TrickstaPriest

I agree with this wholeheartedly. This was in 1999, not the Great Depression. It's frankly unreasonable. Just bringing my perspective, that things are actually largely better now for the current generation (which I might add I see as a good thing). As it was better for me than in prior ones. The data in the census report supports that as well, "arc of the universe" blah blah blah. Gradually increasing median household income for both genders over time adjusted for inflation. 
 
Individual experiences will vary, of course, I'm talking aggregate vs narrative. My professional life is dedicated to helping people who are very vulnerable, and often disadvantaged. Older adults and adults over 50 are practically speaking the most at risk, they're the largest population of homeless individuals in our region (and are predominantly white). Nobody much worries about what happens to them, which is damn tragic. Awful things happen daily, and so do wonderful ones. Everyone tends to focus on the bad stuff, which is a cognitive survival imperative. 
 
But I digress, still don't own a home. I rent. Had 3 kids, definitely could not afford to - I don't regret that at all. They're a treasure in my home. Things are pretty good for me, although that could change. I do not feel like it was particularly easy, and battled some not insignificant despair in my 30s trying to make it. Don't see any sign this generation won't make their mark as well, in their own time. 

On that I would have to respectfully disagree. Yes, we knew he was selfish, we knew he was ignorant, we knew he was inflammatory, we knew he wasn't moral. As so many people commented during the last presidential election, in those regards he didn't seem all that different from his rival and many other politicians. If I was American I would have voted for Hillary Clinton over the Donald, because at least she was competent for the job.
 
But no one actually knew in advance that, when provided with expert information and advice on a range of issues of which he knew nothing, Trump would ignore it in favor of his "instincts." No one knew he would believe fringe media conspiracy theories over information from the most extensive intelligence service in the world. No one knew that he would deny basic human compassion to people based on their country of origin, and arguably, the color of their skins. No one knew that he would deliberately inflame the social and racial divisions within American society to his own benefit. No one knew that he would try to blatantly ignore and even cast into disrepute elements of the Constitution. No one knew that he would withdraw America from multiple commitments to the international community negotiated by his predecessors, seemingly because he wanted to claim he got "a better deal." No one knew that he would alienate long-standing American allies while cozying up to the country's rivals.
 
In hindsight, the pattern is clear, and the seeds were already planted. We got Trump, but we never bargained for how much Trump we would get.

Apparently that was the third time I’ve banned that person...they keep creating new accounts.
 
I’d look into a more permanent solution when I get back from London, but I’m just not sure that I care...
 
Plus side, I’m consistent in my banning.

This is almost certainly the funniest and most brilliant thing I will read all day.

Lee will no longer be joining us on these forums*
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 
 
*kidding
 
 
 

I KNOW, rite? 
 
 
Well, you called  that.
 
Respect, LL... as usual, you were your calm, polite, nice, and dare I say 'reasonable' self when I think others might have growled a bit. I know I would have been tempted to. 
 
 

Usage, I began to respond to you in a detailed way but there is too much.  If you cannot see that calling Lord Liaden evil is an ad hominem attack, that introducing downvotes to a highly policed topic then I can see you very quickly getting yourself a ban.
 
I do not know what is motivating your ire but you need to contain it, your belief (because that is what it is) that human discourse would be immeasurably improved by abandoning belief in higher beings and religion may be correct, it may not.  It is only slightly easier to prove than most of the religious beliefs out there.
 
Your 'fact' that Christianity is the root of all corporate evil demonstrated a very privileged, Western perspective. 
 
My advice is to back off, find other places to chat.  I don't think you have the restraint necessary to converse here.  Illustrated most pointedly by attacking one of the nicest board members we have as evil. 😞
 
Doc

It bothers me how close we are to the brink of climate disaster, and how impossible it is to get any progress on the environmental front at all.  By any government. 
 
So I don't know about "always shall be"...  😕

It bothers me how close we are to the brink of climate disaster, and how impossible it is to get any progress on the environmental front at all.  By any government. 
 
So I don't know about "always shall be"...  😕

See page 1, post 1, rule 3.  

I feel you. Most of the world's leaders seem to have gotten the message, and are making at least some moves to try to repair the situation. But the second-largest greenhouse gas emitter on the planet is currently led by a climate-change denier, and his example seems to have galvanized populist opportunists around the globe, who are complicating the political issues by pushing short-term benefits at the risk of long-term disaster.

It's supposed to protect you from shards of glass.  If the bomb went off far enough away, your windows were the most dangerous thing to you.

There's a rule of 7 with respect to radiation levels, IIRC.  After 7 hours the outside radiation level is halved, halved again after 49 hours, halved again after 2 weeks, and again at around 100 days.  Usually the advice is to wait in your shelter at least two weeks before exiting to seek more supplies or assistance.  

If the blast is close enough to break windows, the radiation poisoning is your biggest worry.

That last part I don't regret. I hate that song.

Ain't that the truth.  In 1999 I put together a time capsule for my great-grandchildren to open.  In the journal I included, I was so optimistic based on how things were going at that time.  I'm pretty sure they're going to read what I wrote and think "Great-grandpa was a moron."

On a cheerier note, NOVA recently aired "The Violence Paradox," based on Pinker's Better Angels of our Nature (the phrase is used, and Pinker is one of the talking heads presented). The world is getting better... slowly... so far. But past performance is no guarantee of future returns. As Pinker says, the worldwide decline in many forms of violence does not guarantee that violence will continue to decline; but it shows that continued progress is possible.
 
Less happily, much of the violence in the world today seems to be in direct reaction to past progress, from people who'd rather see the world burn than give up their tribal loyalties, prejudices or caste privileges.
 
Dean Shomshak

In hindsight.  But in 1999 it sure as hell felt like civilization had turned a corner, wherein the former USSR was nominally democratic and the Chinese were more interested in getting rich than invading their neighbors, and the Internet was about to usher in a new age of free communications and commerce.  And then it all went to s---.

"Welcome to humanity -- you must be new."

Word is Fiona Hill told Devin Nunes he should stick to suing imaginary cows because he was more useless than a obstructed bowel in the nicest politest way possible. Otherwise everyone called has confirmed every known fact that Trump did hold aid as hostage for personal favors and that Nunes and Jordan should not try to run conspiracy theories in the middle of a proceeding and leave that to their counterpart in the senate Lyndsey Graham
CES

At this point seven career government officials have testified under oath that Trump and Giuliani bribed the president of Ukraine for foreign campaign assistance. All the testimony corroborates the White House’s own “transcript” of the call.  Neither man has the balls to testify in their own defense—they are effectively pleading the 5th. 

Asylum officers rebel against Trump policies they say are immoral and illegal
 
This is where the test of government policy always comes -- whether the officials on the front lines are willing to carry it out.

The Other Side Is Not As Extreme As You Think

Kentucky GOP governor Bevin has actually conceded the election he lost a few days ago, apparently after the electorate blew up the state GOP’s phones when they realized he was going to try to contest it. 
 
Oh, and there was another school shooting because America. 

How Internet Trolls And Online Extremists Are 'Hijacking ...
www.npr.org/2019/11/12/778502116 Andrew Marantz is the author of the new book "Antisocial: Online Extremists, Techno-Utopians, And The Hijacking Of The American Conversation." Andrew Marantz, welcome to FRESH AIR. Your book is...
 
I hope this attempt to copy and paste a link works. If not, Google Fresh Air Antisocial Marantz.
 
Summary: NPR program Fresh Air interviews New Yorker reporter Andrew Marantz about his new book Antisocial: Internet Extremists, echno-Utopians and the Hijacking of the American Conversation. Marantz spent a year closely observing the alt-right and seeing how they, to use their own words, "memed Donald Trump into the White House." He describes the ease with which white supremacists use social media to manipulate mass media. Case study: the "Is Hillary Sick?" story. A group comes up with the speculation that Hillary Clinton has Parkinson's based on, what, how she blinks in a snippet of video? They retweet it back and forth. Twitter dutifully reports this as trending, even though it's all within a small echo chamber. This brings it to the notice of Breitbart or the Drudge Report, which spreads the story. So Fox News picks it up. So everybody picks it up -- and even if a "mainstream" media outlet concludes there's nothing there, the story nevertheless gets repeated. Presto: A thousand people plant an idea in hundreds of millions of minds.
 
Marantz particularly takes Mark Zuckerberg to task for his refusal to take any responsibility for how Facebook is exploited, though Zuckerberg is emblematic of a wider attitude. He notes that when Zuckerberg talks about the importance of free speech, don't censor anyone for any reason, he keeps his arguments completely abstract and divorced from real events and the real choices they bring.
 
(Anyone seriously interested in these issues should read "Areopagitica," by John Milton -- yes, that John Milton. He wrote his argument at a time when Europe's wars of religion still raged. Books were genuinely dangerous, and it took a lot of courage to accept that danger. But Milton also argued that books could be criminal and destructive just as people were -- and like human criminals, they should be suppressed once their criminality was proved beyond a reasonable doubt. I think this standard can apply when people use social media to whip up murderous mobs, as has happened in India and Myanmar.)
 
One interesting point Marantz reports: The people he studied don't back Trump so much anymore. They figure he's given them as much as he will. Instead a lot of them back Tulsi Gabbard, as the most radical candidate who isn't Trump. They particularly like her extreme anti-war stance: Perhaps oddly, a lot of the alt-righters Marantz studied came to their positions through extreme pacifism, or at least an anti-war isolationism.
 
It's an interesting talk, and I recommend it.
 
Dean Shomshak