U.S. Politics - Thread

U.S. Politics


  • Total voters
    103
Status
Not open for further replies.

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,741
Reaction score
27,950
I know its CNN but how can Trumpsters defend this. The corruption continues.

In a last-minute move, NSA installing Trump loyalist as general counsel

 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,215
Reaction score
19,733
But here's the funny part. This is exactly what Libertarians have been pushing for. Free Speech. Freedom of Association. Less government. What does that lead to? Monopolies. And those Monopolies can choose who they associate with. And if they don't associate with your side then in a Libertarian world, you're screwed.
One of the key reasons I'm against an unregulated free market.

With monopolies you also get those monopolies saying to workers, if you don't accept this pay for this job, that's fine there's a whole lot of other people who are willing to do this job for this measly pay. Forget text books, but the greedy nature of humans, eventually leads an unregulated free market to result in "paid" slavery.

And yes, if there's no minimum wage and people are working 3 or 4 jobs just to make ends meet, that is a system built on slavery. Payment of a wage (that is unlivable on) does not negate that it is slavery. If the reports are true and that people who work at Amazon or Wallmart (in the US), still require government food stamps just to be able to feed themselves because all their other cash has gone to bills, to me that's slavery.

Free speech means that the government can't stop you from saying something. Freedom of association means that you can choose who to do business with. Libertarians generally want unrestricted free speech and unrestricted Freedom of Association, including removing any discrimination laws so Christian bakers can refuse to make cakes for gay weddings while also telling that gay couple that they're an abomination.

But ironically it's these same Libertarians that want Twitter and Facebook to be forced to allow people to post what they want. Which completely breaches Freedom of Association.

I get the argument they make though. Get kicked off Twitter, start your own platform. But you need cloud servers for that platform and companies are blocking you from using their servers, therefore you can't have your own platform.
On twitter there's handles called "Sleeping Giants" who organize boycotts of companies who advertise on certain networks/shows.

So basically it goes like this, as an example:

1. Alan Jones says something racist, sexist, bigoted - He has free speech to say this
2. Groups like sleeping giants hear this and therefore advise companies that as long as they pay advertisement dollars to Alan Jones' show, that the consumer refuses to spend money at that company and will seek a different company - free choice
3. Company evaluates their consumer market, deems if it is a big enough risk, and accordingly makes a "free choice" to remove advertising dollars from Alan Jones

A lot of huff and puff about "free speech" has also been made of the above scenario. However,

1. Companies are free to spend their advertising dollars wherever they want, they can also choose to ignore the boycotts

2. Consumers who care, are free to spend their money wherever they want. Consumers realise that part of THEIR money will pass through to scum like Alan Jones, hence consumer make a FREE CHOICE to spend at a company that doesn't advertise at Alan Jones. However consumers let the company (who advertises with Alan Jones) that this is their planned course of action and advise that company they can retain their clients if they take a specific course of action

3. Alan jones and types like him are free to see the consequences of their bigoted shit and choose not to say it. The same way that their "shock jock" status got them their platform and millions in advertising, the same way it can be taken away.

Their is no impediment to freedom of speech in boycotts. Just thought that that needed to be addressed with this discussion
 

N4TE

DogsRhavnaParty
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
5,486
Reaction score
6,817

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,741
Reaction score
27,950
One of the key reasons I'm against an unregulated free market.

With monopolies you also get those monopolies saying to workers, if you don't accept this pay for this job, that's fine there's a whole lot of other people who are willing to do this job for this measly pay. Forget text books, but the greedy nature of humans, eventually leads an unregulated free market to result in "paid" slavery.

And yes, if there's no minimum wage and people are working 3 or 4 jobs just to make ends meet, that is a system built on slavery. Payment of a wage (that is unlivable on) does not negate that it is slavery. If the reports are true and that people who work at Amazon or Wallmart (in the US), still require government food stamps just to be able to feed themselves because all their other cash has gone to bills, to me that's slavery.



On twitter there's handles called "Sleeping Giants" who organize boycotts of companies who advertise on certain networks/shows.

So basically it goes like this, as an example:

1. Alan Jones says something racist, sexist, bigoted - He has free speech to say this
2. Groups like sleeping giants hear this and therefore advise companies that as long as they pay advertisement dollars to Alan Jones' show, that the consumer refuses to spend money at that company and will seek a different company - free choice
3. Company evaluates their consumer market, deems if it is a big enough risk, and accordingly makes a "free choice" to remove advertising dollars from Alan Jones

A lot of huff and puff about "free speech" has also been made of the above scenario. However,

1. Companies are free to spend their advertising dollars wherever they want, they can also choose to ignore the boycotts

2. Consumers who care, are free to spend their money wherever they want. Consumers realise that part of THEIR money will pass through to scum like Alan Jones, hence consumer make a FREE CHOICE to spend at a company that doesn't advertise at Alan Jones. However consumers let the company (who advertises with Alan Jones) that this is their planned course of action and advise that company they can retain their clients if they take a specific course of action

3. Alan jones and types like him are free to see the consequences of their bigoted shit and choose not to say it. The same way that their "shock jock" status got them their platform and millions in advertising, the same way it can be taken away.

Their is no impediment to freedom of speech in boycotts. Just thought that that needed to be addressed with this discussion
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,215
Reaction score
19,733

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
22,701
Reaction score
41,519
Part 3 from Jon Swan.
Trump considered giving Sidney Powell top level security clearance to investigate the election ‘fraud’ as she was telling him what he wanted to hear :fearscream:.

Only when his most senior advisers loudly protested this did it not happen. This was after Trump mocked Powell on a muted call on loudspeaker in the Oval Office as she parroted her lunacy. #shitshow
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,741
Reaction score
27,950
Ha ha these guys let their faces be shown. They were just wandering around like what do we do now..
The interview in the clip has an opinion by the security analysts that in their opinion it was a military style information gathering exercise. The guys in the first wave shown knew exactly what they were doing they say.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
Yep that's why he's off the radio now, he lost them massive amounts of money due to the boycotts. Sky News decided to prop him up though and rightfully so Sky News Australia is receiving world wide criticism for the garbage they put out
The worst part is, he's not the worst person on Sky News.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
The worst part is, he's not the worst person on Sky News.
I find Alan Jones quite insightful. I don't agree with everything he says but I mostly find his narratives support 'the little people' including farmers and those in regional areas. Which has to be a positive thing.
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,741
Reaction score
27,950
Another Trump legacy.

"US army officials have requested all 25,000 members of the National Guard stationed in Washington DC for Joe Biden's inauguration be vetted by the FBI over fears of an insider attack".
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Another Trump legacy.

"US army officials have requested all 25,000 members of the National Guard stationed in Washington DC for Joe Biden's inauguration be vetted by the FBI over fears of an insider attack".
Does it say more about Trump or the legitimacy of Biden's win.
 

N4TE

DogsRhavnaParty
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
5,486
Reaction score
6,817
I find Alan Jones quite insightful. I don't agree with everything he says but I mostly find his narratives support 'the little people' including farmers and those in regional areas. Which has to be a positive thing.
He is an outdated right wing powerbroker that says statements like does it pass the pub test to try and speak to the people beneath him that would go to a grotty establishment like a pub which he would have never ever stepped foot in as he prefers more eloquently endeavours like the Rugby, the theatre and public toilets in London
 

Realist90

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
13,949
Reaction score
3,261
And in case you haven't noticed @Cook has been a big defender of yours and @Realist90
What’s your point? I don’t get the tag? Have you thought about how you as a orthodox Christian can defend and agree with leftist ideology when it’s so anti Christian fundamentally? Or still avoiding that and just running around with “how can a Christian support trump who’s spoken bad about women’s”
 

Realist90

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
13,949
Reaction score
3,261
I like to give people every chance to surprise.

Although I must confess, on night after a REALLY big night at Kinselas many years ago I somehow ended up hugging a tree at Moore Park. I vaguely remember getting to 3rd base.
“You like to give people every chance” bro who actually are you lmao. No one is asking that you give them a chance. The actual audacity on this guy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top