• Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • I think it just remains to be seen how Trump is. I think he probably won't do much, but... The thing is that presidencies build on each other, and sometimes you don't feel really know how good or bad they were until a long time later. Reagan, at least, is controversial. Like, people in certain fields can predict, but... Well, for example, the current economic situation can be traced back to Clinton, at least, when he took regulations off the housing market. Bush continued that trend, and Obama didn't help. Well, Trump himself is pretty extreme. A lot of people hated Bush, too, mostly over the Iraq war, but he tried to be... diplomatic isn't the word I'm looking for, but he wasn't inflammatory. On the other hand, Trump says whatever he wants regardless of how people will react (or, more likely, he does it to get a reaction), and... The response is pretty much what I'd expect. It seems to me like it really has little to do with Trump as a policy maker, and much more to do with his comments. As for nukes, on the other hand, we don't know what everyone else has, either. It's probably not up to our standards, but it's still an unknown. I'm not saying it's likely that we'll have nuclear warfare, just that it's a possibility. That incident in Hawaii kind of reminded me of one of the times we almost did end up there, when someone missed a message that someone was just testing, and we took it for a real threat. Oh, yeah, EMPs could definitely doe some damage here; our economy is so closely tied to technology.
    I mean, it's not like they have to look very hard for controversy. In fact, if you want to know the truth, I bet the people in the media just loves Trump, because he provides controversy, which provides views. And I think he likes the attention. Nah, I just saw it in passing on the TV at work. I do remember a few things, though, like, remember the controversy over that apparently Black supremecist minister from the church his family attended? Or when Michelle Obama said she was proud of her country for the first time ever when he was elected? At least part of my perception comes from stuff beyond news media, sitcoms, comedies, things like that, which also lean Left. At least the ones I'm familiar with. 30 Rock, for example, at times made fun of the optimism of Obama supporters, and... Heck, The Boondocks did a whole episode on how excited people got about having a Black president, without even really knowing what his policies were, and then how they were disappointed. That first aired in... 2010, so, two years after Obama was first elected.
    Well, the hierarchy of needs is an out-moded idea, because... You how babies won't thrive if they're not held and touched? That's where it really started to be challenged. Part of my point is, welfare and social security reform are things that would stabilize the economy. Part of the problem now is that the working class struggles, and can't afford to put money back into the economy. It's not mutually exclusive-- we're not limited to speaking out about economic justice or political justice. In fact, everything is related. Change depends on getting people to care about the people most affected. It can get really nit-picky, but I think the basic push toward understanding other people's perspectives is good. When I think of America getting back on its feet, it's largely the economy of the working class I'm thinking of.
    The court of public opinion has always been different from the court of law, though; the internet just makes everyone more visible. Which honestly is a problem, because your whole life can really be ruined by mob-mentality, everyone knowing what happened, or worse, not knowing what really happened. Sorry, I didn't watch it, which is on me. But I felt like I'd probably disagree, get irritated, and obsess over writing a comment about it. That's how I tend to do. I mean, sure, you can block people on social media, but you can't block people in real life. In fact... before social media, I think we might've had less access to people's opinions. A lot of people don't like to talk about it in polite conversation, but people tend to be more outspoken with their online personas. As for how well-off snowflakes are, it depends on the snowflake. Like I said, just because we're better off than others doesn't mean injustice is ok. And yeah, there's still plenty of room for improvement. I mean, many people in the US are worse off than many in third world countries; homelessness is a big problem, and because there's little infrastructure to support it.
    Not everyone values money over everything, though.Or even their own well-being. Some people have stuck to their values on pain of torture and execution, like the astronomer Bruno Giordano. Or that guy who allowed himself to be crushed to death rather than confess to witchcraft during the Salem Witchtrials. People will choose what they value most, but sometimes that's their own beliefs and integrity. Or Claire Patterson, who refused to help sweep it under the rug that leaded fuel was putting toxic levels of lead into the envionment, even though that meant he'd lose all funding for his research. As for me... I don't think I could go as far as death or homelessness, but I value my own sense of self and conscience much more than wealth. If I sold someone out so I could be rich, I'd have to live with the knowledge that I did that, and that wouldn't be worth it to me. Same with love-- like, the one thing I want out of life is to find someone I really love and be with that person. I've dated guys from well-off families, and if it had've gone anywhere, who knows, I could have ended up with a pretty extravagant lifestyle. But to give up on what I really want for that (not to mention the squickiness and feelings of intrustion that would result from being with someone I don't really care about)... The idea of that is depressing as hell. Even now, with what I've been through, I wouldn't do it. And after comfort and a certain level of extravagance, anything more loses meaning, because I wouldn't even feel the effect.
    I don't think that has much to do with their actual lives. Sure, they're more liberal, but not to that extreme, and I think they're more secure and comfortable. I just know that when I talk to Canadians, they're generally pretty happy with the system and think we've got a raw deal. Is that so? I think Canada does have a pretty big immigrant population. They're not as well-known. Not to mention the fact that they're colder and darker (that's why I wouldn't move there). They're definitely not as easy to reach as the US for a lot of populations. That last part is a big one-- our biggest immigration points are near our borders (and New York), and for Canada, it's near their airports. Actually, they have a higher percentage of immigrants, based on their populations. I mean, if you think they make a lot of exceptions for immigrants... wouldn't that make immigrants want to move there?
    Eheh, well, it's more that talking about politics stresses me out, so I end up avoiding it. Maybe we should drop it? I dunno if it gets to you, too, sometimes I get the impression it does. I can't even remember how we got back on the subject As for how to explain why you want to be like an emotionless machine... I don't think that's so hard to understand. It's because you feel like you can't feel good, so you'd rather feel nothing, right? You feel like you'd be able to function better without them? Good luck!
    What I mean is, I think there are more people who are well-off and don't work, than who are destitute and don't work. Like, I think it's something like 80% of people who are on welfare are employed? Those who don't are often disabled or can't find a job. I don't get the impression that people are against any form of welfare change; sliding scale seems to be a pretty popular idea. No, progressive doesn't mean good. But for quotas... The idea isn't that every sector should reflect the population perfectly, but to correct inbalances caused by poverty and bias. It's generally supposed to only be a deciding factor if two candidates are equally qualified. Of course, it's flawed, and it doesn't always work that way... And I think it's fair to say that it's unfair on some levels. At the same time, I think it's a case where it's impossible to be fair to everyone, and that, if you have to generalize, it's most important to try to correct injustice. If it's effective, things will balance out, and then it won't be needed anymore. That's the argument, anyway.
    Trump inherited his businesses. If there's risk involved, yeah, it is sink or swim, but when you're that wealthy, it doesn't really matter, because you can just cut your losses and start over. Which is exactly what he did a few times. Hey, I saw in a poll on a liberal news station just the other day that more people blame the Obama administration for the current economic situation than they do Trump. Like I said, I remember the media getting pretty disillusioned with him, especially when it came to Obama care. The general impression I get of people's... general impression of him, is that he promised a lot that he ended up failing to deliver. No, nuclear defense technology isn't that advanced; we have it, but it's not incredibly accurate. There's still the possibility that the government has technology they don't disclose to the general public, but from what we know, no, it's not entirely preventable. Oh, it's not North Korea directly that I think is concerning, it's the possibility of full-scale nuclear war along the lines of WWIII. I don't think it's going to happen, but it's a possibilty.
    What I'm saying is that there's no reason to believe that Millennials are any worse or going to cause any more damage than any other generation. In fact, I think we're doing a lot better in terms of our values. No, doing stupid stuff will still get you killed, and people will totally shun you if you don't do right by them. That's just the way things are; you can't change the laws of physics, or how people react to being betrayed. If we have some 40 year olds acting like children... well, for one, I think there have always been people like that, and two, I think it's those who have been prosperous more than anyone else. When you don't have to worry about stuff and can have whatever you want, that's when you lose sight of your priorities. And that's also when it doesn't matter to you if people shun you, because you don't depend on other people, and besides, you associate with people who share your values, anyway. You don't have to be responsible for your actions, because you can afford not to be. That's been my experience with the people I've known, including my own family. Those who are willing to help you out tend to be those who have struggled themselves. Which isn't to say that they're the only people who will.
    Ack, sorry I've been away so long; I kinda lost track of time... Anyway, it's good you were able to think of some positives! Hope it goes well.

    It's not people on welfare who are like that, but people who have parents who are well off and can take care of them. Reality is harsh if you don't have anything. And in fact, the thing that keeps people dependent on welfare is that it's not a scaled system; once you reach a certain income, it cuts off completely, which limits a lot of people, because they do better on welfare than they would if they worked more. It's not that they can't think for themselves, it's that they're stuck. People in that situation are generally not fans of the system. Nah, I'd actually say that Millennials are a lot more progressive. I mean, they sure care more about social issues more than other recent generations, and are more likely to actually do something about it, like volunteer work. I mean, I think it's better to care about social justice and do something about it, even if you do have those who are too extreme, than it is to let the dominant group continue to enjoy advantages over everyone else. It's not good for the majority, either, because that's where all the backlash and identity issues come from.

    Well, I don't think everyone can be bought, but... probably most people? It depends on who and what. Anyway, some systems are better at preventing it than others, but I think they all tend to degrade over time.

    Canada actually has better quality of life for most people than we do, stuff like better access to healthcare and education. They don't have the same wealth disparity that we do. They're actually more stable, because their general population is better taken care of. That's how I judge countries-- how good is the quality of life for the general population? How sustainable is that quality of life?
    Maybe they're planning to release it if there's some certain arc in the anime by that time, or maybe because of movie 20 and 21?
    Yeah it's only like 10 dollars
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…