Tiggnutz wrote:Democrats are happy to just ignore tough problems or blame someone else. If that fails and they are forced to address a problem than the next step is always the same throw tons of money at it. Cities with the very worse crime won't ever change because you can't fix a problem you won't admit exists. Leaders here in Baltimore still sell the same bullshit that it's just a handful of bad apples causing all the problems here. Refusal to except reality.
Sure. They're idiots.
But what policies do you want to see rescinded, and what would you replace them with?
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
That seems pretty dramatic. But would that solve the problem even if you did it? Or are you saying if all conservatives lived together then everything would be awesome while the liberal hell-holes would tear themselves up leaving all in their wake dead?
Tiggnutz wrote:Democrats are happy to just ignore tough problems or blame someone else. If that fails and they are forced to address a problem than the next step is always the same throw tons of money at it. Cities with the very worse crime won't ever change because you can't fix a problem you won't admit exists. Leaders here in Baltimore still sell the same bullshit that it's just a handful of bad apples causing all the problems here. Refusal to except reality.
Sure. They're idiots.
But what policies do you want to see rescinded, and what would you replace them with?
You need to charge more people as adults you need stiffer penalties for parents who's kids run wild and wreck havok.
Tougher sentences for violent crime.
Stop treating school as government funded daycare and remove troublesome students who keep others from learning.
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
and this even assumes that families are all one party or the other? (or all some third party, i guess) i'm just trying to determine how this is done, and how successful it would be.
Tiggnutz wrote:Democrats are happy to just ignore tough problems or blame someone else. If that fails and they are forced to address a problem than the next step is always the same throw tons of money at it. Cities with the very worse crime won't ever change because you can't fix a problem you won't admit exists. Leaders here in Baltimore still sell the same bullshit that it's just a handful of bad apples causing all the problems here. Refusal to except reality.
Sure. They're idiots.
But what policies do you want to see rescinded, and what would you replace them with?
You need to charge more people as adults you need stiffer penalties for parents who's kids run wild and wreck havok.
Tougher sentences for violent crime.
Stop treating school as government funded daycare and remove troublesome students who keep others from learning.
What are the current penalties for parents with shit kids? Are there any?
And what would you do with the students who are trouble? Do you guys have a PRU (Pupil Referral Unit) type thing like they do here?
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
and this even assumes that families are all one party or the other? (or all some third party, i guess) i'm just trying to determine how this is done, and how successful it would be.
I saw how families split for and against Trump. Those guys would be better off walled off from eachother.
I think there's a visibly pragmatic problem to Reign's solution, being that someone like Foo who is independent is screwed over, as are any moderates and libertarians who sit inbetween the extremes. Plus some might not migrate that well, like old people.
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
and this even assumes that families are all one party or the other? (or all some third party, i guess) i'm just trying to determine how this is done, and how successful it would be.
I saw how families split for and against Trump. Those guys would be better off walled off from eachother.
I think there's a visibly pragmatic problem to Reign's solution, being that someone like Foo who is independent is screwed over, as are any moderates and libertarians who sit inbetween the extremes. Plus some might not migrate that well, like old people.
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
That seems pretty dramatic. But would that solve the problem even if you did it? Or are you saying if all conservatives lived together then everything would be awesome while the liberal hell-holes would tear themselves up leaving all in their wake dead?
Why wouldn't it work? That plan is rock solid AND bullet proof, baby. As for the liberal hell-holes, one of two things will happen: Life and reality will finally smack them in the face and they will get their act together or they will do as you described.
Tiggnutz wrote:Democrats are happy to just ignore tough problems or blame someone else. If that fails and they are forced to address a problem than the next step is always the same throw tons of money at it. Cities with the very worse crime won't ever change because you can't fix a problem you won't admit exists. Leaders here in Baltimore still sell the same bullshit that it's just a handful of bad apples causing all the problems here. Refusal to except reality.
Sure. They're idiots.
But what policies do you want to see rescinded, and what would you replace them with?
You need to charge more people as adults you need stiffer penalties for parents who's kids run wild and wreck havok.
Tougher sentences for violent crime.
Stop treating school as government funded daycare and remove troublesome students who keep others from learning.
penalty like detention, something in-school, or punishment like a suspension from school, or a fine or what?
if school is no longer to be used as a "daycare", then do we adjust the work / financial burden on parents as well?
Genuinely, if the problem is all these people don't want to learn, do you guys think it would be worth having a lower minimum age for workforce participation and just letting the kids go get jobs?
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
Cold-hard dictatorship. Can't let the sheep or crooked politicians yammer on for days, gotta get this ball rollin'.
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
Cold-hard dictatorship. Can't let the sheep or crooked politicians yammer on for days, gotta get this ball rollin'.
Boom, solved. Good people in one place, bad people in another. Mordor and Gondor it is.
showa58taro wrote:I would agree that I don't think it doesn't have anything specifically to do with race, but let's accept that there is likely an issue akin to crabs in a pot, where poor, disenfranchised communities who don't have a lot of options to get out of their difficult community, will see someone making an effort to do so and try to pull them back in. That's certainly what that behaviour sounds like, almost a "I can't succeed so why should you" type thing.
Holy shit. Stop creating a scenario out of your ass so you can apologize for them. They are animals. They grew up in shitty homes? Tough. Tell their black parents to raise their black children better.
How is that apologizing? I'm making an analogy for why that is happening. That's all. To me:
1. They are not animals, they're all humans and I believe in all honesty if in a different circumstance they would make different choices.
2. If they do grow up in shitty homes, and they have shitty parents, then that probably is the problem. So how would you fix that? What is the best way to get parents to be better parents, or failing that to limit the damage they can do to their kids and then society.
Of course we all may make different choices under different circumstances, what happens in the black community right now is so much squandered opportunity...broken families, drugs, crime.
The criminals are liberals, making excuses instead of the tough love needed to break the cycle.
Ok, I made this topic to go along for your ride, not mine. So we say tough love. What would you like to see happen? Remove all unemployment benefits to those who don't keep their kids in school? Take the kids away? More police? Tell them "your life sucks, deal with it" through a megaphone all day? What do you think "Tough love" would look like, and what results are you thinking you'll see?
We could start by telling the truth. The truth is that there is opportunity that is constantly squandered by stupid behaviors. Stop having children out of wedlock, go to school, work, and stay away from substances.
These people are in America. They have better opportunities than 90% of the world and people risk their lives to get here for less opportunity. My fiancé is from Venezuela, a malfunctioning nation where there is literally no opportunity. Travel around to Latin America, Africa, and India and you see how absurd any claims about lack of opportunity here are.
We give people tax money they can use on candy and energy drinks. My fiancé is a dentist who lives with her mother who is a doctor, and they are frequently locked down in their home with no internet, no places to shop, people standing in lines hoping the government will allow them to buy flour and toilet paper.
Are you envisioning Trump-style rallies to affirm how much opportunity they have, or just pamphlets through the door, people knocking on their doors to tell them how much opportunity they have?
And the second point, you want to take away all government handouts to all communities, forcing them to seize their opportunities?
Culture change. Instead of showing up to the government doorstep and expecting a freebie, start expecting a list of job opportunities. Instead of cards that provide junk food, they get recipes for rice, beans, potatoes, bread, and pasta.
We start teaching self reliance instead of governmental reliance.
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
and this even assumes that families are all one party or the other? (or all some third party, i guess) i'm just trying to determine how this is done, and how successful it would be.
You've heard of that whole sins of the father thing, right?
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
Cold-hard dictatorship. Can't let the sheep or crooked politicians yammer on for days, gotta get this ball rollin'.
and i assume, no contact (like internet or postal) between the two sides? or something more like mexico / canada, but just without travel access?
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
and this even assumes that families are all one party or the other? (or all some third party, i guess) i'm just trying to determine how this is done, and how successful it would be.
You've heard of that whole sins of the father thing, right?
so you'd allow a republican father, and a democrat son / daughter to live together? or am i misunderstanding what you are trying to get at?
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
and this even assumes that families are all one party or the other? (or all some third party, i guess) i'm just trying to determine how this is done, and how successful it would be.
I saw how families split for and against Trump. Those guys would be better off walled off from eachother.
I think there's a visibly pragmatic problem to Reign's solution, being that someone like Foo who is independent is screwed over, as are any moderates and libertarians who sit inbetween the extremes. Plus some might not migrate that well, like old people.
I thought I made it clear one side is only for liberals. Independents like Fooksey and pot smoking libertarians will be welcomed into the good bosom.
Reign in Blood wrote:Solution to all ills is simple. We should give liberals their own side of the country; I will even let them choose which they want, west or east, north or south. They do their thing, normal folk will do our thing, normal folk will be happy and prosperous and then god and nature will sort out the liberal side. Chock full of win for all.
so, is this approach to be something that the people decide on, or that the government / politicians decide on? i'm curious if this is intended to be done through democracy or dictatorship or something else?
and this even assumes that families are all one party or the other? (or all some third party, i guess) i'm just trying to determine how this is done, and how successful it would be.
You've heard of that whole sins of the father thing, right?
so you'd allow a republican father, and a democrat son / daughter to live together? or am i misunderstanding what you are trying to get at?
If your father is a filthy liberal and you are not but you do not wish to be away from him, well then off you go to the slums.
