not activists. We've found that gender is a lot more complex than we though. Hormone levels have a huge impact on how we act and interact and those can vary wildly.
This actually brings up an interesting point: A lot of transgender people are that way because of hormonal imbalances. Right now we can't really fix those because we don't have a reliable way to test for them when you're young. By the time we're aware it's happening it's too late to fix. But eventually that'll change. We'll be able to identify gender fluid people when their born (or at least folks likely to have the specific genetic markers and issues related to it) and make corrections. But should we?
There was a story where disabled people having kids faced a bit of a problem because their kids would be healthy. With a blind kid it's not so bad, but with Dwarfs they wanted children like them. In the end I think all of them said they would choose for the children to be normal given the chance. And that's understandable given the disadvantages of even something like Dwarfism. But it raises some interesting questions. And of course, what happens if we start making improvements?
You're misusing the word status. In this context it refers to the "status of being male or female". e.g. the fact of whether you are, legally, male or female. Not the relative social position of a person.
The left say you should be able to identify as either sex since both sexes are equal under the law. e.g. it makes no difference how you Identify.
The right, usually for religious reasons (or, let's be honest, just to rile up the base) say that your sex is determined at birth (usually by some sort of Creator God) and that to suggest you identify as a different sex is morally and objectively wrong.
Also, brilliant pivot on "gender as a physical trait". I almost missed it. You're subtly suggestion gender is a binary. If you had transgendered friends you'd know it is not. Yes, it's a physical trait. A very, very complex physical trait made up of dozens of chemical reactions, thought processes and biological functions. It's quite a bit more than "has two arms" or "male and female".
Again, I've got close friends who are trans and have a good grasp on what they've been through.
None of that was cited as a reason. It's Net Neutrality and Government Spying that cut us down a notch. Facebook bans aren't the risk to your freedom. Losing Net Neutrality OTOH is.
is it exists to hide the problems with a soldered in battery and Apple's general anti-repair stance. If my $200 LG can have a replaceable battery my kid's $800 iPhone can. But if the battery was easy to replace she'd be less likely to get a new iPhone every 2 years.
we're calling them what they are: Russians. And yes, they are trying to destabilize our country. I don't see anything wrong with wanting to put a stop to that, but your entire post implies that there is.
especially in a sun state like Az. But there are a lot of vested interests that want profits _now_ and investment when it's somebody else. If I'm a CEO in charge of building a solar plant I just spent several million this quarter that could have gone to shareholders like me (remember most CEOs are paid in stock). Meanwhile those solar farms might be 10, 20 years before they really pay off. I'll be retired by then.
We've created an economic and political system that incentivizes short term profit and incumbent powers. We shouldn't be surprised when the long term results are poor at best and disastrous at worst.
The Colorado river's drying up. As water gets scarce even waste water becomes valuable. Again, think 20, 30, 40 or 50 years from now. I'll be dead, my kids won't.
Again, if Az would invest in new water infrastructure now it wouldn't be an issue. But it's a red state. They'll just sit around until it's a crisis, blame the poor for not planning and wait for federal dollars to bail them out (or not, and the entire state will collapse). I wish I could say I was exaggerating or trolling...
Law firms are businesses, not charities. That's certainly true. Now what do you think all those lawyers who can't sue mega corporations for fat sacks of cash are going to do? Think they'll close up shop and go become public defenders? Maybe do night shift at the local WalMart?
Nope, they're gonna sue you and me (since we can't afford to buy off a Senator or House rep to defend us). As the Chinese say, Interesting Times.
it was manufacturing going away and/or being automated. Manufacturing was easy to Unionize because you had a shit ton of employees all in the same place (the factory floor). The closest you get with that is an Amazon warehouse, even those don't have as many employees as a factory from 50 years ago and they make it a point to ban employees talking to each other so they can't complain and organize (among other Union busting tactics).
Come to think of it that's the other trouble Unions have: Employers learned from their experience with Unions and got better at busting them. Employees didn't learn a god damn thing. I can't tell you how many folks just complain about how corrupt unions are when they go to their job that pays well and is safe because of a Union from 50 years ago who won those protections at the barrel of a gun.
which are batshit crazy. But that said, solar is a completely different ballgame in a place like Az where you've got sun 90% of the time.
Global Warming is a problem that needs solving, but nuclear plants with their 10+ years time to start up aren't going to solve it anyway. Solar can be up and running in 16 weeks (ok, let's be honest , 32, but 8 months is better than 8 years). That's because you don't have to constantly watch every step and every screw. If you cut corners then it costs a bit more in maintenance. Do the same on a nuke plant and you've got a meltdown + dead zone.
And you haven't said what is going to replace those older plants. If it's the same type of plant that's cheaper to run unsafe than safe then Houston, we've got a problem.
lifetime. In good times they'll built it with a 50 year plan then 50 years from now the economy's in the cyclic downturn and it's time to shut down the plant and build a new one but nobody wants to.
it's a terrible idea but it's the best we can get with the current political system.
I worked for a company that made everyone come in 20 minutes early to set up their workstations and leave 10 minutes late, all unpaid. 30 minutes free labor a day times several thousand employees. It was millions. I didn't get much from the lawsuit but the company did have to start paying me for those 30 minutes.
My state doesn't have a labor board (there's one on paper but it's not funded). The threat of lawyers suing for a big payday is the only thing keeping most companies honest in my neck of the woods.
Like Arbitration this strikes me as the latest attack on that very minimal protection consumers have. Would I like to live in a world where I don't rely on skeezy lawyers getting big cash payouts for little to no work as the only protection I have from abuse by mega-corps? You bet. But I don't. I live in the real world, and I'm a realist. Until I can get folks to vote for genuine change I'll take what I can get.
and I don't support nuke. Show me a nuke plant that's cheaper to run safely in 50 years than to run dangerously. I don't mean "Cheaper because you don't have to clean up a meltdown" I mean "Cheaper right now, in this quarter, so that the CEO will run the plant rightly because that way he gets his bonus".
Fukushima was a disaster everyone knew was coming. The Almanacs said they were due for a big Tsunami. They knew the plants cooling system couldn't outlast the inevitable power outage. They knew they needed to buy a shit ton of trucks with generators and keep them standing by. They didn't because the CEO figured he'd retire before the next disaster. What's worse is that so far as I know none of the ones responsible ever got punished. They went on TV and cried a bit and all was forgiven. There was talk of independent commissions but let's face it, you don't spill the blood of kings.
Now, Arizona is pretty free of natural disasters (baring California sinking into the ocean it should be good on Tsunamis). But with climate change, drought and rising temps who's to say we won't be pushing those cooling systems past their limits in 50 years? I'll be dead, but my grand kids won't be.
So again, show me a reactor that's cheaper to run safely. Oh, and one that's either in active use or can be built. Nothing experimental or "just a few years away". Something that can be built today. Until then the extra cost for solar is worth it. I've never heard of a solar power plant turning a city into a dead zone.
means more electrics. But that's kind of a stretch since the ROI on solar is debatable.
The main thing is that for all the talk of "Clean Coal" and even natural gas those plants still crank out a lot of emissions. Yes, it is possible to build a zero emission coal or gas plant, but it's expensive as hell and you have to change the filters way more than they want to. By the time you're done you could have done solar.
But that's not the point. They want to spew out their particulates while spewing nonsense about Clean Coal and pocket the extra money.
You don't get efficiency. You get a company skimming 20% off the top of an essential service. This is why you can't pay your power bill with a credit card without a 4% surcharge. The service is essential and (unlike housing) there are no alternatives so they don't have to play nice.
As for me, I'm in a city that saw smog days 80% of the time this summer. Screw the power company and their half a billion in profit. They need to be forced to build out solar so I can breath. Doesn't matter if I don't smoke if every day I go outside I'm getting the equivalent in bad air. I'm still gonna die of lung cancer in my 50s. And I don't get to move out of the city because I need money and like most working class Americans I live where the jobs are.
if we lived in a world with UBI and the like. The folks doing this do it because they like doing it. There aren't a lot of people who think that way but in a world of 7 billion humans there's more than enough; and truly intelligent people don't waste their time sitting golden toilets. They don't need Veblen goods and conspicuous consumption.
The hard part is that despite all the progress we live in a world of "if you don't work you don't eat". Even in first world nations like America we live like sharks: stop swimming for a moment and you suffocate.
but don't count on guns to save you from tyranny. The government will have the military, and a disorganized resistance without supply lines is no match for a modern army. Don't look to Afghanistan for solace. We took the valuable parts of the country and let the "insurgents" run wild in the desert mountains and occasionally come down and blow up a school bus.
"Second Amendment Solutions" are the political equivalent to "getting my MCSE". Something you tell yourself to feel better about a worsening solution. Something/. nerds tell ourselves we can do to solve any problem if all else fails.
everything he said was backed by facts. There was no specific hatred towards the GOP. You're using the word to strawman.
You're post is also a Gish Gallop. You're throwing so many points out that are so nonsensical it's tough to shoot them all down.
The one I'll focus on: Obamacare didn't give your family worse healthcare, private insurance did. The flaws in Obamacare are there at the behest of those insurers for the express purpose of maximizing their profits. There is exactly 1 group that lost under Obamacare: People who didn't really have insurance and never needed it. Phony baloney plans that didn't really cover anything got banned. Some of your family might have had to buy real plans with real coverage at a higher cost. The upshot is anyone in your family who had those plans was in for a rude awakening if they ever tried to use them.
OTOH if we could get the GOP (and members of the DNC bought off by Big Insurance) out of the way we could have single payer. Then your family members would have better plans for less money. A few of the really high earners ($500k/yr+) might see some new payroll taxes, but they might also make that up by not paying the 80% cost their employees healthcare they do now.
There's one true loser under single payer: Insurance companies. We've out grown them, they know this, and they're not going quiet into that good night. And they'll kill you and me to keep their phony baloney jobs.
further right and into the realm of dictators. It's the same thing we're seeing with Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell going around saying they want to end Social Security and Medicare right when they're getting ready to retire. They're putting the idea into the public discourse in a politically safe way. For Ryan & McConnell it's because they're close to the end of their careers (though Ryan might try and come back for a presidential run in a few years). For Trump it's because he's Teflon. Nothing sticks.
I know who Ted Kackzynksi is. This latest nut job is not a false flag. He's just a nut job. There's lots of them. We used to have the FBI keep tabs on them. Trump stopped that with, well, predictable results.
Hanlon's razor my friend. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. The reason you don't see more of these nut jobs is they usually get pegged by the FBI or blow themselves up. This one made it through because Trump's FBI isn't allowed to do it's job and as you pointed out his bombs didn't work so he couldn't blow himself up.
But if we keep this up we'll start getting guys that do it right. Lots of them. They'll blow up guys like you and me (assuming you're not a Russian troll ). My bro made a good point: It'd be nice to be so rich you have people mailing you pipe bombs.
the for profit insurance industry did. There's multiple studies that show it kept prices down.... a bit. They're selling you something you can't live without and that has virtually no competition (since most get it from employers and there's only a few big companies left). The only cap on what they can charge is how much Americans will bear before they demand single payer.
Single payer solves everything. Every country in the world that's implemented it has made it work. Costs are limited because there's virtually no overhead. Doctors aren't employees of the government. It's single payer not single employer. The government is just paying. Docs do better because they no longer fight insurance companies for every scrap and penny.
Malpractice doesn't go away either. Again, we're not talking about nationalizing healthcare, we're nationalizing insurance. Just the paying for it.
The problem you're having is there's a multi-billion dollar propaganda engine putting ideas in your head. That's because the insurance companies are fighting for their lives. If Americans every realize they've got a bloated tick literally sucking the life out of them that's it. End of the gravy train. They spent half a billion last time we did a major reform and it paid off in spades with the "individual mandate" aka Romneycare being the best we could do even with Dems in charge. Don't fall for it. Single payer has been shown to work again and again. It saves money and it saves lives. 45,000 Americans will die of treatable illness this year. Next year you might be one of them. Demand single payer and don't vote for anyone who won't give you it.
you're setting an unreasonably high standard so you don't have to bear the burden of the results of being "centrist". Don't fool yourself. You can't stay neutral here, any more than the UK could in WWII. You'll get dragged into the violence sooner or later on one side or the other.
America got a temporary reprieve when the wars distracted us long enough for the ruling class to rob us blind. But they're out of wars. Iran was the next one and looks like that's a no-go. The rich and powerful always use the same trick to divide the working class: Create an enemy for us to hate so we won't notice them robbing us blind. If they can't get one overseas they've got to make one at home. Eventually we'll kick out the Mexicans, ban the Muslims and turn to the Jews. Just like Europe does. This has been going on for thousands of years. We've got the internet and Wikipedia. We can read history and spot the pattern. Now's the time to end the cycle.
you can bloody well forget about me and my dumb/. posts all you want if you get that one message through your skull.
And we each do what little we can. If I push a few over the edge to vote against Donald Trump and the modern American Aristocracy then I call that a win. If the Russians can get Trump elected then us Americans can get him kicked out. At least in 2020. In the meantime vote in your Mid Terms for anyone who'll oppose Trump's agenda.
Slashdot Mirror
not activists. We've found that gender is a lot more complex than we though. Hormone levels have a huge impact on how we act and interact and those can vary wildly.
This actually brings up an interesting point: A lot of transgender people are that way because of hormonal imbalances. Right now we can't really fix those because we don't have a reliable way to test for them when you're young. By the time we're aware it's happening it's too late to fix. But eventually that'll change. We'll be able to identify gender fluid people when their born (or at least folks likely to have the specific genetic markers and issues related to it) and make corrections. But should we?
There was a story where disabled people having kids faced a bit of a problem because their kids would be healthy. With a blind kid it's not so bad, but with Dwarfs they wanted children like them. In the end I think all of them said they would choose for the children to be normal given the chance. And that's understandable given the disadvantages of even something like Dwarfism. But it raises some interesting questions. And of course, what happens if we start making improvements?
I mean, it's built right into HTML for Pete's sake. If you're using Angular I can point you to a good guide on how to wire it up to a model.
or did you misread the summary?
You're misusing the word status. In this context it refers to the "status of being male or female". e.g. the fact of whether you are, legally, male or female. Not the relative social position of a person.
The left say you should be able to identify as either sex since both sexes are equal under the law. e.g. it makes no difference how you Identify.
The right, usually for religious reasons (or, let's be honest, just to rile up the base) say that your sex is determined at birth (usually by some sort of Creator God) and that to suggest you identify as a different sex is morally and objectively wrong.
Also, brilliant pivot on "gender as a physical trait". I almost missed it. You're subtly suggestion gender is a binary. If you had transgendered friends you'd know it is not. Yes, it's a physical trait. A very, very complex physical trait made up of dozens of chemical reactions, thought processes and biological functions. It's quite a bit more than "has two arms" or "male and female".
Again, I've got close friends who are trans and have a good grasp on what they've been through.
None of that was cited as a reason. It's Net Neutrality and Government Spying that cut us down a notch. Facebook bans aren't the risk to your freedom. Losing Net Neutrality OTOH is.
is it exists to hide the problems with a soldered in battery and Apple's general anti-repair stance. If my $200 LG can have a replaceable battery my kid's $800 iPhone can. But if the battery was easy to replace she'd be less likely to get a new iPhone every 2 years.
we're calling them what they are: Russians. And yes, they are trying to destabilize our country. I don't see anything wrong with wanting to put a stop to that, but your entire post implies that there is.
when you work backwards from your conclusion.
especially in a sun state like Az. But there are a lot of vested interests that want profits _now_ and investment when it's somebody else. If I'm a CEO in charge of building a solar plant I just spent several million this quarter that could have gone to shareholders like me (remember most CEOs are paid in stock). Meanwhile those solar farms might be 10, 20 years before they really pay off. I'll be retired by then.
We've created an economic and political system that incentivizes short term profit and incumbent powers. We shouldn't be surprised when the long term results are poor at best and disastrous at worst.
The Colorado river's drying up. As water gets scarce even waste water becomes valuable. Again, think 20, 30, 40 or 50 years from now. I'll be dead, my kids won't.
Again, if Az would invest in new water infrastructure now it wouldn't be an issue. But it's a red state. They'll just sit around until it's a crisis, blame the poor for not planning and wait for federal dollars to bail them out (or not, and the entire state will collapse). I wish I could say I was exaggerating or trolling...
Law firms are businesses, not charities. That's certainly true. Now what do you think all those lawyers who can't sue mega corporations for fat sacks of cash are going to do? Think they'll close up shop and go become public defenders? Maybe do night shift at the local WalMart?
Nope, they're gonna sue you and me (since we can't afford to buy off a Senator or House rep to defend us). As the Chinese say, Interesting Times.
it was manufacturing going away and/or being automated. Manufacturing was easy to Unionize because you had a shit ton of employees all in the same place (the factory floor). The closest you get with that is an Amazon warehouse, even those don't have as many employees as a factory from 50 years ago and they make it a point to ban employees talking to each other so they can't complain and organize (among other Union busting tactics).
Come to think of it that's the other trouble Unions have: Employers learned from their experience with Unions and got better at busting them. Employees didn't learn a god damn thing. I can't tell you how many folks just complain about how corrupt unions are when they go to their job that pays well and is safe because of a Union from 50 years ago who won those protections at the barrel of a gun.
which are batshit crazy. But that said, solar is a completely different ballgame in a place like Az where you've got sun 90% of the time.
Global Warming is a problem that needs solving, but nuclear plants with their 10+ years time to start up aren't going to solve it anyway. Solar can be up and running in 16 weeks (ok, let's be honest , 32, but 8 months is better than 8 years). That's because you don't have to constantly watch every step and every screw. If you cut corners then it costs a bit more in maintenance. Do the same on a nuke plant and you've got a meltdown + dead zone.
And you haven't said what is going to replace those older plants. If it's the same type of plant that's cheaper to run unsafe than safe then Houston, we've got a problem.
lifetime. In good times they'll built it with a 50 year plan then 50 years from now the economy's in the cyclic downturn and it's time to shut down the plant and build a new one but nobody wants to.
it's a terrible idea but it's the best we can get with the current political system.
I worked for a company that made everyone come in 20 minutes early to set up their workstations and leave 10 minutes late, all unpaid. 30 minutes free labor a day times several thousand employees. It was millions. I didn't get much from the lawsuit but the company did have to start paying me for those 30 minutes.
My state doesn't have a labor board (there's one on paper but it's not funded). The threat of lawyers suing for a big payday is the only thing keeping most companies honest in my neck of the woods.
Like Arbitration this strikes me as the latest attack on that very minimal protection consumers have. Would I like to live in a world where I don't rely on skeezy lawyers getting big cash payouts for little to no work as the only protection I have from abuse by mega-corps? You bet. But I don't. I live in the real world, and I'm a realist. Until I can get folks to vote for genuine change I'll take what I can get.
and I don't support nuke. Show me a nuke plant that's cheaper to run safely in 50 years than to run dangerously. I don't mean "Cheaper because you don't have to clean up a meltdown" I mean "Cheaper right now, in this quarter, so that the CEO will run the plant rightly because that way he gets his bonus".
Fukushima was a disaster everyone knew was coming. The Almanacs said they were due for a big Tsunami. They knew the plants cooling system couldn't outlast the inevitable power outage. They knew they needed to buy a shit ton of trucks with generators and keep them standing by. They didn't because the CEO figured he'd retire before the next disaster. What's worse is that so far as I know none of the ones responsible ever got punished. They went on TV and cried a bit and all was forgiven. There was talk of independent commissions but let's face it, you don't spill the blood of kings.
Now, Arizona is pretty free of natural disasters (baring California sinking into the ocean it should be good on Tsunamis). But with climate change, drought and rising temps who's to say we won't be pushing those cooling systems past their limits in 50 years? I'll be dead, but my grand kids won't be.
So again, show me a reactor that's cheaper to run safely. Oh, and one that's either in active use or can be built. Nothing experimental or "just a few years away". Something that can be built today. Until then the extra cost for solar is worth it. I've never heard of a solar power plant turning a city into a dead zone.
means more electrics. But that's kind of a stretch since the ROI on solar is debatable.
The main thing is that for all the talk of "Clean Coal" and even natural gas those plants still crank out a lot of emissions. Yes, it is possible to build a zero emission coal or gas plant, but it's expensive as hell and you have to change the filters way more than they want to. By the time you're done you could have done solar.
But that's not the point. They want to spew out their particulates while spewing nonsense about Clean Coal and pocket the extra money.
You don't get efficiency. You get a company skimming 20% off the top of an essential service. This is why you can't pay your power bill with a credit card without a 4% surcharge. The service is essential and (unlike housing) there are no alternatives so they don't have to play nice.
As for me, I'm in a city that saw smog days 80% of the time this summer. Screw the power company and their half a billion in profit. They need to be forced to build out solar so I can breath. Doesn't matter if I don't smoke if every day I go outside I'm getting the equivalent in bad air. I'm still gonna die of lung cancer in my 50s. And I don't get to move out of the city because I need money and like most working class Americans I live where the jobs are.
if we lived in a world with UBI and the like. The folks doing this do it because they like doing it. There aren't a lot of people who think that way but in a world of 7 billion humans there's more than enough; and truly intelligent people don't waste their time sitting golden toilets. They don't need Veblen goods and conspicuous consumption.
The hard part is that despite all the progress we live in a world of "if you don't work you don't eat". Even in first world nations like America we live like sharks: stop swimming for a moment and you suffocate.
but don't count on guns to save you from tyranny. The government will have the military, and a disorganized resistance without supply lines is no match for a modern army. Don't look to Afghanistan for solace. We took the valuable parts of the country and let the "insurgents" run wild in the desert mountains and occasionally come down and blow up a school bus.
/. nerds tell ourselves we can do to solve any problem if all else fails.
"Second Amendment Solutions" are the political equivalent to "getting my MCSE". Something you tell yourself to feel better about a worsening solution. Something
everything he said was backed by facts. There was no specific hatred towards the GOP. You're using the word to strawman.
You're post is also a Gish Gallop. You're throwing so many points out that are so nonsensical it's tough to shoot them all down.
The one I'll focus on: Obamacare didn't give your family worse healthcare, private insurance did. The flaws in Obamacare are there at the behest of those insurers for the express purpose of maximizing their profits. There is exactly 1 group that lost under Obamacare: People who didn't really have insurance and never needed it. Phony baloney plans that didn't really cover anything got banned. Some of your family might have had to buy real plans with real coverage at a higher cost. The upshot is anyone in your family who had those plans was in for a rude awakening if they ever tried to use them.
OTOH if we could get the GOP (and members of the DNC bought off by Big Insurance) out of the way we could have single payer. Then your family members would have better plans for less money. A few of the really high earners ($500k/yr+) might see some new payroll taxes, but they might also make that up by not paying the 80% cost their employees healthcare they do now.
There's one true loser under single payer: Insurance companies. We've out grown them, they know this, and they're not going quiet into that good night. And they'll kill you and me to keep their phony baloney jobs.
further right and into the realm of dictators. It's the same thing we're seeing with Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell going around saying they want to end Social Security and Medicare right when they're getting ready to retire. They're putting the idea into the public discourse in a politically safe way. For Ryan & McConnell it's because they're close to the end of their careers (though Ryan might try and come back for a presidential run in a few years). For Trump it's because he's Teflon. Nothing sticks.
I know who Ted Kackzynksi is. This latest nut job is not a false flag. He's just a nut job. There's lots of them. We used to have the FBI keep tabs on them. Trump stopped that with, well, predictable results.
Hanlon's razor my friend. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. The reason you don't see more of these nut jobs is they usually get pegged by the FBI or blow themselves up. This one made it through because Trump's FBI isn't allowed to do it's job and as you pointed out his bombs didn't work so he couldn't blow himself up.
But if we keep this up we'll start getting guys that do it right. Lots of them. They'll blow up guys like you and me (assuming you're not a Russian troll ). My bro made a good point: It'd be nice to be so rich you have people mailing you pipe bombs.
the for profit insurance industry did. There's multiple studies that show it kept prices down.... a bit. They're selling you something you can't live without and that has virtually no competition (since most get it from employers and there's only a few big companies left). The only cap on what they can charge is how much Americans will bear before they demand single payer.
Single payer solves everything. Every country in the world that's implemented it has made it work. Costs are limited because there's virtually no overhead. Doctors aren't employees of the government. It's single payer not single employer. The government is just paying. Docs do better because they no longer fight insurance companies for every scrap and penny.
Malpractice doesn't go away either. Again, we're not talking about nationalizing healthcare, we're nationalizing insurance. Just the paying for it.
The problem you're having is there's a multi-billion dollar propaganda engine putting ideas in your head. That's because the insurance companies are fighting for their lives. If Americans every realize they've got a bloated tick literally sucking the life out of them that's it. End of the gravy train. They spent half a billion last time we did a major reform and it paid off in spades with the "individual mandate" aka Romneycare being the best we could do even with Dems in charge. Don't fall for it. Single payer has been shown to work again and again. It saves money and it saves lives. 45,000 Americans will die of treatable illness this year. Next year you might be one of them. Demand single payer and don't vote for anyone who won't give you it.
you're setting an unreasonably high standard so you don't have to bear the burden of the results of being "centrist". Don't fool yourself. You can't stay neutral here, any more than the UK could in WWII. You'll get dragged into the violence sooner or later on one side or the other.
America got a temporary reprieve when the wars distracted us long enough for the ruling class to rob us blind. But they're out of wars. Iran was the next one and looks like that's a no-go. The rich and powerful always use the same trick to divide the working class: Create an enemy for us to hate so we won't notice them robbing us blind. If they can't get one overseas they've got to make one at home. Eventually we'll kick out the Mexicans, ban the Muslims and turn to the Jews. Just like Europe does. This has been going on for thousands of years. We've got the internet and Wikipedia. We can read history and spot the pattern. Now's the time to end the cycle.
you can bloody well forget about me and my dumb /. posts all you want if you get that one message through your skull.
And we each do what little we can. If I push a few over the edge to vote against Donald Trump and the modern American Aristocracy then I call that a win. If the Russians can get Trump elected then us Americans can get him kicked out. At least in 2020. In the meantime vote in your Mid Terms for anyone who'll oppose Trump's agenda.