[Mega] MAGA Super Trump Mega Thread

havax said:
socialism begets authoritarianism
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, everything begets authoritarianism. The developed world's foray into representative democracy is the outlier, and if you ask me it's under attack by far-right forces via tried-and-true tactics (vilification of independent media, dehumanization of political opponents, xenophobia, cronyism etc.)
 
Last edited:
Chaol said:
As far as I can tell, everything begets authoritarianism. The developed world's foray into representative democracy is the outlier, and if you ask me it's under attack by far-right forces via tried-and-true tactics (vilification of media, dehumanization of political opponents, xenophobia, cronyism etc.)
Click to expand...

there would be no need to vilify media if they weren't villains. the media has the power to destroy nations with propaganda, and now being owned by basically 5-6 super corporations, they are certainly trying. we can't allow that to happen. i agree that the press should be free, but not free to propagandize and attempt control like they are doing now.
 
havax said:
there would be no need to vilify media if they weren't villains. the media has the power to destroy nations with propaganda, and now being owned by basically 5-6 super corporations, they are certainly trying. we can't allow that to happen. i agree that the press should be free, but not free to propagandize and attempt control like they are doing now.
Click to expand...


Yet, you blindly support and give Rupert Murdoch's corporations revenue. Interesting.
 
havax said:
there would be no need to vilify media if they weren't villains. the media has the power to destroy nations with propaganda, and now being owned by basically 5-6 super corporations, they are certainly trying. we can't allow that to happen. i agree that the press should be free, but not free to propagandize and attempt control like they are doing now.
Click to expand...

Your statement regarding vilification doesn't make any sense. If they were villains they wouldn't need to be vilified. Instead they're viewed as non-villians, and forces act to vilify them so as to create demand for their alternative narrative.

It allows Sinclair, Breitbart and Cambridge Analytica to feed whatever nonsense they want, while allowing their believers to act like they're not being lead on a rope to their faulty conclusions.
 
Chaol said:
Your statement regarding vilification doesn't make any sense. If they were villains they wouldn't need to be vilified. Instead they're viewed as non-villians, and forces act to vilify them so as to create demand for their alternative narrative.

It allows Sinclair, Breitbart and Cambridge Analytica to feed whatever nonsense they want, while allowing their believers to act like they're not being lead on a rope to their faulty conclusions.
Click to expand...

are you serious about this post? lol

I can't blame the negative attitude toward the press on President Trump. Certainly he has advanced the discussions and, perhaps, the negativity. However, the news media have not done a good job. When I heard CNN anchor Chris Cuomo say on national TV during the presidential race that "CNN was doing all it can for Hillary," I cringed. I was a journalist for 10 years and never heard anything as unprofessional as that. I was further disgusted when the Washington Post and NBC had to apologize for their reporting of polls during the November election. They finally came out and said they attempted to under report the negative feelings the public had for Hillary Clinton. Then we see the New York Times apologize for another "fake" story. And let's not forget the 24-hour anti-Trump reporting by CNN and MSNBC. The Huffington Post finally came out and said Rachel Maddow was basically whacked for her reporting. Finally, on election night we hear on CNN, NBC, ABC, and MSNBC some of the worst and most biased reporting in American journalism history. We saw anchors sobbing on the the air. Buck up and, perhaps, watch some Walter Cronkite tapes to learn how to report. Where is the news today? What you get are anchors such as Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper debating the president, who has done some good things, instead of reporting on the news. I think American journalism is pathetic today.
Click to expand...

that is an honest assessment there.
 
samUwell said:
I have no problem with private unions in any field at all. If a privately owned company believes that allowing their employees to become a union and they can pay the wages the unions are asking while continuing to stay in business, more power to them.

My beef with unions is when its taxpayer funded. I already have a major issue with any person being paid through the forced removal of money from the people in the form of taxes, but to give a union the power over the purse and demand that under no circumstance can we the people lower their wages or pensions, no matter how bad it is for the State, then i have a major problem with unions.
Click to expand...
unions are fine if they actually follow through on actually protecting their membership.

instead they typically go insanely greedy and price their labor force out of competition. then, like you said, we have public servant unions (govt workers, teachers in canada) that get state funded raises at teh expense of my fucking wallet
 
Pagy said:
its also unions/govt pricing labour so high that they have no choice

poor, lazy people will always be jealous of people that work and have wealth and want free shit. its as certain as death and taxes.
Click to expand...
Speak for yourself. You're a bitter STEM autist so you can't expect to be rational. lol ISP's lol

A P&G factory closed claiming "labour costs." though the Unionistas were earning over $30/hr each person produced about $4200 in goods/hour.

Most manufacturing plants have labour costs around 10-15% of their sale price.

Sure there's bitter technologists complaining about unionista dudes out earning them. And about ISP's not having the Bw to support the intarweb. :/

Edit:
I agree that public sector unions are fucking us over.
 
Last edited:
clu said:
that is no doubt part of it, but you (figuratively with amway) are asking in one sentence why people (the US economy really you dumb fuck) should expect something in return from CEOs after they ship all our jobs overseas for extra dividends.

it's teh unions@! partially true - it's been noted elsewhere that after WWII we owned the remaining industrial infrastructure so of course we prospered. now that other countries have their foot in the door, apple, cisco, and other companies can have products made cheaper.

your claim seems to be "finders keeprs get better jerbs". I don't think it's unreasonable to have some of this money invested back into the US for relaxed college costs for skills/means tested applicants.


edit-communist!
Click to expand...
maybe you should develop your skillset in such a way that you have more to offer than someone living in a clay hut on the other side of the world?

if your skills aren't valuable, or worth what you're asking, it's not my problem.

as long as you keep demanding for lower prices and keep demands for higher wages, you'll be replaced. bubye
 
cael said:
LMGTFY

you're welcome !!
Click to expand...

politifact first result LOL

oh and i loved this one

unknown.png


they always say this, plenty of proof that russia did it. then they never give us the proof lol
 
amRam said:
So if an economy needs the innovators and risk takers to drive industry, and those people need CEOs to operate the corporations they create, why are you being a little bitch?

The CEOs are responsible to their shareholders and to carry out business in a lawful way. As an individual you generally have the option to buy shares of those companies and partake in the profit, and you also have the option to petition your government to enact rules and regulations to govern said businesses.

"Globalism" isn't just business seeking higher profit, it's also consumers seeking cheaper goods. You can't have it all.
Click to expand...
Risk takers? How so?

We're talking about Corp's that have billions in liquidity. How many of these "risk takers" have gone bankrupt due to engaging in "risk taking" activities? I can only recall a handful of tens of thousands of non-retail corp's and like Lehaman, WorldCom or Enron these corp's failed due to malfeasance.

Perhaps you can tell me of the costs of these dashing captains of industry experiencing an occaissional bankruptcy due to "risk taking."

It's time to update your paradigms friend.

At any rate you didn't address my assertion that CEO's as a whole have cost our society jobs and in so doing, perhaps have planted the seeds of social dissolution. Why don't you address that?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top