Needed: Counterpart to 'Woke'

[laughing dog]

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.

Plus federal workers tend to be paid less in salary than their private sector counterparts, so better benefits is a way to induce people to work for the federal gov't.

 

[Gospel]

Given America's history and its role on the global stage, one could argue that being 'woke' is deeply American. After all, the U.S. was built on ideals of liberty, equality, and the right to challenge authority when it fails to serve the people. From the Civil Rights Movement to women's suffrage and beyond, Americans have consistently pushed to expand these freedoms to all, regardless of race, gender, or background.

In this sense, to be 'woke' is to embody a vigilant American spirit that questions inequality and works to fulfill the nation’s promise of 'liberty and justice for all.' Instead of allowing 'woke' to be used as a divisive term, we should remind those unpatriotic idiots that they're insulting our national commitment to inclusivity, resilience, and fairness.

• The Original Tea Party Movement: Colonists protested British taxation without representation, recognizing and opposing an unjust system that denied them political agency. This movement wasn’t just about taxes; it was about resisting unfair treatment and asserting rights—much like modern "woke" movements that challenge systemic injustices. Their willingness to stand against an oppressive power structure for the principle of fairness reflects a deeply "woke" consciousness.
• Religious Freedom and the Separation from Britain: Many early settlers left Europe to escape religious persecution. Their desire for a society that allowed diverse beliefs without interference from a state-sanctioned religion was revolutionary at the time. This push for religious freedom paved the way for a fundamental American value of tolerance and respect for different beliefs—a cornerstone of social justice and personal liberty.
• The Abolitionist Movement: This movement in the 19th century, advocating for the end of slavery, was a profound example of early American "wokeness." Abolitionists were acutely aware of the moral and ethical injustices of slavery, often at great personal risk, and they mobilized others to recognize and act against this deeply rooted injustice. Their work is one of America’s earliest examples of societal self-critique leading to transformative change.
• Women’s Suffrage Movement: The fight for women’s right to vote exemplified an awareness of gender inequality and a proactive push to correct it. Suffragists sought to align America’s political system with its stated principles of equality and representation, challenging a long-standing imbalance in rights and freedoms.
• Civil Rights Movement: This movement explicitly aimed to address racial discrimination, segregation, and systemic inequalities, seeking to fulfill the American ideal of equal rights. Leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. called for the country to live up to its promise of freedom and justice for all, highlighting how far America still had to go to realize its foundational values.

America has always been woke biotch! That's the counter.

 

[Gospel]

Id even argue that Independence Day itself is a celebration of 'wokeness.' While the ideals of freedom and equality weren’t extended to all groups at the time, the colonists were 'woke' to the injustices they faced under British rule and took bold steps toward independence. They recognized their right to self-determination and fought for a fairer system, embodying the same spirit of questioning authority and seeking justice that drives the modern 'woke' movement.

 

[Gospel]

Our conservative media has been compromised.

 

[Elixir]

Our conservative media has been compromised.

Definitely controlled by foreign interests.

 

[bilby]

why is it not possible (on average) for the US to export the same amount of goods/services that we import?

It's possible. But it would mean the USA was no longer as wealthy a nation.

You currently take more from the world than you give back. The world accepts this, because the world likes US Dollars, and the only source of US Dollars is the USA. The USA has a literally inexhaustible supply of US Dollars, and can make as many as she wants at zero marginal cost.

Why the fuck would you want to stop getting stuff in exchange for what (to your country) is available for no effort, and instead start only getting stuff in exchange for stuff your countrymen have to put in effort to obtain?

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

Why??

 

[bilby]

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.

Point of information: Money is mostly not printed on anything. The vast majority of money today exists as numbers in a computer, and the marginal cost of producing more money is therefore zero.

So you are getting those goods and/or sevices for nothing.

Complaining that getting stuff for nothing makes you "feel bad" seems to me rather churlish, not to mention foolish.