You must be joking. Democratic Socialism is just Socialism with a prettier name. Socialism does not work, full stop, unless you're in the group at the top controlling the strings. Don't point at the nordic countries, they have far less progressive taxation policies that the US when you factor VAT in.
I thought it was more like, if it doesn’t work it’s socialism, if it does work it’s not socialism? This is why Norway is at the same time called not socialism (because it works) and socialism (because conservatives don’t want us to even try adopting what works in Norway).
I like writing code too. What I don't like doing is debugging code that just isn't doing what I want. Debugging CSS layout issues in Safari vs Chrome vs Firefox? Screw that...agent do it. Debugging layout issues in a React Native mobile app on Android on that one weird screen layout phone? Screw that....agent do it.
Not unless you're here illegally. And it has nothing to do with skin color. Just the basic fact that a country not in control of its borders ceases to be a country.
> Remigration is a far-right concept referring to the ethnic cleansing[1] via mass deportation of non-white minority populations, especially immigrants and sometimes including native-born citizens, to their place of racial ancestry.[2]
It’s right there at the top. One google search is all it takes. You didn’t even, for a second, think to familiarize yourself with the remigration concept. You jumped immediately to me being wrong, even though I was discussing something you were ignorant of. That’s embarrassing.
I reject your (and Wikipedia’s) theory of “remigration” arbitrarily defining something that is (not actually) happening in the US. People are being deported from the US based on their lack of legal presence in the country, which is what every country also does. Nobody is being deported because of their skin color.
Also, nobody is jumping to the conclusion that you’re wrong about something that is not actually happening. It’s just a simple fact that what you’ve stated is preposterous to begin with and is not the policy of any recent law or administration in the US.
No one is saying it is currently happening, you goof. Remigration is an idea proposed by identitarian assholes like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Sellner, author of a book called Remigration, who Musk has promoted in tweets.
It is not currently happening, but the richest man in the world is among those actively working to make it happen.
Again, you types confidently misunderstand a discussion.
Trump is doing everything in his power to make people illegal. Outright revoking visas and making immigrants unemployment so their visa sponsorship is expired. This is nationalism and doesn't have anything to do with border control but with brutalizing minorities.
We had all the border control, the border encounters being exactly 0 since Trump took office? Pretty obviously bullshit, it's the same as before with extra brutality. Despicable and disgusting people think like you and support this policy.
Easy to say this when the original commenter incorrectly described Tobias' comments. He suggested that those who pay more in taxes should have a greater say in how the government is spending the money. This is not a crazy idea on its face; you could say that taken to the limit it would not be a good system to live in (the highest taxpayer dictating what gov't does).
But it does make sense that those who are footing the bill for everything might be consulted a little on the plans to spend.
reading "those who pay more in taxes should have a greater say in how the government is spending the money" and NOT taking that to mean what the OP is suggesting it to mean is naive. Everyone knows what Tobias meant when he said that.
“Didn’t forbid”, if referring to the framers of the Constitution, is a bit of an understatement, given that they created multiple layers of protection to prevent dismantling slavery at the federal level into the future.
The founding fathers, the framers (a different and later group, though the two overlap and are often conflated) and original states had a variety of (and evolving in some cases between the Founding and the Constitution) opinions on the issue; some (Thomas Paine and Ben Franklin, notably, the latter also the primary author of PA’s 1776 Constitution which also adopted this position at the state level) were in favor of universal male suffrage.
Franklin also supported universal male suffrage, wrote Pennsulvania’s 1776 constitution which adopted universal male suffrage, and condemned property requirements for the franchise, reportedly arguing:
“Today a man owns a jackass worth fifty dollars, and he is entitled to vote; but before the next election the jackass dies. The man in the meantime has become more experienced, his knowledge of the principles of government, and his acquaintance with mankind, are more extensive, and he is therefore better qualified to make a proper selection of rulers — but the jackass is dead and the man cannot vote. Now gentlemen, pray inform me, in whom is the right of suffrage? In the man or in the jackass.”
This is simply untrue, there are no full auto handguns legally sold to the public. Semiautomatic yes. And yes, some guns are way too easy to convert to full auto.
Yes, I did. When you set up a passkey on your phone in your password manager, you'll transfer it to your other device using your password manager.
Either your password manager will automatically synchronize for you, or you can transfer your passkey to another password manager that will do the synchronization, via the finicky app-to-app transfer system (Credential Exchange Protocol). You can transfer from Apple to Bitwarden and vice versa.
The family sharing question was added later, but the answer is: all of the major password managers have finicky family-sharing features for passwords and passkeys.
For passwords, most people don't bother with formal family-sharing features, and just share passwords via copy and paste. For passkeys, you have to use the family-sharing features, which means you and your family member have to use the same password-manager vendor to share those passkeys.
It’s up to you to decide whether protecting yourself from being tricked into exporting your passkeys is worth sacrificing your ability to read them.
Someone needs to make an inverse Krugman index like the one they did for Jim Cramer.
You could make an argument that the Yuan could be an alternative to USD as a mechanism of international payments, but you ignore the danger of working in a currency controlled by a country with no rule of law.
Krugman is so blinded by Trump hatred that he can't be objective. You dont have to be a MAGA person to see this post is terribly stilted.
The casual disregard of international treaties and responsibilities coupled by the arbitrary tariffs and other economic actions makes the us untrustworthy and unpredictable. Countries hate the former and business hate the latter. Therefore, if the us can be avoided it will be.
I DO hate him, and still find this black and white thinking unsettling, though not uncommon. Has all of the western world completely surrendered to the nuance void?
s/subject/object - there's no objective standard for hatred. I find it funny that Trump was pretty much universally liked until he ran for President as a Republican. If you go back to his interviews in the 80's and 90's, he's pretty much saying now what he said back then, so what changed?
In the 1990s he said he was very pro-choice. That's changed.
In some more fundamental sense, you are right - he hasn't changed that much. Doonesbury, 16 September 1987 characterized him as "I'm just a billionaire developer exercising trial balloons! If I were running [for President] though, it'd be as an original, as a beloved archetype - the American Landlord!" https://readingdoonesbury.com/2018/06/01/selling-reagan-to-b...
You couldn't have read Doonesbury at the time without knowing that a lot of people didn't like Trump, but did things for him because of his money.
Certainly some people did like him. Some of those trial balloons went over really well with racists, like the malicious Central Park 5 ad. ("even a fool can become a multi-millionaire." and 'Trump "was the fire starter" in 1989, as "common citizens were being manipulated and swayed into believing that we were guilty."' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_jogger_case ).
As one of the examples of how we know a lot of people didn't like the short fingered vulgarian, here's a 50 second piece featured in "Alive from Off Center" in 1991, starting at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY7pKQ-Imco&t=559 and ending with the assertion that names like Donald Trump ("a man who can buy his cake and eat it too") "are just fancy names for irrelevance".
IMO what changed is the economic insecurity as the New Deal and Great Society were torn down from the rise of neoliberal thought in the 1970s, funded by rich reactionaries who want to return to a pre-New Deal America, and embraced by both major parties who are more beholden to rich donors than the electorate. As President Lyndon B. Johnson once said, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." That continues to be used to redirect anger towards minorities, instead of at the rich people, and Trump, as you point out, has for decades been a master at picking that pocket.
