Total posts: 866
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
The right has been telling me that anyone who votes against Trump and prefers Harris to Trump is a Marxist.No they haven't
A quote from Greyperrot:
I guarantee if half of Texas invaded New York, they would lose their Marxist culture.
To Greyperrot, left of center = Marxist. This is also accurate of you in the correct context.
Created:
Posted in:
Anybody that disagrees with this statement values George Soros'es tax cuts more than the life of a starving child.
And is therefore a Soros Simp.
Created:
Posted in:
The right has been telling me that anyone who votes against Trump and prefers Harris to Trump is a Marxist.
Alright; I don't care about the label; I'm a Marxist as well as about half the country (actually there would be more Marxists than non Marxists in the US).
There are a lot of Marxists in the US, I'm one of them, and there's strength in numbers if you equate democrat with Marxist.
I'm a Marxist because I would rather see starving kids get food in their stomachs than give tax cuts to globalists like George Soros.
Anybody that disagrees with this statement values George Soros'es tax cuts more than the life of a starving child.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I guarantee if half of Texas invaded New York, they would lose their Marxist culture.
To you, Marxist = someone with left wing opinions, so I'm a proud Marxist by your definition (as is most of the USA). The label doesn't matter.
But lets say TX invaded NY (having if be half of TX would be hard to compute because which half are you talking about?).
If that happens, then this expanded TX (TX + NY) would compose of a D+20 NY and a R+5 TX.
TX has more people, but in the 2020 election, this means that this expanded TX would be about D+8 (so TX would be a blue state if they annexed all of the NY State area).
So yeah; let TX annex NY; it's how you turn TX blue.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Undoucmented Chinese people moving to California is not the same as China annexing California. That's like saying that a bunch of Saint Louis residents moving to NYC without getting regestered by the government is somehow going to lead to Missouri annexing the West side of Manhattan.
It's total lunacy to think that would happen.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Why isn't China trying to annex Mongolia right now?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
100% underdog. Why do people even do this?
I learn some things from him, but I can find one big disagreement between me and the underdog.
Here the underdog basically makes a right wing argument on Israel:
(6 months ago; not a huge amount of time)
I disagree with it because there is nothing hypocritical about being pro LGBT and being pro Palestine. The position consistently believes the 2 following things:
- Homophobia is bad.
- Homophobia should not be punished with death.
The right on the other hand, advocates the death penalty for Islamic homophobia by implying, "Homosexuals should support the genocide in Gaza because Gazans are homophobes" while they turn a blind eye to white Christain homophobia as, "free speech". Black Christain homophobia is a mixed signal; they love white people, but they also love christains.
Underdog didn't see it like that though; I don't agree with anyone 100%.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Mongolia is a proud nation with closed borders, unlike the USA which hates itself and begs to be annexed.
Mongolia can have whatever rules they want; it's irrelevant. If China wanted to annex Mongolia, then they could easily. China's GDP is 1000x that of Mongolia; it's like a human vs a rat in a container. The rat's will on if they live is irrelevant if the human wants to kill them; the human gets a say in whether the rat lives or dies.
But China has no desire to annex Mongolia; so why would they annex the USA? They can't even annex Hong Kong without getting international backlash.
If China invaded the US, then China's economy would get decimated; it doesn't matter how many people they plausibly send over here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
You didn't make an argument.
Yeah I did; you just didn't understand it because you have a party to stick too.
Since it was vague it must mean "It is lawful to kill undocumented migrants"?Missing a premise.
The quote was you can use self defense "in a place where the person may legally be and is not engaged in an unlawful act."
The people always referencing the, "they're not legally supposed to be here" are conservatives.
You learn to read between the lines when you're politically seasoned.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Underdog I presume.
Who's he?
No, you cannot.
How is my proof incorrect?
Why?
Because bills take a long time to make; so they try to iron out all vagueness in the bill. I figured out in 5 seconds how it could all be ironed out; a bunch of politicians can easily do the same (especially with their law degrees where their brains are trained to find loopholes in the law; I was able to do it and I'm not even a lawyer).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It implies that Trump is worried that the military is going after him and Harris is worried that the military being used on her if Trump wins.
Just split the US up after Nov 8; Harrica can join Canada; Trumplica can have Trump be their King in an absolute monarchy fashion. Let the political minorities in each state go to their preferred half of the country.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
I don't agree with Biden on that.
Nobody should get deported under any circumstances. If they're murderers or similar, then you execute them. Latin America shouldn't have to deal with them; makes more sense to kill murderers and similar and leave the harmless alone!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Fortunately America had open borders when the Pilgrims landed in America on December 21, 1620, at Plymouth Harbor, Massachusetts.
Yes, and they were mooching off the native governments. Fucking freeloaders (sarcasm)!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
I guess we are just taking it on faith that countries won't do what is in their own best interests if the United States has border security.
Obviously every nation is going to act in their best interests no matter what. My contention is if the US has open borders, then it is in China's best interests to not send 100 million people to the US to try and annex California. They won't even do that for Mongolia.
China annexing America when they didn't annex Mongolia is like England colonizing America before they colonize Wales (actually less sense).
Wales was more powerful than the 13 colonies in the 1300s but they were closer (one con, one pro to annexing Wales before you annex American territory). With Mongolia vs the US, the US is both farther from China than Mongolia is and they are more powerful.
China will not plausibly annex America regardless of America's immigration policy.
I like how your solution to criminals coming over was to arrest then after they victimize Americans.
Yes; just like how if someone illegally buys an AR 15 in a state where they are banned, then I only support prosecuting them if they actually murder people (not the AR 15 owner that doesn't murder people).
All victimless crimes should be abolished, and driving from Mexico to Texas without papers is 100% victimless.
Something that is definitely not retarded
You are acting like such a snowflake with SJW like insults. Smh.
It's also a great idea just to eliminate border security and let a bunch of unactivated ms13 members to come through unchecked.
Yeah; and if they murder, then you kill them, but the vast majority of undocumented immigrants won't murder or anything like that and if MS 13 murders, then the individuals that murdered or r@ped should get executed.
In 2016, this nation voted more republican than they did in 2012 (because the incumbent party usually does worse once their guy is no longer POTUS). Despite that, the border states (who deal with the most amount of illegal immigration) voted much more blue (every border state). This means the American Citizens that know undocumented immigrants the most want them here and don't need randos telling them what is and isn't a problem.
There's a reason why as of the time of this comment getting posted, I'm getting likes on my comments and you're not. This is not a one off either; this is a general trend. Left wingers often make good points that resonate with other left wingers; right wingers rarely make good points that resonate with other right wingers. We the people have spoken and America is a blue country by popular vote. Might makes right!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Would it be accurate to say that the bill "Arizona GOP Bill Legalizes Killing Undocumented Migrants"?
I would say yes and I can prove that by contradiction.
Lets say the answer to that is no. Then the AZ state government would have modified that text to something extremely similar to what I would have stated.
This did not happen and AZ is worried about their state turning blue (and if you're a republican politician, then this is scary and undocumented immigrants are a big reason why because although they can't vote, they talk to Citizens who can, those people gain respect for the undocumented, and they vote blue whereas otherwise they would have voted red).
So yeah; the AZ GOP politicians are willing to kill people to stay in power.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
China won't do that. It they won't do that to Mongolia, then how would they do it to America? It would be like England colonizing America before they colonized Wales.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
You are not engaging honestly and you know what the following clip means
Do I agree with Harris here? No. It's better than Trump saying he wants to deport every Pro Palestine person (if it's true). Deleted Tweets or shipped to Shithole Gaza? Decision made. I'm voting for Oliver, so it's not even like I like Harris; I don't. But she is less bad than Trump.
Whenever you get the option of being a retard or not a retard. Choose not retard
In your mind, retard = preferring Harris over Trump. By that definition, I'm proud to be retarted; the label doesn't matter. My temporary definition of retarted is wanting abortion banned because a zygote is a human being and then supporting free IVF which kills a lot of zygotes. Trump will say both of these things.
You are correct when you say mainstream media hates Trump. They have good reason too.
Retarded take and not what was said.
If that's true, then he should clarify his position. RFK did. So did DeSantis. Trump won't because he wants to do it.
You can't be retarded enough to think a welfare state should have open borders.
Define, "welfare state". If it's free education, then yes; I support every child documented or not getting a state funded education. If it's medicare for all, then I'm against it. You can be pro open borders and believe both of these things.
Your concern with this:
I don't want my taxes skyrocketing
There are 2 options:
- You are in the 50% or so of GOP voters that don't pay any income tax. 57% of American households paid no income tax last year, study shows | Fox Business states what you can read based on the title, and 44% of the economic bottom half votes republican, so its about half. Then your income tax won't be impacted at all.
- You are in the 50% or so of GOP voters that don't pay any income tax. Then you can pay because you have the money (and even then, you probably won't pay a lot because you aren't a billionaire). What's more important to you, George Soros's tax cuts, or these children's lives:
Because to be honest, $1000 of my tax money to me matters way more to me than these children's lives (I'm selfish, I'll admit that). But $1000 of George Soros'es money matters way less to me than these children's lives. Anyone who disagrees is a fan of George Soros.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
13-405. Justification; use of deadly physical force
A. A person is justified in threatening or using deadly physical force against another:
1. If such person would be justified in threatening or using physical force against the other under section 13-404, and
2. When and to the degree a reasonable person would believe that deadly physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly physical force.
B. A person has no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly physical force pursuant to this section if the person is in a place where the person may legally be and is not engaged in an unlawful act.
A. You can harm someone else if:
1. They are threatening you (with a bill that you didn't cite).
2. Same thing as 1.
B. No duty to retreat if the person is not where they legally can be.
The bolded part should be modified to, "No duty to retreat if the person is on your private property without your consent." Someone is on your private property without your consent; you can do what is needed to get them off; someone is on public property; you can't shoot them if they are harmless.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Jurisdiction depends on actual borders.
Correct, but what if America's borders never get redrawn due to Mexican immigration (most likely outcome)?
Other nations with borders will define the borders of their colony if America refuses to.
Is your argument (just so I understand it):
If America opens up our borders, then Mexicans will make up the majority in certain areas and as a result, they would want to create a separatist movement due to them not learning English which makes them feel more Mexican than American, causing the US to lose the South West to Mexico
?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
@oromagi
@HistoryBuff
Thoughts on this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
If America has open borders, then it's no longer America. It's a colony of a world of nations with borders.
Cap; you can be a nation with open borders.
Created:
Posted in:
Common counter arguments to this idea:
Adopt them if you care about them
No. I don't want to adopt anyone citizen or undocumented. This is totally different than a citizen or undocumented moving into a home 5 blocks away with a consenting landlord and them paying rent.
They might murder or r@pe
So execute them if they do that, but most are fine. Same standard for the native born.
They're on welfare
So are the trailer parks; at least the migrants want the welfare; trailer parks call their welfare socialist as an insult. I'd easily rather give welfare money to immigrants who don't insult the help over trailer parks that do by calling it socialist. I'd rather give money to the grateful.
They get to vote
If that's the case, then who cares? The immigration test 1/3 of Americans can't pass and they can vote. Either let anyone vote regardless of documentation status or require passing the citizenship test to vote regardless of if you're born here or not.
They would help the democrat party win all future elections
Who objectively cares if the GOP dies? It's not your kid dying; it's an organization being dissolved (and this has happened all throughout history). The Whigs died out; the federalists died out, they were just replaced with new parties. It's just the GOP's turn to die. Don't worry, some other party will take their place. At this point, Trump is the GOP, if Harris dies, the democrats find someone else. If Waltz dies, then the democrats find someone else. If Trump dies, then the GOP MAGA base are lost sheep; Trump is their party; if the assassination attempt on him succeeded, then who would be the GOP party head? JD Vance? He's not a popular guy (when he wants to ban porn and undisputedly supports project 2025). Sometimes parties die. There's historical precedent for it.
They are both too lazy to work and they are taking all the jobs
Make up your mind. The fact that you say this implies you just bandwagon whatever you hear from MAGA media. It's not being racist; but it's being a bandwagoner that can't think for themselves.
They are both increasing the price of housing and they are decreasing the price of housing
Make up your mind. The fact that you say this implies you just bandwagon whatever you hear from MAGA media. It's not being racist; but it's being a bandwagoner that can't think for themselves.
If America has open borders, then we are no longer a nation
Cap; you can easily be an open borders nation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Wrong they have advocated for literally imprisoning wrong thinkers as my thread has linked to then directly stating
VP Kamala Harris & Hillary Clinton Wants Censorship On Social Media To Regain Control Of The People - YouTube is my attempt to understand what your source is. If this is the case, then what time does Harris call for imprisoning people whose views she doesn't agree with?
He was stating that if you are a guest in the United States and want to engage in anti American activities you Will be deported.
There are 2 ways to interpret, "anti American activities". They are:
- Any Pro Palestine protesting that happens to be peaceful.
- Killing known innocent americans.
If he advocates the 2nd, then I actually would want the execution of those that murder any known innocent person. The 1st should be totally legal. If Trump doesn't clarify which he means, then assume it's the 1st; if it was the 2nd, then he would clarify it's the 2nd, if it's the 1st, then he knows if he comes out and says it, then he's losing the election.
Just like when DeSantis passed the, "don't say gay" bill (which was really "don't bring children to drag shows"), he clarified his position and I don't think he's calling for banning homosexuality in Florida.
Clarification is needed; and the absence of it should always imply they support the worst position avaliable; if they supported the best position avaliable, then they would say it and clarified what he meant. RFK said something many people thought was anti semetic, he said he didn't mean it like that, and the media stopped calling him anti semetic.
He specifically prefaced his message with "If you come to America"This obviously excludes citizens, stop acting retarded.
Deproting pro Palestine immigrants is just as bad as deporting pro Palestine American Citizens. Yes, they are here illegally (tecnecially). But this law should be changed and ICE should be abolished, America should have open borders, so at that no point, nobody would be here illegally.
Bad laws should get eliminated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Trump can wear a klan uniform and be a neo con and you'd still vote for him.I can still also not vote for him or Kamala.
You can technically vote for Bernie Sanders.
The question is would you vote for Trump if he did a rally in a KKK uniform?
Created:
-->
@Mharman
That's stupid and unconstitutional (13th amendment).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Trump Didn't Tell People to 'Inject Bleach' for COVID-19. But Here's What He Did Say | Snopes.com says that Trump never told people to do that.
I trust Snopes as a reliable fact checker, even when they defend Trump. MAGA world isn't consistent with this though; they claim fact checkers are fake news.
Or like when he said that trade would be a blood bath and lied and said he was talking about a violent revolution if he loses?
The whole, "Stand back and stand by" is him saying, "If I lose, then get violent".
Literally just a free speech platform where anybody of any ideology can post anything they want within legal limitations.
Truth social to me counts as media. I define media as online stuff you read. Is YouTube media? I think it is; it's independent media. So is X and Truth social. Independent media is still a subset of media.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I know you don't think there is anything wrong with being a pedo; but pretty much all of society disagrees, and society has the might; might makes right.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I can still also not vote for him or Kamala.
If you do that, then that's respectable. As long as it's not Trump. Like, I'm voting for Chase Oliver.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
There is no such thing as MAGA media.
Truth social.
We know you like CNN, HLN and Fox though. So enjoy being talked down to
I don't like CNN, but I prefer it to MAGA media. CNN at least tries to be factual; Trump can wear a klan uniform and be a neo con and you'd still vote for him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Billionaire media cares about you!
Generic billionaire media cares more about me than MAGA media does (which is also run by a billionaire).
I like the billionaires who start out poor and middle class; they know what it's like to struggle and they respect the poor much more.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Moozer325
Yeah; Best.Korea is an idiot on these points.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
How is stating he doesn't want his kid to grow up in a racial jungle and promoting segregationism a joke
Those are not jokes, but they are a product of the time. It's why I don't get angry at George Washington for owning slaves like the far left does; it was a product of the time.
The ones that made them able to afford groceries.
What specific policy(ies) are that?
Oh and the first step act that released thousands of black inmates
If Harris did this, then would you give her credit? Or is it only Trump that can do something like this and you give him credit, but if Harris did it, then she's releasing dangerous people onto the streets?
My rule is people in jail for weed should be freed, people in jail for murder should be executed, and people in jail for something like DUI should get whipped; no imprisonment; this reduces taxpayers the most amount of money.
If Trump released 5000 people for weed charges, then credit where it's due. I think it's just a virtue signal though since there are 3 million prisoners; so he freed .2% of the prisoner population.
I have also supported efforts locally on the "Ban the box" initiative.
I read what ban the box is, I don't agree with it. If I was an employer, then I wouldn't want to hire a convicted murderer or r@pist for a job. It's not very pro law and order.
Created:
Posted in:
I prefer mainstream media to MAGA media. Mainstream media seems more reliable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Both Harris and Trump are anti-free speech (for Harris, this is for conservatives, for Trump, this is for Palestinian supporters).
Harris'es penalty is she deletes conservative tweets. Trump's penalty is he ships Pro Palestinian advocates to the middle east without their consent (and this would easily expand to those who call Trump a Neo con).
I know who's less crazy. All of a sudden, having your tweets deleted doesn't seem so bad.
I'm anti war and America first; I don't want the US funding Ukraine or Israel's wars. But I would easily rather my social media posts get deleted without my consent than be shipped to GAZA without my consent.
All of a sudden, the government deleting my posts doesn't seem so bad.
If he claims their message is wrong, then he should correct it. Like, RFK said something many people though was anti semetic, he said that he didn't mean it like that, and the media forgave him. Trump didn't do that, so it's implied he would deport the roughly 1/3 of the country that prefers Palestine to Israel.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
If it didn't stop Democrats from electing Robert Byrd a former KKK member or Joe Biden an open racist who said his true feeling on race prior to his party starting to pander to African americans, it slcertainly wouldn't effect my vote.
Robert Byrd was never a 21st century US POTUS candidate.and Biden was making a joke about African Americans. Trump has declared similar statements with, "Jews that vote against me are voting against their best interests because they should supprot Israel". That comment the left argued was anti semetic (which I don't agree with them on) and me being consistent, Biden saying blacks should vote for him isn't racist.
Why would I care if he simultaneously hates blacks while coincidentally having policies that improve their lives?
- What policy(ies) are you referring too?
- If Harris enacted the same policy, then would you be as equally supportive of Harris doing the policy? If not, then you don't actually care about the policy; you only care about Trump.
He could have a strong hatred for whites or even me personally and I would vote for him based on the fact his policies would make my life better.
- What policy(ies) are you referring too?
- If Harris enacted the same policy, then would you be as equally supportive of Harris doing the policy? If not, then you don't actually care about the policy; you only care about Trump.
Created:
Harrica (Harris America) should be separated from Trumplica (Trump America).
This nation is too ideologically divided; Trumplica should be able to have Trump become their King in an absolute monarchy if they so choose; Harrica should be allowed to break away and join Canada. This should be done peacefully, and I believe this regardless of who wins in 2024; large numbers of people will riot if things don't go their way regardless of who wins.
The US should just split up and Harrica should get annexed by Canada. That I think is the most pragmatic way for both sides to get what they want.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Then you are inconvincible and there's no point in arguing with you about the issue if you're unwilling to change your mind (it would be like a priest trying to convince orthodox Jews to convert to Christianity).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I hate pedophiles.
Not only have you outed yourself as a pedophille, but you have made extensive arguments advocating for abolishing the Age of Consent.
No matter what you say from here on out, people here know you're a pedophille.
You could hypothetically get banned for advocating for pedophillia and nobody (left or right wing) will advocate for your right to free speech.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
He wants to fund Israel's war against Gaza; that is Neo Con.
Created:
Posted in:
To all the Trump supporters on this site, what is required to occur in order for you to denounce your support for Trump?
If any of the following occur, then will your support for Trump cease:
- Trump performs a rally with a Klan uniform on
- Trump being convicted of r@pe
- Trump coming out against the first amendment
- Trump calling to terminate the US constitution
?
If the answer to all of these scenario is no, then it's safe to assume that you will vote for Trump no matter what.
As a result, if we're being honest, then counterspeech to address what you're saying is pointless. You won't change your mind no matter what. Like, I would argue if Trump never called Mexicans r@pists, never said Hatians were eating pets, never did Jan 6, and any incorrect or horrible claim he makes, he merely apologizes for, then I definitely would be more willing to vote for him.
But I don't vote for crazy.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I would argue that Harris'es clip is merely being slowed to 80% of the original speed of the video in order to make it sound like she's drunk while giving a speech, when she isn't.
But this won't change your mind because Trump can do a rally in a KKK uniform and you would still vote for him. Your perspective will never be changed in terms of who you vote for no matter what happens, so there honestly is no use in engaging with you. Whereas for me, if Trump never argued Mexicans are r@pists or anything like that, then I would not believe he's racist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
@oromagi
@Trent0405
@WyIted
Essentially what he is saying is that Springfield has strained resources from the flood of Hatian immigrants.
Then you argue that claim. You don't lie about legal immigrants. But we know Trump wouldn't posess this claim if the immigrants were white; he married someone that performed fashion work illegally. It's fine by Trump's private standard (white is right, black is crap).
To think I actually trusted your claim of having a high IQ. SmH
Haters got to hate.
But more importantly you didn't answer the following question:
If Trump performed a rally in a KKK uniform, then would you not vote for him?
which lets everyone on DART know that you would still vote for him even if Trump performed a rally in a KKK uniform.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
I'm surprised you would say that. Trump is a neo con (wanting to fund Israel). So is Harris. Maybe you could vote for Chase Oliver.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
This is one of those situations where correlation does not equal causation. We know that IQ is mostly genetic. In the United States where even the poor are well nourished anyway.
There is probably some genetic component to it, but is it race related? There was this black kid in my school that had a very high GPA. The school had every kid getting the same amount of education funding. I don't believe there was a significant correlation between race and IQ in that school.
We know that wealthy people are more likely to be high IQ. Property taxes go to schools and the wealthy pay more in property taxes so their schools will be better funded. It seems like Occam's razor will lead us to conclude that education spending and IQ is not causation.
I would argue there is a loop effect. More education funding -> higher IQ -> wealthier people -> higher property taxes -> more education funding. But there is a lot of friction associated with it, if you work out, then you will gain strength consistently, but matienience is required (otherwise you become weak again). You can overtrain and undertrain. But the more you work out, the more weight you would have to lift for it to be overtraining.
I could see school funding resulting in better educated children or better academic tests but IQ seems to be a stretch
The average person now probably has a higher IQ on average than a person in the middle ages.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
They are higher in the economic freedom index but lack some of the anti freedom policies of the United States.
Which policies are Norway higher and lower on wrt economic freedom than the US?
Anyway I think we all know he was trying to backdoor Marxism there.
What would make you declare that?
I will say if he won the primaries though and was up against Jeb bush, I would have voted for him
What would make you say that?
Created:
-->
@WyIted
I have seen scientists attribute nutrition, Genetics and ease of life to IQ but I have seen zero people suggest that Inherent intelligence is effected to any significant degree by how could the public education system is.
Race vs Education spending vs IQ - Google Sheets indicates a correlation of over .5 between education spending ranking and IQ ranking. Sources are in the spreadsheet.
How exactly would a school that does a better job teaching, increase a kids IQ anyway?
Better brain workout models, designed to maximize children's intelligence.
So if you go to a community college what will your Iaq change to according to your theory? Now how much would an Ivy league college change your IQ according to your theory?
One is undertraining; one is overtraining. I wouldn't go to an Ivy League school because they are too expensive; they turn down Valedictorians. To be a valedictorian, you need to be not only very intelligence, but you got to be a try hard. I'm definitely not a try hard, but I'm very smart so I ended up 77th percentile in my class.
but how exactly would the chemical composition of the brain be impacted by schools with the same curriculum having less funding that another school with the same curriculum?
The school with more funding would have teachers more motivated to teach the concept due to the higher pay incentive (and higher national teacher salaries means you get smarter people teaching kids and spreading their intelligence to the kids to a much greater extent). This would make the teaching field extremely competitive; but the best win and spread their intelligence to the next generation.
You want the biggest crops to provide the seeds for the next generation of crops; you want a similar setup for teachers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
guess that's why the furthest left countries on the economic freedom index like North Korea and Venezuela are the best countries to live in while countries at the top such as the United States, Germany and Switzerland suck so much.
The most left wing politician in the United States is Bernie Sanders, who wants to turn this nation into Norway (a nation that even Trump praised when he advocated for letting more people from Norway come here). The US left and the US right both approve of Norway in certain contexts.
Norway is very fiscally left wing.
I am pro life and like most prolife people we are okay with abortions in the first trimester.
Why 12 weeks? I thought the overton window was anything before 6.5 weeks was considered pro life; anything beyond that was pro choice (because 50% of abortions happen before 6.5 weeks).
About 92% of abortions happen before 12 weeks.
Many red states banned abortion from conception. The left states usually are 20-22 weeks. The position of left wing states is more similar to yours than the right wing position.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Moozer325
Best.Korea: Smart person, left leaning, but also the single biggest Troll you’ll ever meet. Avoid at all costs.
How is he a troll?
Underdog: Also didn’t know him that well. He had potential but he wasted most of his time trying to piss everyone off
How was he trying to piss everyone off?
Created:
-->
@WyIted
High IQ people will move to where there is more economic opportunities and usually early in their career will love to places like the northeast particularly some place like Massachusetts which has colleges like MIT.
If someone is born in small town West Virginia and has doctor intelligence, then they are probably going to college, but they wouldn't go to Boston; they may go to West Virginia's own university (and get a job in West Virginia). Just like a stupid kid from Massachusetts would work at cape cod for minimum wage. It just so happens that West Virginia produces way fewer intelligent people due to their inferior education system.
You need a certain base level IQ to pursue those things, but pursuing that sort of higher education isn't going to magically raise your IQ.
Making this claim is like making the following claim:
You need a certain base level testosterone to bench your body weight, but going to the gym isn't going to magically increase your strength.
Education is a brain workout. More funding is like more protein powder when you go to the gym.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
They do have a clear bias
Snopes has a left bias. So does reality.
Wrong I trust no news.
You cited an X post; that's news (or you may disagree, but it's splitting hairs).
It's easy to impersonate some politician being a p*do, especially since so much relevant content is blacked out.
Also wrong that Trump is above criticism by the right wing. They are literally kvetching that he would veto a federal abortion ban.
Some are, other MAGA people are praising Trump when he called for IVF to be federally funded. Not only is this universal healthcare, but it also causes the death of a lot of zygotes (which the right argues are human beings).
It makes more sense for a MAGA pro life person to want to ban IVF than to agree with Trump; but Trump's MAGA crowd agreed with him because they don't do as much research as they like to advertise to the nation that they do. The MAGA crowd cheered Trump on for that.
It is pretty important. Republicans will never win an election again if he loses not at that level anyway
Who cares? n America has had political parties die before (Whigs, Democrats-Republicans). Maybe it's just the GOP's turn. Don't worry; there will be some opposition to the democrats that rises up. If not, then every politician is a democrat, but elections sill would exist, it would merely mean the terms, "politician" and, "democrat" would be synonymous in the national context. There will still be difference in politicians (and people would need to research who they prefer). If in an election between Sanders and AOC you think they are going to stay ideologically identical, then that's not accurate; they want to enact unique policies that make them stand out. Maybe Sanders advocates for building a hospital in Vermont; maybe AOC advocates for expanding the metro North train network and advocates investing in public transit. People would vote based on which they prefer. Like, in San Fransisco, in their city, all the politicians are democrats, but there is ideological difference between them if you study their proposed plans to deal with issues.
The word, "democrat" is just a label.
the nation will do what every nation does that moves left as evidenced by the economic freedom index.
Don't they somehow rate Scandinavia as more economically free than the United States?
I would prefer to debate people I disagree with so ai can grow more as a person.
If that's you, then I believe I may be that person.
I've started out very right wing in high school, but I've become more left wing as time has gone on. I've realized that cutting taxes feels good until you realize that it doesn't do good because some government program has to be cut (and here are your options assuming we are merely dealing with federal spending):
The military people often call for cutting, but that's the left; and the right wants to cut vaguely, but I don't appreciate vague; I appreciate specifics.
Created: