Are you concerned about replacement?

Geeko Sportivo said:
NO! Not at all!

I just don't hate people!

I don't feel like my race is any better than any other race of people!

In fact, I am embarrassed by some of my own race of people for being so hateful towards others!

It seems like The White Evangelical Nationalists are the most hateful, racist, dangerous, ignorant, selfish, self-centered, and self-important of all the people on earth!
Click to expand...

Yeah, and the most generous. You're a fucking hypocrite, Mr. Lizard.
 
AssHatZombie said:
I disagree. Globalist zealotry only works well for the richest part of society.
Click to expand...

Have you considered spot-checking that against real-world facts? For example, 1993 was a real milestone for the acceleration of globalism, with the US having implemented the WTO-round of the GATT, and with us entering NAFTA. So, we could see what happened. Like, say, check the five years after 1993 against the five years before, and see what happened to poverty or median incomes in each period, or unemployment levels. What do you think -- will the actual data support your notion that globalism only works well for the richest part of society?
 
Mina said:
Have you considered spot-checking that against real-world facts? For example, 1993 was a real milestone for the acceleration of globalism, with the US having implemented the WTO-round of the GATT, and with us entering NAFTA. So, we could see what happened. Like, say, check the five years after 1993 against the five years before, and see what happened to poverty or median incomes in each period, or unemployment levels. What do you think -- will the actual data support your notion that globalism only works well for the richest part of society?
Click to expand...

we could withstand the stupidity for a number of years, but now its been proven that empowering overseas slave regimes with massive orders is a race to the bottom for free workers.
 
take your time on this mina, i understanding this globalization zealotry is the core of your intellectual self.

you can become a new better person tho.

reject the oligarch wet dream known as the new world order.
 
Since there is no meaningful gun regulation or anything else, that will come out of this Buffalo tragedy, I would advice, Blacks, Latinos, Jews, and Asians, to arm yourself?!! It seems you can get killed in houses of worship, grocery stores, just about anywhere nowadays?!! And with this rise of white supremacy and replacement crap, coming from carnival barkers, like Trump, Carlson, Green, and Stefanik, it would behoove minorities to arm yourself?!!
 
signalmankenneth said:
Since there is no meaningful gun regulation or anything else, that will come out of this Buffalo tragedy, I would advice, Blacks, Latinos, Jews, and Asians, to arm yourself?!! It seems you can get killed in houses of worship, grocery stores, just about anywhere nowadays?!! And with this rise of white supremacy and replacement crap, coming from carnival barkers, like Trump, Carlson, Green, and Stefanik, it would behoove minorities to arm yourself?!!
Click to expand...

This all happened in one of the most progressive, liberal, blue states in the country. With some of the toughest gun laws. As usual you are barking up the wrong tree.
 
AssHatZombie said:
we could withstand the stupidity for a number of years, but now its been proven that empowering overseas slave regimes with massive orders is a race to the bottom for free workers.
Click to expand...
How many years, exactly? Should we try twenty? For example, we could look at 1973-1993, and compare that to 1993-2013. What did poverty rates, unemployment rates, and median incomes do during that first period? How about the second?
 
Mina said:
How many years, exactly? Should we try twenty? For example, we could look at 1973-1993, and compare that to 1993-2013. What did poverty rates, unemployment rates, and median incomes do during that first period? How about the second?
Click to expand...

right now the results are clear. utter destruction of a nation and it's people.
 
Mina said:
How many years, exactly? Should we try twenty? For example, we could look at 1973-1993, and compare that to 1993-2013. What did poverty rates, unemployment rates, and median incomes do during that first period? How about the second?
Click to expand...

let's do 2007-2027.
 
AssHatZombie said:
right now the results are clear. utter destruction of a nation and it's people.
Click to expand...

What makes you think that? I think it's fair to point out that Trump's presidency was a disaster for America. We had net job destruction, massive deficit increases, a horrifying crime wave in 2020, and even a big decline in life expectancy. But, until then, we were doing pretty well. As of 2016, we had record or near-record levels in just about every positive measure of social and economic performance (e.g., record real GDP growth), and things were improving. That period from 1993 to 2016 was one of nearly across-the-board improvement.... notwithstanding the hideous backsliding of the Bush era in the middle of that. So, it just doesn't look like we'd expect if globalism was a bad thing, does it?
 
AssHatZombie said:
why dont you want to do 2007-2027?
Click to expand...

Well, for starters, we have no idea at all what will happen between now and 2027, so unless you have a time-travel machine, it's not even possible. But, again, the whole idea was to check your theory against the history, to see if we did, in fact, get the nasty turn for the worse for everyone but the richest part of society, when we launched those two gigantic trade deals in the same year.

Here, I'll get you started by pulling one of the data points: poverty. In the 20 years leading up to NAFTA and the WTO, the poverty rate ROSE by 4.0 points. In the 20 years after we entered those deals, the poverty rate FELL by 0.6 points. So, we went from extremely rapid worsening, in the era before that ramp-up in global trade, to slow improvement, in the era after that ramp-up.

Now, want to compare the change in unemployment rates? Median real household incomes? Surely you're not just content to assert it was bad for the have-nots without actually checking if that's true, right?
 
AssHatZombie said:
why dont you want to do 2007-2027?
Click to expand...

Well, for starters, we have no idea at all what will happen between now and 2027, so unless you have a time-travel machine, it's not even possible. But, again, the whole idea was to check you theory against the history, to see if we did, in fact, get the nasty turn for the worse for everyone but the richest part of society, when we launched those two gigantic trade deals in the same year.

Here, I'll get you started by pulling one of the data points: poverty. In the 20 years leading up to NAFTA and the WTO, the poverty rate ROSE by 4.0 points. In the 20 years after we entered those deals, the poverty rate FELL by 0.6 points. So, we went from extremely rapid worsening, in the era before that ramp-up in global trade, to slow improvement, in the era after that ramp-up.

Now, want to compare the change in unemployment rates? Median real household incomes? Surely you're not just content to assert it was bad for the have-nots without actually checking if that's true, right? You must at least be curious if your claim is correct.
 
Mina said:
Well, for starters, we have no idea at all what will happen between now and 2027, so unless you have a time-travel machine, it's not even possible. But, again, the whole idea was to check your theory against the history, to see if we did, in fact, get the nasty turn for the worse for everyone but the richest part of society, when we launched those two gigantic trade deals in the same year.

Here, I'll get you started by pulling one of the data points: poverty. In the 20 years leading up to NAFTA and the WTO, the poverty rate ROSE by 4.0 points. In the 20 years after we entered those deals, the poverty rate FELL by 0.6 points. So, we went from extremely rapid worsening, in the era before that ramp-up in global trade, to slow improvement, in the era after that ramp-up.

Now, want to compare the change in unemployment rates? Median real household incomes? Surely you're not just content to assert it was bad for the have-nots without actually checking if that's true, right?
Click to expand...

no. not right.


the bottom line is allowing slaver nations into world trade incentivizes slavery and hurts free people.



comparing two different 20 year periods of a countries history is not worthwhile because there are too many factors.

globalism is just selling chinese mercanitilism to naive western people.

mer·can·til·ism
/mərˈkan(t)əˌlizəm/
Learn to pronounce
noun
belief in the benefits of profitable trading; commercialism.
HISTORICAL
the economic theory that trade generates wealth and is stimulated by the accumulation of profitable balances, which a government should encourage by means of protectionism.

globalist zealotry is a downward spiral at this particular moment for everyone but china.

we need more protectionism.

Trump 2024
 
Mina said:
What makes you think that? I think it's fair to point out that Trump's presidency was a disaster for America. We had net job destruction, massive deficit increases, a horrifying crime wave in 2020, and even a big decline in life expectancy. But, until then, we were doing pretty well. As of 2016, we had record or near-record levels in just about every positive measure of social and economic performance (e.g., record real GDP growth), and things were improving. That period from 1993 to 2016 was one of nearly across-the-board improvement.... notwithstanding the hideous backsliding of the Bush era in the middle of that. So, it just doesn't look like we'd expect if globalism was a bad thing, does it?
Click to expand...
Sorry but good luck getting a factual reply, with or without argumentum ad hominem. He doesn't know and he doesn't have the personality or education to best convey it even if he did.

As for the nation, that's much more complex. First, all nations are hurting because of the pandemic. Only Americans seem to think it's all about them.

Second, Trump was elected. He couldn't have been elected in 2000, 2004, 2008, or 2012 so why was 2016 different. People can blame the Russians all day long but that doesn't explain why Trump won the Republican nomination in the first place. Everyone knows the reason Hillary won her nomination was because she owned the DNC. Literally. LOL

BTW, anyone who argues "the fucking Russians" is admitting that Obama didn't do shit about it for eight fucking years. :thup:

It was a long road to get this screwed up as a nation, to become so divided. What is the best direction back to unity?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top