Yes, you hold everyone to the same standard. Namely, the standard that you hold everyone to is that if you don't like it, it's the result of some vast Biden conspiracy. RFK is a crank and an incredibly unserious presidential candidate, who has already seen what support he had collapse as soon as people looked past his name and actually listened the complete madness he utters. He believes that vaccines caused the 1918-19 influenza outbreak, despite there being no such vaccines, in part because they didn't even bloody well know that influenza was caused by a virus at the time...influenza takes its name from a bacteria that was believed to cause it, and the virus wasn't identified until the 1930s. Biden did not order Youtube to do anything; Youtube has a policy against vaccine misinformation, and RFK spreads some of the absolute most batshit misinformation going.
Because there is just as much, if not more. evidence of Biden corruption than there is of Trump; but as soon as I point it out you and the other wokerati on here completely ignore it. I do care about US politics because they are the owners of the global reserve currency and therefore their politics has a disproportionately large impact on European & world politics. Is it possible you know less about these issues than me? Why do you assume I know less than you and try and patronise me just because I lean more to the right than you? Have you considered that I may know more than you on these topics? Also I have had Schad on ignore since the vaccine conversations so I often miss his posts unless someone quotes them
All I asked is how you can say you hold them both to the same standard when there is an obvious anti-Biden bias in your posts? I think maybe you ‘know’ a lot of things told to you by right-wing lunatics…
I would argue that I don’t have an anti-Biden bias; I have an anti-government bias. As I said, I dislike trump and Biden pretty much equally. I just detest the way Biden is allowed to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing and held up on a pedestal by the media. He should be destroyed and ridiculed in the same way that Trump is. Instead he is defended and lauded as some kind of amazing president.
I’m interested to know two things, as you say you have an “anti-government bias” What system you would like the US to be organised by? Who do you not have a bias against and think might be the key players in this system?
In general I am very thankful that our society is as peaceful and well-run as it is. I think the free market is the best decider of good outcomes. I am pro-capitalism. I think it’s an incredible system. So I would say my strongest positive feelings are toward property rights and freedom of choice; which is the antithesis of the modern state. One point I strongly believe is that if there was a hierarchy of importance for society; finance would be way above politics. But I believe that capitalism has been fundamentally broken and undermined by central banks & governments. I think that central banks, governments & politicians in general have become an impediment on society and make things worse when they get involved. None of them are willing address the systemic issues in society.
Peaceful? More than some less than others. We'll run? Absolutely not, the consequences of brexshit along with the hapless handling of the pandemic plus the incompetent and corrupt government have left the UK as the poor man laughing stock of Europe and worldwide.
Big subject and I don't want to go on too long, so ... Well, we both believe that Capitalism is broken then However, I can see that we differ on the reasons for that I don't believe that unrestrained capitalism delivers good outcomes at all, it mainly delivers great profits to shareholders Lessening financial controls also delivered the 2008 crash and privatisation of the UKs public sector has delivered failing services. Amongst those Water & Railways I believe that right-wing governments are letting down ordinary people, blaming it on the left and often getting away with it I believe that the theory of the free market sounds great, providing the best products delivers the highest rewards and leads to better products, but that doesn't work in practice, it is idealistic and ignores other factors. e.g. (Simplistic example) Does MacDonalds make the best Burgers? Certainly not Proper working democracies deliver the best outcomes
There is some truth in what you say although I do disagree slightly. Capitalism optimises for whatever there is the highest demand for. So using your McDonald’s example - it’s simple. There is a higher demand for quick and easy snacks than there are for luxury burgers. I also agree about 2008 being a huge factor in where we are today. For me, that was when capitalism died 100%. The bailouts that were granted then, allowed corrupt institutions to continue whilst wiping out honest actors. The devastation this has caused cannot be overstated. The problem we have today is the Fiat money system. In my opinion, all of the problems you discussed are caused by misapplication of capital throughout society. A lot of people blame capitalism for todays problems, but IMO capitalism died a long time ago. A lot of the problems we see are caused by “The cantillon effect” which is one of the most important things people should be taught about in the world, but aren’t.
Like genuinely if there is one concept that I think could change the world completely it would be teaching everyone what the Cantillon Effect is. Once I understood that and how the central banks and governments are knowingly stealing everyone’s time & wealth i started to view the world completely differently
Watching with interest the royal courts of justice Rwanda deportation ruling. Update: The government's plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda has been ruled unlawful by the Court of Appeal. Cue the lefty lawyers and human rights diatribe.
Quick response to the first 3 paras The rest needs more consideration Maybe a bit if hyperbole here, but MacD demonstrates how to crush competition, reduce the free market promise of choice and delivers a product that is detrimental to health, driven by addiction and fuelled by poverty My point on 2008 was that it was caused by a market left to run free of necessary regulation. I do agree it is a major factor in where we are today, in the UK, because it was the catalyst for austerity policies that punish the poor and reward the rich
There's likely to be an appeal to the supreme court, more money to be trousered by the legal machine. £140m and rising already paid to Rwanda plus the costs of failed attempts to date. Far better to have improved the deliberately manufactured backlog of asylum claims and providing safe and legal routes which would cut the numbers crossing in small boats.
There is a certain element of truth to that, but equally consumers are demanding what McDonald’s are selling, otherwise McDonald’s wouldn’t exist. They are providing the service that the market is asking them for. You can’t blame the capitalist system for the unhealthy choices of consumers
You can’t and I hate the state to control what we eat, but sadly the economics of a Maccy D drive through over say a nutritional meal seal the deal. Consumers have a choice I agree, but the fact that it is a lot cheaper (and easier) to have one makes it more popular. However, that said, a tax on MacDonalds because it is unhealthy would just make it more expensive (but still cheaper than a good meal) so again the poorer would suffer.
Is MankDonalds really cheaper than a nutritious meal? I think that's a bit of a myth really. You can't feed two people from there for less than a tenner and I could easily do that by making a proper meal.
It is the economy of time. A lot of people work way too many hours. I can’t understand choosing MacDonalds for your tea as you will be hungry again anyway! Capitalism doesn’t judge. It is a cold, hard bitch. You are born wealthy? Capitalism throws cash at you. You are born poor? Capitalism grinds you under her heel. Money generates money. Poverty generates poverty. If you are rich you buy a house? Why pay outright though? You can buy it on a buy to let and the poor man who is judged unable to afford a mortgage is asked to pay for the rich man’s mortgage and a little extra. You want to have kids as a rich man? One partner can take 5 years off or you can hire a nanny. You end up with well-attended and socially mobile children. You want kids when you are poor? You both work long hours, the childcare costs a fortune, your child grows up with less attention and has issues with concentration. They become less socially mobile. It is a trap. Free market capitalists would happily see people die ‘from their own laziness’ rather than restrict the capacity for profit exhibited by the greedy few.
