• 0 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 14th, 2024

help-circle
  • I just don’t get how people are looking at Harris’ stance as being pro-genocide. Biden is the President and historically, foreign policy during the tenure of the President by the Vice President doesn’t veer too far off from the President. That said, Harris has absolutely called for investigation into the suffering of civilians in the conflict.

    Congress sets the budgetary amount of aid to direct to Israel and the President distributes the money via their diplomatic channels. There are very few options for the President to just suspend funding, which Biden has done twice for weapons under the rules established within 10 USC § 362 (a)(1)

    Of the amounts made available to the Department of Defense, none may be used for any training, equipment, or other assistance for a unit of a foreign security force if the Secretary of Defense has credible information that the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.

    But outside that, there’s very little the President can do once Congress approves funding and that funding has been signed into law. This is why an independent channel investigation is required and is exactly what Harris has called for. This would allow the the US Government to establish their own inquiry into the human abuses. This would give the required evidence to cancel funding under Title XII authority. But none of that can happen overnight. It’s not an easy path to override the will of Congress.

    On the opposite side, Trump has indicated that he will absolutely turn a blind eye to the whole thing and allow Israel to determine solely the “best” course of action for their current conflict. Trump has literally stated in his rallies:

    From the start, Harris has worked to tie Israel’s hand behind its back, demanding an immediate cease-fire, always demanding cease-fire

    Trump would not see a cease-fire as a required condition for the on-going conflict.

    Harris and Democrats historically have called for a two-state solution. Trump’s plan which has been broadly adopted by the Republican party in general would:

    • Give Palestinians only about 15% of their original territory
    • Jerusalem would become Israel’s undivided capitol, meaning all claims by the Palestinians to the eastern half of the city would be tossed out.
    • Allow Palestinians to “achieve an independent state” via a means that is not clearly defined in the plan but indicated that Israel would have a final say in that process.
    • “No Palestinians or Israelis will be uprooted from their homes” indicating that the territory that Israel has already colonized from their current conflict would become Israel’s.
    • Would put Israel and Jordan on equal footing for the administration of al-Haram al-Sharif, which will absolutely ignite a conflict.
    • Any territory allocated to Palestinians would have to undergo a four year “wait” period, but there’s no protections from Israel obtaining that territory if done so during conflict. So Israel could provoke someone to fight them and that would give them justification to take the land during this “four year wait period”.

    Trump has all but given up completely on a two-state solution. Which means, he’s for a one state solution. And people are fooling themselves if they believe that Trump would seek a “peaceful” one state solution. He has told Netanyahu directly, “Just get it done quickly”. Now we can play a game as what manner is used to “get it done quickly” means, but only idiots are the one’s thinking that doesn’t give a tacit nod to ethic cleansing.

    I just have no idea what these people who think Harris is a bad idea for Palestinians are actually thinking. And really, I don’t think they are thinking at all. You have one solution that is long, stupid, and required because we are a nation of laws. And you have the other solution that is “fuck it, firebomb them all and call it done”. It is difficult to imagine that there are truly people this blind and ignorant to this reality. But yet, here we are.

    The notion that we might get a 3rd party into office like twenty years from now if we start today, helps nobody if the people we’re trying to help are all eradicated over the next four years. Going down this “third road” only ensures an outcome where we are fifteen years too late to help.





  • But even in the liturgical sense of benevolence, schism is a thing, and often enough that we literally made the word schism for that and everyone else just adopted it to means a break of different ideas that used to be one.

    So even those of the same religion have over time turned on each other. There’s just been no successful consolidation of organized power under a single person or dictum that stayed free of eventually violence to it’s own members. Power always thirsts more power. That’s been all of history.


  • calls for a “benevolent dictator” to run the US

    These chucklefucks keep getting this part so wrong. No dictator stays benevolent for long. We’ve got something like 60 centuries of history to back that up. Eventually they demand unwavering fealty to their, and only theirs alone, lineage.

    I feel like sometimes dressing up as Gandalf and smacking these idiots over their head and reminding them “only one who can bend them to his will. And he does not share power!”

    Like for fucks sake this is such an ingrained human trait we’re making fucking fictional stories based off it and needing zero additional information on why anyone would desire such a monopoly on power.

    I swear the lot of these people have their heads firmly planted deep into their lower digestive tract.


  • Yes. The low ball estimates for just hurricane Helene is 100% FEMA’s annual funding for the next eleven years. That’s how destructive these disasters are.

    We’re still paying for the 2013 Colorado flooding, the 2017 California wildfire, and 2022 Hurricane Ian, just to name a few.

    People are completely missing how much climate change is truly costing us. Helene will be something we’re paying for easily for the next twenty years if not longer. $20B is not a lot of cash when compared to these events, not by a long shot.










  • That’s not untrue though. The number of times the average consumer has over corrected to only put themselves into a position where they over correct yet again is sobering.

    I’m not dissing AI or the average consumer, I’m just saying they often paint their asses into a corner over and over again only to complain when they paint themselves into a corner.

    Number of times I’ve heard people complain about having to pay the monthly price for iCloud is a non-zero number. But then you suggest getting a phone with an SD slot and they’re aghast that you’d suggest them giving up their blue bubbles. They hate ads on their Smart TV but how would they watch their Disney+ without a Smart TV? I’ve got a CVS receipt sized list of things consumers complain about that consumers wanted but now find themselves in the awkward position of “not like this.”

    C’est la vie. But there’s not going to be any kind of discourse that’s going to prevent folks shooting themselves in the foot. All we can do is just present some other options for when they inevitably have a bloody stump where their foot used to be. They’re going to use AI no matter what and eventually they’ll be wondering how their back is against the wall with all this paint surrounding them. Yet again.

    I don’t think there’s any point any trying to persuade them of anything really. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. So yeah, the average consumer is completely going to snag these shit PCs up in droves, they also are going to eventually regret that, but that’s a future them problem apparently.

    You and the person you replied to are correct.


  • No, you have a point and I wrote that oddly. I’m not saying we can only have one or the other. But yeah, my comment makes it sound like we can’t do helping small businesses without first taking care of large corporations. We can have both things happening.

    That’s on me, I wasn’t entirely clear in that comment. We can have the small business help and that would provide benefit to small businesses. But small businesses won’t thrive until we ease up the grip that particular companies have on select industries.


  • Having more small businesses is how you get less corporations and a healthier middle class

    Except when the corporations just buy the small business. This is the big problem with breaking into an industry. If you do find a way to break in, then one of the larger guys will just buy you out or force you out. Facebook bought Insta for the sole reason to reduce competition. Meta bought them out at $1B, which was huge for a small business buyout. Post-Meta, Insta is now estimated to be worth $100B Literally a penny on the dollar for the buyout. Meta also bought out WhatsApp at $19B, currently estimated to be $109B worth today. Like things that are regular names at this point were once small businesses that were serious threats to larger companies. Meta’s Messenger was under serious threat by WhatsApp prior to the buy out.

    And sometimes the point is to just get rid of the business altogether. Microsoft bought out Wunderlist for the sole reason to kill off the app. Google bought out Waze and has constantly been keeping them just functioning, but in 2020 the FTC launched yet another investigation into Google over Waze.

    Small businesses won’t thrive without restricting some of the anti-competitive behavior of the larger corporations.