Heresy
Well-known member
So pointing out you and Mr. "The Trail of Tears wasn't a genocide." Vyor's ignorance is shiting up the thread now?Well this thread is getting shat up by sectarians...
My word.
/s
So pointing out you and Mr. "The Trail of Tears wasn't a genocide." Vyor's ignorance is shiting up the thread now?Well this thread is getting shat up by sectarians...
So pointing out you and Mr. "The Trail of Tears wasn't a genocide." Vyor's ignorance is shiting up the thread now?
My word.
/s
According to what the United Nations provides, the term "genocide," as coined by Raphael Lemkin in 1943, was defined in 1948. The criteria is as follows:Well since it doesn't fit the definition of genocide it isn't genocide. Saying it wasn't a genocide is akin to saying that 3 people being murdered isn't a mass killing.
A list that half the links don't work, or aren't lies lol.Nothing more trustworthy than an epic list on a right wing psycho site
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
A list that half the links don't work, or aren't lies lol.
So you're telling me the US government, that has by this point lost thousands of people due to them dying while moving out west in caravans, didn't think that picking up and moving 18'000 Native Americans in a fuck huge mob on foot with inadequate resources wouldn't kill a good portion of them?Was not intended by its designers to do so, so it doesn't fit that.
You guys are literally quibbling about the definition of genocide.
It shouldn't be hard to stay on those particulars.
Thank you. And I'm glad this forum has a quick comment loading (I saw the post 2 minutes after it was made), otherwise I'd have continued it with a multi-paragraph rant. Per topic. With a large amount of citation. Sure, it's an hour's typing up in smoke, but I'd get myself another three hour's typing from responding to the responses.Okay. Clearly, my advisory before to get back on topic didn't work. So any further derails will get you an infraction and if you choose to persist you get another infraction and a thread ban.
...You know, I'm so used to safety regulations that I barely even consider them. I did mention MLMs, which are literally one step away from a Ponzi scheme by having a physical product instead of just mailing money around. As such, they dodge US laws against pyramid schemes.Something like the FDA is needed to keep people from selling poison.
...You know, I'm so used to safety regulations that I barely even consider them. I did mention MLMs, which are literally one step away from a Ponzi scheme by having a physical product instead of just mailing money around. As such, they dodge US laws against pyramid schemes.
But yeah. Regulations to make sure Capitalism doesn't kill and keep it from bludgeoning the little guy out of the market entirely.
Need something to keep water/air quality at accepable levels too. Oh, and soil, since if stuff leeches into that you can be poisoned by eating stuff grown in it, so an EPA style organization is a must for the same reasons.I don't forget because I've seen shit from before the USA had said organization.
It was not pretty.
Need something to keep water/air quality at accepable levels too. Oh, and soil, since if stuff leeches into that you can be poisoned by eating stuff grown in it, so an EPA style organization is a must for the same reasons.
That's one of the biggest problems I have with Libertarian ideas of "do whatever you want on your private property". What you (not you personally) do there affects everyone around you.
The problem is that pretty much everything you can do beyond "sit quietly and play video games" does exactly that.That's kinda part of libertarianism. "You can do whatever you want on your property so long as it doesn't infringe on other people's freedoms."
The problem is that pretty much everything you can do beyond "sit quietly and play video games" does exactly that.
Yeah, but I mean things like farms, businesses, outdoor shooting ranges, etc... or messing with a stream that flows through.Sex, weed, lsd(most times), what you eat, what you post on forums...
Yeah, but I mean things like farms, businesses, outdoor shooting ranges, etc... or messing with a stream that flows through.
Say you own a piece of land. You sell the mineral rights to a mining company. Well, what they do ruins the value and possibly the health of everyone living around them.Some of those don't count as "your backyard" but I'll give you that.
Say you own a piece of land. You sell the mineral rights to a mining company. Well, what they do ruins the value and possibly the health of everyone living around them.
Essentially industry is impossible in a libertarian society that actually lives up to the nonaggression principles. As is farming. That's why people make all those "spherical cow" jokes about it.
So, everything needs to be regulated to keep that harm at a minimum. And because people don't want to be regulated, they try and hide things, so you need investigators for the regulators. But they might bribe or arrange friendly investigators, so you need...
And that's how we get the current situation. Basically, "small government" doesn't work. Government needs to keep growing to fill all the needs of the growing population and diversifying ways for that population to fuck each other over.
And there we have the big question: who decides that? Currently, all the people appointed to determine that have vested interests in making things smaller than they need to be to maintain our current standard of health. And the ones appointed to make sure that ISPs don't cheat their customers have a vested interest in letting them cheat their customers. Etc... Literally every "small government" politician in the US seems to be "too small to protect anyone, but big enough to control their sex habits and drug consumption"Government should be as small as possible. "as possible" in this case meaning that it needs to be large enough to insure a certain standard of living and safety.
According to the Center for American Progress, establishing universal preschool could allow a mother to participate in the labor force and moving up on the economic ladder. This could help the development of children by providing a safe and generally positive environment and learn to communicate with those who are not a part of their family at an early age.Introduction and summary
Over the past 15 years, the share of 4-year-olds who are U.S. residents attending public preschool has more than doubled to 33 percent.1 A growing number of cities and states have dedicated resources to establish or expand preschool programs, with policymakers frequently citing the impact that preschool participation has on school readiness.2 Preschool attendance has been shown to improve children's academic and socio-emotional skills, preparing them for kindergarten and beyond.3 Research also shows that effective preschool programs benefit children from disadvantaged families the most, providing those children with a nurturing environment for healthy development.4
Moreover, along with these important educational benefits, public preschool also allows some parents to re-enter the labor force or increase the number of hours they work, providing a decided boon to families' economic well-being. That has been the experience in Washington, D.C., where parents—specifically mothers—have returned to or entered the workforce in significant numbers since the city expanded to universal preschool.
Unfortunately, that is not the case for millions of parents throughout the United States, who report cutting back on hours or making career sacrifices due to challenges related to child care.5 Since private tuition for high-quality, full-day preschool can cost many thousands of dollars per year, free public preschool has the potential to significantly increase take-home pay for parents.
Well, I went to preschool and I was better-ish... but that is skewed with decent teachers.According to the Center for American Progress, establishing universal preschool could allow a mother to participate in the labor force and moving up on the economic ladder. This could help the development of children by providing a safe and generally positive environment and learn to communicate with those who are not a part of their family at an early age.
Problem, to do that you'll need a vastly larger government than what we have now. Probably at least twice as large minimum, probably three or more with the national guard ready and on call 24/7 in some cases.Government should be as small as possible. "as possible" in this case meaning that it needs to be large enough to insure a certain standard of living and safety.