US Government Shutdown- It's Over!... For Now

[Thermodolia]

I know what I said, this socialist knows the difference thank you very much. Also communism is also an economic system.

Communism tends to go a bit further than just economics though...

Yes but at its core it is an economic system. Plus for the vast majority of socialist states a vanguard party has clamped down on “anti-revolutionary thought”

[New haven america]

If a revolution occurs and a socialist state is created, you aren’t going to have a great time. You come from money which will make you hated, on top of that several tv shows, movies, and video games you like would most likely be banned “for spreading anti-revolutionary propaganda”

Hmmmm...

I will have to think about those possibilities...

TBH, this rings true in any dictatorship, the richer you are the more of a threat you are to the government, and they will deal with you by any means necessary.

That's not your money (I honestly doubt that it is your money to begin with), it's the government's, you just happen to be in possession of it.

[Kowani]

Communism tends to go a bit further than just economics though...

Yes but at its core it is an economic system. Plus for the vast majority of socialist states a vanguard party has clamped down on “anti-revolutionary thought”

That’s fair.

[Thermodolia]

Communism tends to go a bit further than just economics though...

Some could say that communism is the furthest extreme of socialism and involves both complete social and economic restructuring.

Oh wait that's exactly what it is.

Well ya I still don’t know why you think only a communist state would jail people for “anti-revolutionary Actions”. I said socialist state which is a bit different than socialism in the abstract.m


Either way the point was that IM would have a worse life under a dictatorship socialist or not

[Thermodolia]

Hmmmm...

I will have to think about those possibilities...

TBH, this rings true in any dictatorship, the richer you are the more of a threat you are to the government, and they will deal with you by any means necessary.

That's not your money (I honestly doubt that it is your money to begin with), it's the government's.

Unless you are super rich, and I mean bill gates rich, or an industrialist you’ll probably only lose your wealth under a socialist regime. Under any other system the super rich would more than likely be the ones running the show while those who are the “middle rich” would be removed from the money

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

TBH, this rings true in any dictatorship, the richer you are the more of a threat you are to the government, and they will deal with you by any means necessary.

That's not your money (I honestly doubt that it is your money to begin with), it's the government's.

Unless you are super rich, and I mean bill gates rich, or an industrialist you’ll probably only lose your wealth under a socialist regime. Under any other system the super rich would more than likely be the ones running the show while those who are the “middle rich” would be removed from the money

If you are super rich*. Socialism distributes property equally, therefore leading to less and possibly no inequality. The political system is another matter, although I personally support one run directly by the workers. Stop strawmanning socialism as though it's represented by Stalin and Mao alone.

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

DAY 30! https://youtu.be/LI2zdCXmZD4?t=16

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

It's been said before, but I want to make it clear.

There is no crysis on the US border. Trump is just fear mongering for the purpose of a wall.

[Hakons]

It's been said before, but I want to make it clear.

There is no crysis on the US border. Trump is just fear mongering for the purpose of a wall.

>Trump is putting immigrant children in cages at the border
>There is no crisis at the border

Pick one.

There's not enough crisis to declare a national emergency, but there are dire humanitarian needs. Border security and personnel needs more help in processing and housing migrants.

[The South Falls]

It's been said before, but I want to make it clear.

There is no crysis on the US border. Trump is just fear mongering for the purpose of a wall.

>Trump is putting immigrant children in cages at the border
>There is no crisis at the border

Pick one.

There's not enough crisis to declare a national emergency, but there are dire humanitarian needs. Border security and personnel needs more help in processing and housing migrants.

Neither of those options requires a wall, that's the issue. More border security agents, and high-tech methods of information processing.

[Hakons]

>Trump is putting immigrant children in cages at the border
>There is no crisis at the border

Pick one.

There's not enough crisis to declare a national emergency, but there are dire humanitarian needs. Border security and personnel needs more help in processing and housing migrants.

Neither of those options requires a wall, that's the issue. More border security agents, and high-tech methods of information processing.

I agree. A wall is a waste and would be a poor national symbol. Back a few years, Trump just brought up the wall as something that probably popped into his head while giving a speech. Then he stayed committed to it and now it's apparently a vital campaign promise.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

It's been said before, but I want to make it clear.

There is no crysis on the US border. Trump is just fear mongering for the purpose of a wall.

>Trump is putting immigrant children in cages at the border
>There is no crisis at the border

Pick one.

There's not enough crisis to declare a national emergency, but there are dire humanitarian needs. Border security and personnel needs more help in processing and housing migrants.

There is, but that wasn't the non existent crisis Trump was referring to as an argument for his wall.

[Shofercia]

There is a crisis on the Southern border, but it's about drugs, not immigrants. So why don't we just give Trump's $5 billion border wall funding to the DEA and the Border Patrol, tell them "here's five billion, cut down the drug trade" and see how they want to spend it?

[Infected Mushroom]

What if the Democrats gave Trump his 5 billion for the wall, but in exchange ask for an additional 2-3 billion on a choice project of theirs?

Or does the US not have enough billions?

[Greater vakolicci haven]

There is a crisis on the Southern border, but it's about drugs, not immigrants. So why don't we just give Trump's $5 billion border wall funding to the DEA and the Border Patrol, tell them "here's five billion, cut down the drug trade" and see how they want to spend it?

Because the DEA are arseholes who don't have any idea of how due process works?

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

There is a crisis on the Southern border, but it's about drugs, not immigrants. So why don't we just give Trump's $5 billion border wall funding to the DEA and the Border Patrol, tell them "here's five billion, cut down the drug trade" and see how they want to spend it?

I'd be ok with that.

[Shofercia]

What if the Democrats gave Trump his 5 billion for the wall, but in exchange ask for an additional 2-3 billion on a choice project of theirs?

Or does the US not have enough billions?

Here's the thing - Dems don't want any walls, anymore. If they cave, a part of their base will be pissed off, and not vote for them. On the other hand, if there's no wall, Trump will be viewed as caving, thus losing a part of his base. This isn't about Republican Border Security, or Democrats caring about the poor little immigrant Jose, whom they are very happy for their donors to exploit with below minimum wage job offers. It's about the Presidential Election in 2020, which is why I think it'd be hilarious if Trump steps down and Pence runs. CNN/MSNBC will set a World Record in the switch from "muh Mueller Probe!" to "muh Gay Rights!"

[Thermodolia]

Unless you are super rich, and I mean bill gates rich, or an industrialist you’ll probably only lose your wealth under a socialist regime. Under any other system the super rich would more than likely be the ones running the show while those who are the “middle rich” would be removed from the money

If you are super rich*. Socialism distributes property equally, therefore leading to less and possibly no inequality. The political system is another matter, although I personally support one run directly by the workers. Stop strawmanning socialism as though it's represented by Stalin and Mao alone.

That’s what I said. I guess I just wasn’t very clear. I was trying to say that under a socialist state if you are super rich you aren’t going to be for long. While under any other state you’d be running the show if you where super rich

And I’m not strawmaning anything. The vast majority of socialist states have been authoritarian states, and I say this as an authoritarian socialist.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

There is a crisis on the Southern border, but it's about drugs, not immigrants. So why don't we just give Trump's $5 billion border wall funding to the DEA and the Border Patrol, tell them "here's five billion, cut down the drug trade" and see how they want to spend it?

I'd be ok with that.

Well, I mean...they should all be legalised and regulated anyway so no

[Olthar]

There is a crisis on the Southern border, but it's about drugs, not immigrants. So why don't we just give Trump's $5 billion border wall funding to the DEA and the Border Patrol, tell them "here's five billion, cut down the drug trade" and see how they want to spend it?

So, instead of wasting money on a do nothing vanity project with no positive benefits, we waste money on a do nothing vanity project with no positive benefits that has better PR. The War on Drugs doesn't work.

[Infected Mushroom]

What if the Democrats gave Trump his 5 billion for the wall, but in exchange ask for an additional 2-3 billion on a choice project of theirs?

Or does the US not have enough billions?

Here's the thing - Dems don't want any walls, anymore. If they cave, a part of their base will be pissed off, and not vote for them. On the other hand, if there's no wall, Trump will be viewed as caving, thus losing a part of his base. This isn't about Republican Border Security, or Democrats caring about the poor little immigrant Jose, whom they are very happy for their donors to exploit with below minimum wage job offers. It's about the Presidential Election in 2020, which is why I think it'd be hilarious if Trump steps down and Pence runs. CNN/MSNBC will set a World Record in the switch from "muh Mueller Probe!" to "muh Gay Rights!"

So why not give Trump his wall but get some other federal/National publicized left wing project that will offset (or theoretically offset) the political points docked?

Surely the Democrats want SOMETHING flashy and national that could be worth a few additional billions ?

[Shofercia]

There is a crisis on the Southern border, but it's about drugs, not immigrants. So why don't we just give Trump's $5 billion border wall funding to the DEA and the Border Patrol, tell them "here's five billion, cut down the drug trade" and see how they want to spend it?

Because the DEA are arseholes who don't have any idea of how due process works?

Whereas Republicans and Democrats would never gut due process by passing the PATRIOT Act with record speed... Look, the Government is still shut down. Neither side is likely to cave. Workers are going to get pissed off if it stays shut down into March. This'll also cause the DEA to be even more assholish, as their salaries will start to depend on seized loot.

There is a crisis on the Southern border, but it's about drugs, not immigrants. So why don't we just give Trump's $5 billion border wall funding to the DEA and the Border Patrol, tell them "here's five billion, cut down the drug trade" and see how they want to spend it?

I'd be ok with that.

Yay, compromise!

[Thermodolia]

Here's the thing - Dems don't want any walls, anymore. If they cave, a part of their base will be pissed off, and not vote for them. On the other hand, if there's no wall, Trump will be viewed as caving, thus losing a part of his base. This isn't about Republican Border Security, or Democrats caring about the poor little immigrant Jose, whom they are very happy for their donors to exploit with below minimum wage job offers. It's about the Presidential Election in 2020, which is why I think it'd be hilarious if Trump steps down and Pence runs. CNN/MSNBC will set a World Record in the switch from "muh Mueller Probe!" to "muh Gay Rights!"

So why not give Trump his wall but get some other federal/National publicized left wing project that will offset (or theoretically offset) the political points docked?

Surely the Democrats want SOMETHING flashy and national that could be worth a few additional billions ?

Unlike you the democrat base doesn’t want the democrats to be sell outs

[Shofercia]

I'd be ok with that.

Well, I mean...they should all be legalised and regulated anyway so no

Cocaine should be legalized and regulated?

There is a crisis on the Southern border, but it's about drugs, not immigrants. So why don't we just give Trump's $5 billion border wall funding to the DEA and the Border Patrol, tell them "here's five billion, cut down the drug trade" and see how they want to spend it?

So, instead of wasting money on a do nothing vanity project with no positive benefits, we waste money on a do nothing vanity project with no positive benefits that has better PR. The War on Drugs doesn't work.

I somehow doubt that busting El Chapo was a waste of money. The overall strategy of the War on Drugs is poorly thought out. Employing key tactics to stop cocaine at border crossings tends to work.

[Thermodolia]

Because the DEA are arseholes who don't have any idea of how due process works?

Whereas Republicans and Democrats would never gut due process by passing the PATRIOT Act with record speed... Look, the Government is still shut down. Neither side is likely to cave. Workers are going to get pissed off if it stays shut down into March. This'll also cause the DEA to be even more assholish, as their salaries will start to depend on seized loot.

Sounds like we need our own Red October but in March.