1. America needs to be a producer again and not a consumer. America needs to produce more than it consumes!

Why? If you are referring to trade balances, that is simply not possible to do forever.

I was referring to private and public debt versus our collective productive output. Do we produce more than we consume without borrowing the money? But that being said, why is it not possible (on average) for the US to export the same amount of goods/services that we import? Under normal trade relations it should be a macro and micro goal for the US to produce as much as it consumes without the use of debt or financial engineering. Today our biggest export is the paper currency that our fed abuses and prints in order to purchase our imports. Very similar to the patterns of downfall stage of all previous empires (Spain, Dutch, Britian).

We should be producing what we consume and not printing the money to purchase what we import.

We do produce what we consume. Historically, the USA has long periods of being a net exporter and long periods of being a net importer. When we are a net importer, the exporting countries accumulate our dollars. At some point, someone has to use them to buy stuff from us. If the citizens in those countries prefer to use our dollars to trade in their countries, then basically we are getting their goods and services for the paper we printed out money. If they end up wanting to use those dollars to buy our stuff, then we become a net exporter. Seems to me that our country is better off either way.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

6. The government needs to promote honest money that does not inflate and honest metrics of where the economy is. If average MAGA income is larger than it was 8 years ago it probably does not have the same buying power it did to inflation. But more worrisome than that is that the average MAGA supporter is highly concerned just how long the fed bubbles are going to inflate, and what happens when they explode like they did 2008. Furthermore, honest money (like bitcoin or gold standard) will promote increased economic activity due to firms knowing more easily price information. People will know without the usual CPI mumbo jumbo whether or not their homes are really worth more and whether the gross national produced is really going higher or lower.

Ran out of time yesterday.

You talk of honest money--but there's no such thing. Money has no inherent value, only the value society gives it.

I suspect the average MAGA income buys less than it did 8 years ago--because the MAGAs tend to be in the low end jobs that are valued less by society. That doesn't prove society is wrong.

You talk about "fed bubbles"--you're reading disinformation. There was an inevitable spike of inflation from the Covid supply chain shocks. Worldwide, not just the US, thus no US policy could be the cause. And 2008 was not a fed bubble exploding. It was the housing market that exploded because lending standards had been relaxed. There is an important lesson to be learned from 2008 but it has nothing to do with the Fed. Rather, after 1929 we reigned in investment borrowing. Over the decades that came after we kept watering down the restrictions and sidestepping them with investment options that weren't dreamed of when the 1929 reforms were enacted. The result was more and more borrowing in the investment world. Borrowing more on your investing increases your returns--but also increases your losses. 2008 is what happened when those increased losses exceeded 100%. The only way we are going to be able to actually fix this is with rules that specifically address anything that produces the result of increased leverage no matter what the underlying mechanism. And note that you want the guy who wants to throw out the safety rules.

There is a common expression that building codes and the like are written in blood. To a large degree this is true--people died, a weakness was identified and rules were put in place to address it. The Republicans want to yeet all those rules. Yes, there are some edge cases where the rules produce stupid results. If it's enough of an issue you address the edge cases, you don't chuck the rules.

Bitcoin is honest money?? No, it's 100% scam.

Gold is honest money?? In one sense, yes, but it's not good money. In the gold era the economy was all over the place, major inflation, major deflation. It was not good for the people. Look at the devastation caused by the gold the Spanish looted from the New World.

And a gold standard is deflationary, that certainly will not promote economic activity! It would be horrible for economic activity.

Remember that price is money supply/(goods and services). And money supply is the underlying units of money * the number of times they move. This is an inherently unstable number. Pegging it to a fixed currency supply doesn't help because the important variable is the number of times it moves--and that is highly dependent on the economy.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

When was America great?
That would be step 1 in trying to make any sense of MAGA.

We actually did pretty well right after WW2 (IMO thanks to FDR raising taxes on the rich and banking a lot of gold from England). But we also actually did pretty well (briefly) during Reagan and early Clinton years. For a very short period of time America was the lone super power of the world and still a manufacturing power house.

We did well after WWII not because of taxes but because we were the only industrial powerhouse that didn't get smashed in the war. Shit rolls downhill--and in that period that meant it rolled onto foreigners. It's not a sustainable situation and should not be considered a reference point of doing good.

And note that your guy wants to implement the opposite of the tax policy you like.

 

[ZiprHead]

The riots in 2014 was where the word was "first adopted"??? That's what you said.

Wrong. I said that that is when this word first entered the mainstream lexicon.

What you said and what I responded to:

No, it was first adopted as a "slur" because for one it is just a ridiculous sounding word and second, it was used in earnest by people with ridiculous positions that were ripe for ridicule.

Read more carefully.

No, it was first adopted as a "slur" because for one it is just a ridiculous sounding word and second, it was used in earnest by people with ridiculous positions that were ripe for ridicule.

[emphasis changed]
This sentence was talking about when the term "woke" was adopted as a "slur", i.e. as a term of ridicule by those critiquing those who labeled themselves as "woke". That happened after the 2014 riots.

It would be plain to see above but you conveniently and deliberately did not include the quote that demonstrated that. A very dishonest debate tactic if you ask me.

No, I clarified what I wrote in this thread on this topic. Clarifying my position is not dishonest.

I then demonstrated how the word was really first adopted by black culture of the 1930s.

Nobody was disputing that though, least of all I.

The only way you could actually have been right was by totally dismissing the origin in black culture. I wish that was something that was beneath you but considering your statements in this thread about woke and BLM I highy doubt it.

I did no such thing.
Again:
- term "woke" was invented sometime around 1930s in the black community.

In other words first adopted.

- during the 2014 #BLM riots, the term "woke" entered the mainstream lexicon through its use by #BLM activists.
- sometime after that, the term "woke" was used as a term of derision by those who were critical of those who used the term in earnest, i.e. the #BLM activists and fellow travelers.

All clear now?

Clear as mud. Your words are there for all to see. You were wrong so suck it up, buttercup.

 

[ZiprHead]

Why do federal employees enjoy pensions and medical far in excess of the average private worker?

I prefer to say why do private workers not enjoy pensions and medical like federal employees do.

You like to consider yourself an advocate for the working man but you continue to use management's talking points.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That said, I do think RVonse is exaggerating, but there is certainly a lot of waste in the federal government.

But you don't remove waste with big cuts. You need to identify exactly what the waste is and you need to figure out how it came to be because sometimes it's not truly waste. Always consider Chesterson fences.

How many has Biden let in though through misconceived asylum policies? Democrats also support sanctuary cities which actively oppose ICE efforts to deport illegals, even criminal ones.

Pay attention to what's actually happening. Fundamentally, many states have decided that it's better to permit the illegals to work with the system rather than to fear any contact with the system. Would you prefer to be hit by a licensed, insured illegal or an unlicensed, uninsured illegal who very well might run? And the result has been some fighting over data because the feds were trying to use data for purposes the state disapproved of.

Speak for yourself. You don’t get to tell women they must make babies. And I’m pretty sure you mean white babies.

And I am pretty sure you mean "anybody but white babies". The Left rejoices at the prospect of white people becoming a minority everywhere, even Europe.

The left doesn't care about skin color. It's not something to rejoice, it's something irrelevant.

Maybe incels could get laid (not “layed”) if they were not such stupid whiny misogynist fucks.

The notion that men who have difficulties finding sexual partners are "misogynist fucks" is as inaccurate as it is offensive.

It's often true. The problem is that people can either accept that a problem is internal (there's quite a bit of overlap between incel and autism spectrum) or blame an external source. And this ends up being blaming women. Most people would prefer to blame an external cause and that drives an awful lot of hatred. Note the arrow of causality--the misogyny is a symptom, not a cause.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

[*]Healthy Population: The Trump administration rolled back numerous food and environmental regulations, which arguably made it easier for harmful chemicals to remain in the market.

Not to mention his mismanagement of COVID. He did have the Operation Warp Speed, but he undid it with his rhetoric. That's probably the worst part about Trump. Even when he does something good, he can't take the W and messes it up again.

I don't really think he should take credit for Warp Speed. Besides, that was a large part due to things done long before his time. We got a major jump start on a vaccine because we had done the work on SARS. The actual "development" time for the MRNA Covid vaccine was one day. Warp Speed was simply a gamble that the old research would still apply--run the production phase as if the tests said it worked.

[*]Border Security: While Trump enacted strict border policies, his focus on physical barriers and controversial policies like family separation failed to establish a sustainable or effective immigration reform.

Physical barriers are an important part of a comprehensive strategy. A wall cannot prevent crossings, but it can slow them down for border patrol to arrive and apprehend the illegals. Of course, that is useless as long as "catch and release" policies are in effect.

Barriers not backed up by eyeballs are pretty much worthless. It's a lot easier for them to get through than for us to build a barrier. Thus for the most part said barrier is a political statement, not actual security.

As to "family separation", it was a court order that made it impossible to hold families together. So it was either hold them separately, or just let them in en masse. And then they are virtually impossible to deport even when their asylum cases fail.

The Felon did what he could to ensure things went wrong.

And we have no solution for individuals that can't be deported. What are you going to do, internment camp?? Firing squad?? Invade their country of origin and leave them in the invaded area??

 

[laughing dog]

5. We need to promote our own population reproducing again. That means a lot less "wokeness" and a lot more traditional family values. Which I know is all krytonite to the liberals... but what else can be suggested to get the incels out of their parents basement and back to getting layed by women again. A whole bunch of incels not getting married, layed, or in the whole of society is the guaranteed recipe for shootings and unnecessary violence.

I am simply speechless about the above. Procreation is separate from sex. If "incels" are having trouble attracting willing sex partners, what exactly could a national government do to improve the situation? Their lack of sexual activity is not due to wokeness but attractiveness.

It appears the "woke" solution to the incels issue is for the Democrats to wage more sporting wars and draft registrations to dispose of incels as cannon fodder. Im guessing they consider that the best solution to the problem than embracing any traditional conservative values.

Or if you disagree with the aforementioned, what would be your solution to the problem? Just ignoring it and being offended by conservative suggestions?

I have no idea what a "sporting war" is.

I have no idea what "conservative values" would induce women to have sex with men they don't like because I don't think you are promoting rape.
There is nothing about "wokeness" (whatever that means to you) that causes women to withhold affection - physical or emotional - from men.
Countries have yet to figure out an reliable successful way to promote domestic population growth. I suppose we could ban all sorts of birth control and abortion. Is that the conservative value you wish to bring back?

IMO, In most cases, people have children because they WANT TO HAVE CHILDREN. Either because they love children or they believe that the future is better for them so that they can afford children. I can understand why the child bearing cohort views the future with some alarm. Certainly people like Trump scare them.

We have an easy solution to the perceived deficit of people - immigrants. We could control our borders and allow lots more immigrants. But somehow I don't think that is what you favor, even though from a historical perspective (which makes it conservative), that is how the US has stimulated population growth. But I don't think that is the conservative value you alluded to.