Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

America a Failed State and a Rogue State to the rest of the World

Sdajii

Sdaji
Joined
13 October 2009
Posts
1,958
Reactions
1,676
Please provide your evidence.

The fact that you ask for evidence for such an obvious thing shows how incredibly blinded you are. Your bias is demonstrated. You honestly are unaware that the left has the dominant control over such things? Honestly? Really?

I presented polling data, and data from US government websites which are regarded as credible.

LOL. 'Are regarded as credible', self declared credibility in polling from the side which told us that their polls definitively indicated Trump couldn't possibly win. Even if you want to say the polls are unbiased, which they obviously aren't, the data is represented in a clearly polarising way.

Perhaps you could assimilate the evidence and draw a different conclusion from something you regard as credible.

You're missing the point.

It seeks an opinion. If you saw information that clearly showed a situation that was significantly worse than previously the case, and noted how comparable nations sat by comparison, then reaching an informed opinion on the question is not difficult.

So now even you call it an opinion, rather than a clear fact, which is the exact point I was making.

It's about determining that despite there being information which is freely available and credible (ie. unambiguously verifiable), a large number people are able to disassociate from facts based on political stance.

That's what it's attempting to do, and obviously if you're willing to blindly believe and not keen on critical thinking you'll go along with it, but it has failed to do so. They're declaring that they've kicked a goal without even needing to move the goal posts because the goal posts weren't even placed anywhere to begin with. What are your measures of damage? I listed some possible measures before, they didn't give any, you still haven't, you've just vaguely said that since some tangible information exists, some people dissociate from it, without giving any specific examples. Even if you were to clearly define your question (which hasn't even been attempted here, it has been left vague, and any reasonable person can see that is deliberately so), such as saying "There will be more/fewer COVID-19 deaths in the future than there have been in the past", there is no factual answer, because the future is still yet to come, but in your example here, there isn't any clear way to define 'the worst'; it's deliberately vague to the point of being meaningless.

You speak like a dogmatic religious person; 'You must accept and affirm the narrative, you must be with us, or you are part of the heresy'. At least clearly definite your questions before promoting your side as righteous and the other side as imbeciles (noting that you shouldn't be looking at it as a dichotomy anyway, you should be looking at people as a spectrum, and what you are doing here encourages people to join or oppose you, which is exactly what is causing the polarisation).

Consider this; I am a qualified scientist, I am on the left side of the political spectrum, yet most people on the left would now consider me to be alt right, and people on the right tend to agree with or at least respect my political views. It's obvious who is causing the polarisation, it is those in the upper echelon putting out divisive nonsense like you have displayed here, knowing that people like you will dance to their beat.
 
Joined
29 January 2006
Posts
7,185
Reactions
4,348
The fact that you ask for evidence for such an obvious thing shows how incredibly blinded you are. Your bias is demonstrated. You honestly are unaware that the left has the dominant control over such things? Honestly? Really?
Without evidence your comments lack merit.
You're missing the point.
I gave you the clear opportunity to make your point.
So now even you call it an opinion, rather than a clear fact, which is the exact point I was making.
I clearly said it was an "informed opinion." Your doctor or lawyer only give their opinions, but they have reasonable foundation.
 
Joined
29 January 2006
Posts
7,185
Reactions
4,348
That's what it's attempting to do, and obviously if you're willing to blindly believe and not keen on critical thinking you'll go along with it, but it has failed to do so.
Please elaborate.
If there are verifiable facts, what causes them to be disregarded?
... what you are doing here encourages people to join or oppose you, which is exactly what is causing the polarisation.
I provided information.
I have shown that despite information having a substantive basis many people choose not to accept its legitimacy.
Truth and untruth are polar opposites, so nothing is being "encouraged."
Consider this; I am a qualified scientist, I am on the left side of the political spectrum, yet most people on the left would now consider me to be alt right, and people on the right tend to agree with or at least respect my political views.
I have commented on your understanding of science in other threads, and whether you are of any "leaning" does not change valid scientific data.
 

wayneL

Digging myself a fallout shelter
Joined
9 July 2004
Posts
24,196
Reactions
10,424
Joined
30 June 2008
Posts
14,533
Reactions
6,417

I suggest its a bit more than a mathematical model. The analysis is astute and makes for uncomfortable reading.

One of the issues it raises is the impact this would have on the world economy.

I don't think the title "civil war" makes sense here. I can't see how the States would split into two opposing groups . However fractures across the society are deep and dangerous.

Professor Goldstone predicts the real problems will begin after July 31, when Americans' $600 a week COVID-19 unemployment welfare expires.
 
Joined
26 March 2014
Posts
18,757
Reactions
10,460
I don't think the title "civil war" makes sense here. I can't see how the States would split into two opposing groups . However fractures across the society are deep and dangerous.

I don't think it's a State v State issue, more a Right / Left issue.

We've already seem the BLM demos, the masks wearing objections and general freedom of movement debates vis a vis covid, then with the US awash with guns it could be "citizens for freedom"(Right and Left wing anarchists) vs "suppressors of democracy" (police and government institutions).

I think it has the potential to get very nasty.
 

wayneL

Digging myself a fallout shelter
Joined
9 July 2004
Posts
24,196
Reactions
10,424
The divisions in the US are fairly multifaceted and not so easy to split up the sides.

I'm finding some extreme dissonance in my sympathies between the opposing forces.

On the one hand I am totally against the Marxist left, on the other hand I'm totally against the corporatism and *unjustified inequity created by the financialisation of the economy as per created by the actions of the Federal Reserve.

*This does not mean I am in favour of equity in the socialist sense, equal opportunity certainly, but not equal outcomes.

What you have is a situation not unlike what you have in Syria, a whole mishmash of goals and grievances that cannot be resolved by two sides lining up against each other and shooting it out
 
Joined
6 January 2009
Posts
2,300
Reactions
1,130
"I'm finding some extreme dissonance in my sympathies between the opposing forces."

WyaneL, I am very simple, can you help me out, what does this mean? KISS theory
 

wayneL

Digging myself a fallout shelter
Joined
9 July 2004
Posts
24,196
Reactions
10,424
"I'm finding some extreme dissonance in my sympathies between the opposing forces."

WyaneL, I am very simple, can you help me out, what does this mean? KISS theory
I've got some appointments and then I will try to clarify what I mean there... It's no easy matter because it's confusing, even for the participants.

If you ask people what they are fighting for or against it is very unclear, but there is certainly a sponsoring thought which is up to us to try and figure out.
 
Top