How messed up are Trump Supporters?

[Brian37]

Why yes, when you have a bullshit argument, falsely accuse the sane of social Darwinism.

No sane society would ever do that .Evolution is a fact and is undisputably how we got here. But that does not make it any less screwed up and awful and certainly not something i wan't civilization emulate . Natural does imply good .

Any first world country that values a western open society should not deny scientific fact. Personal superstitions are a matter of rights, not logic. When those superstitions get to the point of bullying a government to the point of denying those facts, bad things follow. 

America did not get to the moon on Allah belief. Led was not taken out of gas based on belief in Vishnu. 

Sickos like Hitler sold hyper nationalism and pseudo science. There are literal charts and junk science tools to point out the inferiority of those evil Jews that his propaganda machine pumped out during his reign of tyranny.

And today, we have a sicko calling Mexicans evil and Muslims evil and even his own intel and the free press evil.

The worst part of Hitler, is that the most likely real reason he became the monster he was, had nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with the fact that the art world told him his painting sucked. Trump picks on the NFL because they would not let him buy into a team, because of his horrible business history. He slams other billionaires not because he cares, but because he cant get a bank loan in America.

Lots of people have told me my poetry sucks. But I certainly would not murder them for saying such.

[Brian37]

Why yes, when you have a bullshit argument, falsely accuse the sane of social Darwinism.

No sane society would ever do that .Evolution is a fact and is undisputably how we got here. But that does not make it any less screwed up and awful and certainly not something i wan't civilization to emulate . Natural does imply good .

Excellent point.

"Natural" to the theist is a dream state where Roy Rogers rides off into the sunset with the girl.

"Natural" to science isn't a good vs evil argument, but only an observation that good and bad happen.

Tornados and Hurricans are NATURAL, scientists are not arguing those events are desirable.

Unfortunately things like rape happen. Not because the victim likes it, and not because there is a man in a red leotard with a pitchfork magically manipulate the neurons in the perps brain. Rape unfortunately happens for very mundane, natural reasons, not desirable reasons, but merely because humans can do bad things.

Rape isn't a bow to Satan, or a denial of God. Rape happens because the perp desires control, and while the sex is the outcome, the control is the drug.

[Angrboda]

Whether Democrats want to "tax the hell out of" the 1% or not, it seems that Democrats have been opposed to tax cuts for the top tiers while Republicans have been for them. Starting with FDR in 1937, tax rates for the wealthy have fallen under four Republican presidents, Nixon, Reagan, Dubya, and Trump, and fallen under only JFK/Johnson on the other side. It may be just my impression, but it's been a perennial talking point of the right, and not so on the left. So, while neither side has taxed the hell out of the rich, I think you're making a false equivalency in claiming there is no difference between the two on the issue of taxing the wealthy.

[Angrboda]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/06/opini...-view.html

A recent Reuters analysis found that the bottom 60 percent of income-earners have been fueling their spending, and thus the economy’s, by using their savings or credit cards. They almost have to, because wage growth is expanding at a disappointing 2.7 percent annual clip — despite evidence that employers are finally throwing a few more pennies at workers.

The prospects for wage growth ought to be good, given the tighter labor supply. But American companies have made an art form of not sharing the wealth with workers. Productivity growth has vastly outstripped real wage growth since the 1970s, according to Deutsche Bank research. Yet employees are working harder and smarter and not getting commensurately remunerated, while corporations have a record share of the national wealth. That is to say, workers have been getting ripped off.

[Minimalist]

RIGHT because one party keeps scaring the shit out of people like you crying "COMMIE".

Ironic when their fuhrer is sucking Putin's cock onstage, eh?

[Angrboda]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/07/us/po...trump.html

A 2016 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine found that while first-generation immigrants can be more costly to governments, subsequent generations “are among the strongest economic and fiscal contributors in the U.S. population, contributing more in taxes than either their parents or the rest of the native-born population.”

[Fake Messiah]

Gas is UP

Cost of food is UP

House prices are UP

Car prices are UP

Rent is UP

Healthcare is UP

Gun deaths are UP

College tuition is UP

Hate crime is UP

National debt is UP

The 1%’s income is UP

The other 99%’s wages are DOWN


Asbestos is BACK and is made by Russian company with Trump's face branded on it


Corporate criminals escape prosecution

Farmers are bracing crisis because of tariffs and some plants are closing for that reason.

Now, let's listen how those Russian bitches ignore all that and praise their glorious leader Putin.

[Pat Mustard]

You would give your vote to people who increase taxes on the rich.....and thats why you don't vote blue and do vote red?

Pull my other one, it has bells on it.

You know a blind dog with a mallet up its arse would see that am is bullshitting here.

[John V]

Ugg, I am sure your denial of evolution and love of old mythology has tons to do with your lack of understanding me.
Lets be clear her, if you do accept evolution, like many theists, you cherry pick it up and until it conflicts with your old mythology.


So how does evolution play into economics you ask?

When you look at other life, when it is balanced and diverse, no one species crashes the ecosystem. But, when one species becomes invasive, that upsets all the other life in that ecosystem and it can cause damage even to the point of extinction.

So how does this relate to humans?

The Russian Revolution, The French Revolution, The Iranian Revolution, AND THE AMERICAN revolution, all went in different directions, with different outcomes, but all happened for the same reason. LACK OF RESOURCES.

There ARE worldwide very empathetic humans, that if it were not for what they are sold by their local powers, WOULD get along better. 
There are humans whom seek power out of greed, then there are others who seek power to do good. 

Just like a female lioness is more apt to protect all cubs even if not hers, while the male lion seeks to kill rival cubs.
Humans are really not a magical species above the behaviors, BOTH GOOD AND BAD, that other species display. 

I would vote for Teddy, or a Malala whom come from a position of empathy, but unfortunately our species also has bullies who seek power too.

Wait is Beta Male trying to pull Social Darwinism  off as a argument ?  

Pure Naturalistic Fallacy

LOL - you quote Brian talking about evolution, and then accuse me of it.

---

Whether Democrats want to "tax the hell out of" the 1% or not,

Uh, no, you don't get to just change my goalposts for me.

it seems that Democrats have been opposed to tax cuts for the top tiers while Republicans have been for them.  Starting with FDR in 1937, tax rates for the wealthy have fallen under four Republican presidents, Nixon, Reagan, Dubya, and Trump, and fallen under only JFK/Johnson on the other side.  It may be just my impression, but it's been a perennial talking point of the right, and not so on the left.  So, while neither side has taxed the hell out of the rich, I think you're making a false equivalency in claiming there is no difference between the two on the issue of taxing the wealthy.

The current difference is 2.6%. BFD.

[Angrboda]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/08/busin...china.html

Hundreds of Western companies already have been reconsidering China’s role in their supply chains, according to several people involved in such decisions. Executives are increasingly looking for ways to transfer the final assembly of goods to factories outside China, mainly in low-wage countries elsewhere in Asia or in Mexico.

Doing the final assembly outside of China will allow companies to bypass the new American tariffs. It could also start to cut the deficit with China over the next couple years.

But these moves may not do much to the overall trade deficit of the United States, rearranging it instead to other countries. Companies are just relocating the last steps in production plans to places like Indonesia and Taiwan rather than bringing them back to the United States, where blue-collar labor is costly. Beijing will also retain a lot of leverage, given that the manufacturing of a long list of components, from wires and screws to electric motors and digital controls, will most likely remain in China.

Star Rapid, a company in Zhongshan, China, makes prototypes of products for more than 400 American companies in sectors like electronics, auto parts and medical devices. It has noticed that while many companies are looking at ways to change locations for final assembly, not one seems to be moving the production of entire supply chains. The components typically account for much if not most of the value in products.

“They’re not looking at taking it out of China,” said David Hunter, the company’s chief executive. “They’re looking at where can they do the final transformation.”