Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 88: Nobody knew trade deals could be so complicated

(+) Yeah! (+)

We're left with no choice but to go to (trade) war with our most hated enemy, Canada, to stop their exports of softwood, milk, and Ted Cruz
---

Yeah, especially the Triangle Trade
---

... okay, if we could stop them from exporting their Ted Cruz's, I might be okay with a new trade deal.
---

Anyways back to your response. Yes you do not respect those people. But, what i am saying is that a thousand years ago that was normal behavior and you would have been considered immoral for not obeying the word of god.

Times change. And many times in dramatic ways and bloody ways.
---

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

We're left with no choice but to go to (trade) war with our most hated enemy, Canada, to stop their exports of softwood, milk, and Ted Cruz

On a more serious note, I'm hearing that Trump apparently wants to pull out of NAFTA

???

Reg posted...

On a more serious note, I'm hearing that Trump apparently wants to pull out of NAFTA

???

Yep

Because he's a fucking idiot and is listening to Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon instead of people who actually know what they're talking about
---

Reg posted...

On a more serious note, I'm hearing that Trump apparently wants to pull out of NAFTA

Yeah, though I've also heard that in that event there's a previous trade agreement between the US and Canada from before NAFTA that we would revert to, so it's Mexico that would be most affected.

But I am admittedly not very clear on all the details and ramifications in play here.
---

Reg posted...

LordoftheMorons posted...

We're left with no choice but to go to (trade) war with our most hated enemy, Canada, to stop their exports of softwood, milk, and Ted Cruz

On a more serious note, I'm hearing that Trump apparently wants to pull out of NAFTA

???

Yup, it's a shame the US is going to lose all of those jobs over this. Things will be pretty bad for us too, but at least Canada recently got the free trade deal with the EU signed and this will likely push us into creating a new TPP deal. On the other side if the US can't even play nice with Canada what chance does it have with other nations.
---

Corrik posted...

Anyways back to your response. Yes you do not respect those people. But, what i am saying is that a thousand years ago that was normal behavior and you would have been considered immoral for not obeying the word of god.

Times change. And many times in dramatic ways and bloody ways.

Going back to the original point of contention, this doesn't excuse people of TODAY flying the Confederate Flag. These people are presumably living under modern morality.
---

He said pre election he wanted no TPP and NAFTA renegotiated or left also.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik posted...

Anyways back to your response. Yes you do not respect those people. But, what i am saying is that a thousand years ago that was normal behavior and you would have been considered immoral for not obeying the word of god.

Times change. And many times in dramatic ways and bloody ways.

Going back to the original point of contention, this does t excuse people of TODAY flying the Confederate Flag. These people are presumably living under modern morality.

Not everyone flies it for the reason you are indicating tho. Sure many are and that is despicable though. Some people care more for the reason they are flying it for more than the possibility of being viewed unfavorably tho.
---

Corrik posted...

He said pre election he wanted no TPP and NAFTA renegotiated or left also.

I'll even back you up here. This should be no shock. This was a campaign promise.
---

For the record I don't think Corrik comes off as racist at all here.

I think it's just a shallow understanding of what a "right" actually is in terms of the ideology of the United States combined with looking at it from a cold logical viewpoint rather than an empathetic one. But I'm also a cold logical person when it comes to these arguments and what it boils down to is the truth of it is forbidding slavery is more like fixing a bug in how society works than denying a right of the states.

Now, people in the moment may not have seen that, as it's not entirely obvious that your country is being immensely hypocritical when it's widely accepted to allow slavery and has been since your birth. But the problem is people these days have no excuse not to see it unless they're racist or have a fundamentally poor understanding of American ideology.
---

Corrik posted...

He said pre election he wanted no TPP and NAFTA renegotiated or left also.

That doesn't change the fact that it's a fucking stupid thing to do and is going to cause substantial damage to the US economy (including raising prices for consumers). Renegotiating is potentially okay (though I don't trust Trump to do it), but leaving altogether would be shooting ourselves in the face.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Corrik posted...

He said pre election he wanted no TPP and NAFTA renegotiated or left also.

That doesn't change the fact that it's a fucking stupid thing to do and is going to cause substantial damage to the US economy (including raising prices for consumers). Renegotiating is potentially okay (though I don't trust Trump to do it), but leaving altogether would be shooting ourselves in the face.

NAFTA hurt our nation greatly. I would be interested to see why you feel leaving it would hurt us now as opppsed to the past where we lost tons of jobs due to it.
---

Now if you're agreeing that there can be people who are flying the confederate flag who do have a poor understanding of what their flag means, fly it anyway, but aren't actually racist.

Then yes I agree with you and you should join my thinking of "these people don't even know what the flag they're flying represents and should fly the Gadsden Flag instead."

But the confederate flag is a racist flag. If you try to twist it it's just a sign you don't understand the origins of the flag and our country's ideology more than anything.
---

Lopen posted...

Now if you're agreeing that there can be people who are flying the confederate flag who do have a poor understanding of what their flag means, fly it anyway, but aren't actually racist.

Then yes I agree with you and you should join my thinking of "these people don't even know what the flag they're flying represents and should fly the Gadsden Flag instead."

But the confederate flag is a racist flag. If you try to twist it it's just a sign you don't understand the origins of the flag and our country's ideology more than anything.

I disagree. I think many fly it for the wrong reasons, but I think their is a core of people who fly it for noble reasons.

I would concede that they may not realize that their flying of the flag may indirectly embolden those who do it for the wrong reasons in their goals however.
---

Why We Have a Second Amendment: Venezuela Plans to Give Firearms to Loyalists So They Can Purge Growing Resistance

In the lead-up to the protest, which had been planned for weeks by opposition political parties, President Maduro issued an alarming proclamation that didn.t receive nearly enough press. He promised to expand the nation's armed militia, and hand out firearms to as many as 400,000 loyalists.

The Bolivarian militias, currently at approximately 100,000, were created by the late Hugo Chavez to assist the armed forces in the defense of his revolution from external and domestic attacks.

Speaking to thousands of militia members dressed in beige uniforms gathered in front of the presidential palace, Maduro said that vision remains relevant as Venezuela continues to face "imperialist aggression."

"A gun for every militiaman!" he cried.

If you know your history of communist regimes, you understand what comes next. Maduro's response to millions of hungry pissed off people, is to arm his die-hard supporters, who will be able to purge the starving masses that dared to cross him. They may not face much resistance, because in 2012 Venezuela banned private firearm ownership.

Venezuela has brought a new gun law into effect which bans the commercial sale of firearms and ammunition.

Until now, anyone with a gun permit could buy arms from a private company.

Under the new law, only the army, police and certain groups like security companies will be able to buy arms from the state-owned weapons manufacturer and importer.

The ban is the latest attempt by the government to improve security and cut crime ahead of elections in October

Venezuela saw more than 18,000 murders last year and the capital, Caracas, is thought to be one of the most dangerous cities in Latin America.


Nicolas Maduro just your average dictator. Would Trump gave the same freebies to his supporters?

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/why-we-have-a-second-amendment-venezuela-plans-to-give-firearms-to-loyalists-so-they-can-purge-growing-resistance_04262017
---

Corrik posted...

NAFTA hurt our nation greatly. I would be interested to see why you feel leaving it would hurt us now as opppsed to the past where we lost tons of jobs due to it.

NAFTA actually benefited the US. But even if your only concern is the jobs that were lost due to a rearrangement of the economy, they aren't going to just instantly come back if NAFTA is repealed. In fact, we'll likely see people whose jobs were created due to NAFTA lose their jobs instead.

Basically, we've already paid the cost of the economy re-equilibrating, and repealing NAFTA would make us pay that cost twice while throwing away all of the many benefits.
---

psaltery posted...

Why We Have a Second Amendment: Venezuela Plans to Give Firearms to Loyalists So They Can Purge Growing Resistance

Nicolas Maduro just your average dictator. Would Trump gave the same freebies to his supporters?

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/why-we-have-a-second-amendment-venezuela-plans-to-give-firearms-to-loyalists-so-they-can-purge-growing-resistance_04262017

I would support trump if he gave me free guns. I am actually being serious and honest.
---

You can fly it for noble reasons and still be ignorant that the flag does not symbolize what you think it does

It does not symbolize states rights. That's just a fact, because owning slaves is not a right given by American ideology. I won't deny some people who fought for the flag thought it represented that in the moment, but at this point we know better.
---

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ
---

Lopen posted...

You can fly it for noble reasons and still be ignorant that the flag does not symbolize what you think it does

It does not symbolize states rights. That's just a fact, because owning slaves is not a right given by American ideology. I won't deny some people who fought for the flag thought it represented that in the moment, but at this point we know better.

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ
---

Also NAFTA ensures we have open trade in terms of food items, which means we could have food shortages and spikes in food prices.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Corrik posted...

NAFTA hurt our nation greatly. I would be interested to see why you feel leaving it would hurt us now as opppsed to the past where we lost tons of jobs due to it.

NAFTA actually benefited the US. But even if your only concern is the jobs that were lost due to a rearrangement of the economy, they aren't going to just instantly come back if NAFTA is repealed. In fact, we'll likely see people whose jobs were created due to NAFTA lose their jobs instead.

Basically, we've already paid the cost of the economy re-equilibrating, and repealing NAFTA would make us pay that cost twice while throwing away all of the many benefits.

That is what I worry about NAFTA. That the damage is already done and we just have to eat the cost and bare a grin. = /

Worst deal ever. Thanks Bush Sr and Clinton.
---

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

It was about labor sure. The fear was factories worked by slaves for free being fundamentally unfair to the north from an economic perspective. People feared there would be no more free labor and that people wouldnt be able to make a living in an industrial society, which shockingly similar to the issues we are having now with near total automation in manufacturing.

The problem with your argument is that Lincoln was so fucking moderate. He wasnt Seward and he wasnt for immediate abolition. He was for a slow graduated system away from slavery that you suggest the country was headed for.

He didnt even take office before the South seceded. The South forced the issue. They got smacked for being dickheads and basically deserved it.
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ

This would be better situated to the people who insult others for thinking otherwise. Hell, one person had the gall to call me a hateful person when I am always courteous while others call people names back and forth.
---

Eddv posted...

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

It was about labor sure. The fear was factories worked by slaves for free being fundamentally unfair to the north from an economic perspective. People feared there would be no more free labor and that people wouldnt be able to make a living in an industrial society, which shockingly similar to the issues we are having now with near total automation in manufacturing.

The problem with your argument is that Lincoln was so fucking moderate. He wasnt Seward and he wasnt for immediate abolition. He was for a slow graduated system away from slavery that you suggest the country was headed for.

He didnt even take office before the South seceded. The South forced the issue. They got smacked for being dickheads and basically deserved it.

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ
---

Eddv posted...

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

It was about labor sure. The fear was factories worked by slaves for free being fundamentally unfair to the north from an economic perspective. People feared there would be no more free labor and that people wouldnt be able to make a living in an industrial society, which shockingly similar to the issues we are having now with near total automation in manufacturing.

The problem with your argument is that Lincoln was so fucking moderate. He wasnt Seward and he wasnt for immediate abolition. He was for a slow graduated system away from slavery that you suggest the country was headed for.

He didnt even take office before the South seceded. The South forced the issue. They got smacked for being dickheads and basically deserved it.

I would have argued money on the other end of the spectrum. But it is a fair perspective.
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Eddv posted...

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

It was about labor sure. The fear was factories worked by slaves for free being fundamentally unfair to the north from an economic perspective. People feared there would be no more free labor and that people wouldnt be able to make a living in an industrial society, which shockingly similar to the issues we are having now with near total automation in manufacturing.

The problem with your argument is that Lincoln was so fucking moderate. He wasnt Seward and he wasnt for immediate abolition. He was for a slow graduated system away from slavery that you suggest the country was headed for.

He didnt even take office before the South seceded. The South forced the issue. They got smacked for being dickheads and basically deserved it.

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ

(I had to)
---

Anyways back to your response. Yes you do not respect those people. But, what i am saying is that a thousand years ago that was normal behavior and you would have been considered immoral for not obeying the word of god.

MalcolmMasher posted...

Their decision to rebel could be understandable, even reasonable - but not moral, and not just.

If you think it's wrong to judge people two hundred years ago by modern standards, then we are not going to be able to reach middle ground. I think that we should understand that things 200 years ago were different, in many ways, and that we need to remember this when we judge the people who were alive 200 years ago. And if they did something that was wrong, because they thought it was right, then we should consider their incomplete information, their mistaken beliefs, as mitigating circumstances when we judge them; a thorough analysis ought to include and account for this information. What it should not do is pretend that if something wrong seems right, feels right, then that makes it right.

You may feel I am being unfair to historical people by judging them by modern standards? But I don't care about being fair or unfair to people who are already dead. (Accurate, now...) Whereas if you say "killing people for God is okay as long as everyone around you agrees it's okay", you're being unfair to the potential future victims of your audience.
---

Lopen posted...

For the record I don't think Corrik comes off as racist at all here.

I think it's just a shallow understanding of what a "right" actually is in terms of the ideology of the United States combined with looking at it from a cold logical viewpoint rather than an empathetic one. But I'm also a cold logical person when it comes to these arguments and what it boils down to is the truth of it is forbidding slavery is more like fixing a bug in how society works than denying a right of the states.

Now, people in the moment may not have seen that, as it's not entirely obvious that your country is being immensely hypocritical when it's widely accepted to allow slavery and has been since your birth. But the problem is people these days have no excuse not to see it unless they're racist or have a fundamentally poor understanding of American ideology.

Yeah I don't think Corrik is racist for his arguments here.

Just WRONG. And also probably scum.

##vote: Corrik
---

Can't technically quote from the last topic anymore, so here's a screenshot...



...and this is the moment where I realize the South fighting for slavery is basically Melee-fans fighting for wavedashing.
---

It's pretty much exactly the same thing, yeah, depending on how great of a sin upon humanity you rate wavedashing.

Hell I called it "fixing a bug" in a later post even!
---

MalcolmMasher posted...

Anyways back to your response. Yes you do not respect those people. But, what i am saying is that a thousand years ago that was normal behavior and you would have been considered immoral for not obeying the word of god.

MalcolmMasher posted...

Their decision to rebel could be understandable, even reasonable - but not moral, and not just.

If you think it's wrong to judge people two hundred years ago by modern standards, then we are not going to be able to reach middle ground. I think that we should understand that things 200 years ago were different, in many ways, and that we need to remember this when we judge the people who were alive 200 years ago. And if they did something that was wrong, because they thought it was right, then we should consider their incomplete information, their mistaken beliefs, as mitigating circumstances when we judge them; a thorough analysis ought to include and account for this information. What it should not do is pretend that if something wrong seems right, feels right, then that makes it right.

You may feel I am being unfair to historical people by judging them by modern standards? But I don't care about being fair or unfair to people who are already dead. (Accurate, now...) Whereas if you say "killing people for God is okay as long as everyone around you agrees it's okay", you're being unfair to the potential future victims of your audience.

Yes because there could be countless things you are doing immorally now that you don't even realize it.
---

Corrik posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ

This would be better situated to the people who insult others for thinking otherwise. Hell, one person had the gall to call me a hateful person when I am always courteous while others call people names back and forth.

In TES3, you called me irrelevant and insulted me for not signing up when I expressed my status as the original TES winner, implying that I was "old news" and and possibly would not do as well as you if we were to compete in the same season, but now that TES4 is ongoing and I am still in it whereas you have already been eliminated... Granted, I fully acknowledge that you showed no discourtesy to other players in the game, and that while your words to the hosts were less than curteous in regard to not reminding you to show up and submit for challenges, that was at least partially justified, as they did give their word to send reminder PMs/notifications and they apparently did not keep that word, although plenty of other people paid attention anyway.
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Corrik posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ

This would be better situated to the people who insult others for thinking otherwise. Hell, one person had the gall to call me a hateful person when I am always courteous while others call people names back and forth.

In TES3, you called me irrelevant and insulted me for not signing up when I expressed my status as the original TES winner, implying that I was "old news" and and possibly would not do as well as you if we were to compete in the same season, but now that TES4 is ongoing and I am still in it whereas you have already been eliminated... Granted, I fully acknowledge that you showed no discourtesy to other players in the game, and that while your words to the hosts were less than curteous in regard to not reminding you to show up and submit for challenges, that was at least partially justified, as they did give their word to send reminder PMs/notifications and they apparently did not keep that word, although plenty of other people paid attention anyway.

Dude you just rambled hard there. What are you even trying to say?
---

Corrik posted...

Yes because there could be countless things you are doing immorally now that you don't even realize it.

Well, it's not as if societal changes are something that come literally out of nowhere. You're trying to say that "people who owned slaves back then didn't realize it was immoral because society didn't tell them it was" but clearly some people did know as much otherwise slavery wouldn't ever have stopped.

An inherent sense of morality isn't really a thing that depends on society. Society merely enforces. People can still think certain things are wrong even in a society that widely accepts such things.

That is to say I think you're drastically overestimating how many things we're doing that are "immoral"
---

Yes because there could be countless things you are doing immorally now that you don't even realize it.

It's conceivable. I hope, Corrik, that you will not judge me by sins that neither of us realize are sins.
---

Corrik posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Corrik posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ

This would be better situated to the people who insult others for thinking otherwise. Hell, one person had the gall to call me a hateful person when I am always courteous while others call people names back and forth.

In TES3, you called me irrelevant and insulted me for not signing up when I expressed my status as the original TES winner, implying that I was "old news" and and possibly would not do as well as you if we were to compete in the same season, but now that TES4 is ongoing and I am still in it whereas you have already been eliminated... Granted, I fully acknowledge that you showed no discourtesy to other players in the game, and that while your words to the hosts were less than curteous in regard to not reminding you to show up and submit for challenges, that was at least partially justified, as they did give their word to send reminder PMs/notifications and they apparently did not keep that word, although plenty of other people paid attention anyway.

Dude you just rambled hard there. What are you even trying to say?

haha lol sure exactly, I <3 u 2 bro
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Corrik posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Corrik posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Corrik posted...

I mean, to be honest, a better argument would be that the Civil War was caused over Money than anything.

People do not like to hear that though.

http://imgur.com/a/8xUjQ

This would be better situated to the people who insult others for thinking otherwise. Hell, one person had the gall to call me a hateful person when I am always courteous while others call people names back and forth.

In TES3, you called me irrelevant and insulted me for not signing up when I expressed my status as the original TES winner, implying that I was "old news" and and possibly would not do as well as you if we were to compete in the same season, but now that TES4 is ongoing and I am still in it whereas you have already been eliminated... Granted, I fully acknowledge that you showed no discourtesy to other players in the game, and that while your words to the hosts were less than curteous in regard to not reminding you to show up and submit for challenges, that was at least partially justified, as they did give their word to send reminder PMs/notifications and they apparently did not keep that word, although plenty of other people paid attention anyway.

Dude you just rambled hard there. What are you even trying to say?

haha lol sure exactly, I <3 u 2 bro

Ok <3
---

MalcolmMasher posted...

Yes because there could be countless things you are doing immorally now that you don't even realize it.

It's conceivable. I hope, Corrik, that you will not judge me by sins that neither of us realize are sins.

I wouldn't. But, that is what you are doing right now? Which is weird to me.
---

Lopen posted...

Corrik posted...

Yes because there could be countless things you are doing immorally now that you don't even realize it.

Well, it's not as if societal changes are something that come literally out of nowhere. You're trying to say that "people who owned slaves back then didn't realize it was immoral because society didn't tell them it was" but clearly some people did know as much otherwise slavery wouldn't ever have stopped.

An inherent sense of morality isn't really a thing that depends on society. Society merely enforces. People can still think certain things are wrong even in a society that widely accepts such things.

That is to say I think you're drastically overestimating how many things we're doing that are "immoral"

Let's use a completely whatever hypothetical.

800 years from now... whatever animal's brain develops more. Achieve higher intelligence whatever.

Wants to know why we used their species as sport, good, entertainment, etc.


Now are we all so immoral because we bred chickens just to slaughter them for food?

I mean...?
---

Corrik posted...

Lopen posted...

Corrik posted...

Yes because there could be countless things you are doing immorally now that you don't even realize it.

Well, it's not as if societal changes are something that come literally out of nowhere. You're trying to say that "people who owned slaves back then didn't realize it was immoral because society didn't tell them it was" but clearly some people did know as much otherwise slavery wouldn't ever have stopped.

An inherent sense of morality isn't really a thing that depends on society. Society merely enforces. People can still think certain things are wrong even in a society that widely accepts such things.

That is to say I think you're drastically overestimating how many things we're doing that are "immoral"

Let's use a completely whatever hypothetical.

800 years from now... whatever animal's brain develops more. Achieve higher intelligence whatever.

Wants to know why we used their species as sport, good, entertainment, etc.


Now are we all so immoral because we bred chickens just to slaughter them for food?

I mean...?

XD!!! "800 years" you fucking smartass
---

I always find it wierd when people equate being polite and being good. The worst person I've met was always polite and spoke kindly to everyone. He then defrauded several people out of tens of thousands of dollars, beat his wife, and fled the country.
---

If we live in that time and fly a McDonalds flag outside our house after cows became sentient, yes, we are immoral, even if our great great great grandma was once a proud shift manager
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

I always find it wierd when people equate being polite and being good. The worst person I've met was always polite and spoke kindly to everyone. He then defrauded several people out of tens of thousands of dollars, beat his wife, and fled the country.

yeah but he didn't call people names just because they had views that he disagreed with.
---

Well I, and many others, already think slaughtering animals is kinda immoral in a lot of ways so that wouldn't be a good example. Perhaps you've heard of PETA?

Just cause society hasn't fully caught up to the idea doesn't mean that the idea isn't out there. As it was for slavery and countless other things.

In any case I'm not entirely judging people back then-- just explaining that people now should be held to a higher standard when thinking the confederate flag represents "state's rights"
---

Lopen posted...

Corrik posted...

Yes because there could be countless things you are doing immorally now that you don't even realize it.

Well, it's not as if societal changes are something that come literally out of nowhere. You're trying to say that "people who owned slaves back then didn't realize it was immoral because society didn't tell them it was" but clearly some people did know as much otherwise slavery wouldn't ever have stopped.

I mean....


The whole argument that people didn't understand that slavery was wrong in the 1860's is basically horseshit. We were one of the last countries in the entire world to have legal slavery, and it was just as much a fucking embarrassment at the time.
---