Bobby_2021

The odds of the Chinese invasion succeeding is zero. They are not nearly the superior military you think they are. They are going to make themselves look like a joke in the world's stage. They should be self aware enough to recognise this.

Tel Aviv would have the military and take responsibility to take out the terrorists themselves without any outside intervention. Israel army could not operate like that in Gaza. The local population will not cooperate.

It's not just 130 hostages. The existence of hamas implies there would be thousands more hostages, rapes and kidnappings as much as Israel is willing to tolerate long into the future. At one point, they decide enough is enough. Also those children are the reason hamas even exist. They need to operate in children's hospital so that they wouldn't be taken out. None of this would have happened it they came to fight upfront without being such cowards using children as human shields. Does that justify killing thousands of children? No. But there would be killings anyway. This would put an end to all this. There is no peaceful ending. The tunnel networks should be destroyed and the city infrastructure rebuilt well once again for civilians and some international body setup to protect the rights of Palestinians.

I feel ya. Focusing on finances feels so weird different after being a self help junkie for so long. It's weird in a way normies would never understand. For most people it's to live make money enjoy and die. And they get some sort of first mover advantage when it comes to making money because they are more likely to pounce on it and bang it hard without thinking twice when the opportunity strikes. Self help junkies think and contemplate a lot more which might be a hit to money making muscles. However it's better to get it out of the way before it becomes a roadblock. You are not alone.

Postponed to Feb 8. We have a new pre trial date. The trial may take place this year. Also new charges are incoming, as predicted.

It's in the CIA playbook rule 101. Destabilized governments are easier to control and influence because of their sheer power of the former. You cannot influence a stable government. They would have their own interests and push it over you. I don't see a two state solution where both of them are fully autonomous and independent, working even in theory. Both parties don't want two state solution, least of all, Palestinians. Blinded by self interests in the short term might have setbacks in the long term, as it did for Bin Laden. What if the US never set foot in the middleast? Would that result in even more terrorism/war or civilization flourish as it used to, once? I don't know.

I wonder how much would this work in the US where a lot of college students are foreign nationals. It would end up giving free education to asians and some whites. Scholarship for meritorious students is a good thing. Also a lot of funding is needed for R&D. How much of that would come from a free college system. Would students pay for R&D funding? You can't just imitate all the policies from the Europe just because it works in Europe.

US is following it's own interests. In the other news, sky is blue. US can only depend on Israel to instill any sort of control in this chaotic region of the world, of course if will side with Israel.

This is good take. The solution must come from a powerful country from the outside. US could only get Israel to obey the international law. But the problem is these attacks would continue to happen indefinitely towards the future that one point, you snap and go for the kill. That's where Israel is at right now. Also note that international law or any law or morality for that matter doesn't apply to the other side. They cheer when they fire rockets to Israel and cry when one comes their way. Instead of not firing anything in the first place.

I don't think anyone used the term "bad" for describing Palestinians. Egypt had a moral responsibility and even incentivised by the west to give up the blockade. They didn't because they don't care about the lives of Palestinians. Period. If Egypt can't accept them, Israel shouldn't have any moral responsibility to accept them into their land either. I am just saying Egypt needs same or even more criticism than Israel for holding the blockade. Egypt is in a shit ton of debt and might even collapse due to their poorly planned capital building. And Just because Nazi's use some argument doens't mean anything. Hitler was a vegetarian too. So when you see someone advocating for vegetarian diet would you say "Oh look you are using the same argument as Hitler" What does that mean? It means nothing. Not good not bad. Analyse the situation at hand. There was a serious case for Egypt to do all the things that you were criticising Israel for. Egypt had all the power and even monetary incentive to end this misery. Heck even the shipping via the suez canal has significantly decreased due to bombings in the red sea by houthis. So this lack of marine traffic had plummeted their revenue significantly. So it's fair to say they had a shit load of incentives to cease the blockade. And international aid would have swept in via Egypt to help those starving Palestinians, on top of forgiving all their debt they took up to build their new capital. That's a legit argument that should be addressed directly without drawing parallels to freking Hitler. You are not really making any case but poor attempts to make Israel look like Hitler. --- With that said, I do get why Egypt is holding up the blockade. One is that they have serious pressure from other arab countries to hold up the blockade. The other is that terrorists can destabilize their government making it hard to control them.

Yes.

Egypt could have chosen not to put up the blockade. They could have taken in their fellow arab civilians seeking asylum from war. US government even agreed to forgive their huge debt they took on to build their new capital.

Why would the best therapists lower themselves to the standard of someone with a basic psych degree who don't know what they are doing. But if you want free therapy, then there should be a seperate section that offers that, which would obviously be of lower quality. Also we forget that all the free stuff that we are enjoying right now are NOT the result of your petty politics or your policies. It's all due to capitalism and scientific/technological breakthroughs. So if you want more free stuff, that's where you should be looking. The solution to the problem will not be in the problem plane itself. That's where I am personally looking forward to. Find a breakthrough that would make cancer drugs easy to manufacture. Invest more to research and development of Nuclear fusion and quantum computing. All these may be fads, but if they pay off, we would be much better off that any of your conscious politics. Conscious politics can solve problems that technology has already solved but politicians are lagging behind due to their degeneracy. For eg not forgiving student loans while bailing out big corporations. Not lowering the prices of cheap drugs. You should put your focus on stuff that you can solve within the realm of politics. And leave the rest to tech bros.

This will only result in decreasing the quality of graduates. You need to be a lot more clear in what you mean by free college. I don't want to make STEM education free at all. Maybe some scholarships for students from poorer backgrounds or waving fee for outstanding students inside college are good moves. Also making healthcare free for all across the board may result in you not getting any treatment at all. When conservatives fear monger against these they are not doing to to block your conscious policies. There are serious problems with the implementation. I don't want to make it free at the degradation of it's quality. I want a meritocratic system with incentives for high performers of various kinds. We should not incentivise unproductive behaviours.

I don't think China will attack for the time being. Their military is a paper tiger just like Russia, but now they have to make an amphibious swift attack against a trained enemy. China will make themselves a joke it they attempt this invasion of Taiwan. Leaked US intelligence says that astronomical levels of corruption has drained the infrastructure of their military and it could be a lot worse than what meets the eye. So it is something to be happy about at the moment.

You can't make a move against ISIS in the international court. They are unreasonable. They don't care about what other countries think about them. Only Israel sets that standard for themselves in the middleast.

After thinking a bit about it UBI will be nothing more than throwing money at their problems. For example if you give UBI per month of 1200 usd, then they would simply increase the rent because there are more people who could pay that money and soon exacerbate the problem. We need to get the system corrected first, which starts from affordable housing. This is the bed rock of any good social policy. We need to build more affordable housing. Housing crisis is an everything crisis. And restrict blackrock and other trillion dollar firms from playing in the property market. It's cruel to use places for peaceful families into tools for speculation and profiteering. I remember Leo saying that most people today live like cornered rats hindering any chances of the being conscious citizens. Housing seems to be a good way to keep them grounded. This is not a democrat vs conservative problem. And the solution comes in policies that are neither going to neatly fit into any one category. The solution comes in innovative ways that requires out of the box thinking. The current system doesn't give a pathway to solve the problem that it creates on it's own. It's not that advanced. You need to come up with a solution and promote it regardless. One such example is using nuclear energy to solve the climate crisis. Not many people think about it and liberal hate it while conservatives love it. So the solution can piss off either side depending on the scenario. Anyways that's is not of our concern. You need to nail down the policies so simplistically and they should be fairly easy to implement. I don't think UBI will work in this rotten system. Removing corporation from buying up properties as investments is a good move. In fact some progress has been made in this realm. This is also an increasingly blue states problem. Forgive the student debt. The tution costs has been jacked up recklessly and forced upon kids who weren't even old enough to know what they were getting into.

@Devin I understand your concern but we actually have the opposite problem. The reason for Nuclear energy projects taking so long is because of the over stringent standards, precautions and safety measures you have in place. Cutting costs is the last thing that you can possibly do. Because the government is too scared of messing it up that it hurts the development. Lax authorities are not the problem. The problems is government trying too hard to make it safe. We should fasten up the paperwork and proceedings. People building this knows what they were doing. Even without these standards the nuclear disasters were negligible in numbers. The standards for setting up the plants are hard to cut costs on.

You should push policies that are easier to administer. Tax the rich is not easy to administer to reduce inequality. The best thing you can do it is to push for UBI atleast for bottom 80% of the people. UBI is fairly easy to get by. Affordable housing is another important thing but it's incredibly difficult to come by.

I wonder how of this can be solved with simply uploading lectures to the internet. This wouldn't work for medicine or law, but they probably make enough to pay off their loans. But for other fields similar to tech all of that can be learned from the internet for free. I think we need to innovate more to find ways to make education accessible yo everyone. For doing practical stuff, you need to set up labs and infrastructure for doing practice. This should really be the only function of college. Doing research, getting society forward and doing lab work. Not teaching theory. People should lean that on their own. This should bring down the costs.

Modern reactors have passive cooling features without manual intervention. It's completely automated unlike the reactors built in the 60s. So basically what happens is that when power gets turned off, and/or temperature of the liquid gets out of control there is a plug that melts automatically and the fluid drains into a emergency dump tanks to cool. (Almost like the electrical fuse that melts in high temperatures.) There is no possibility of leakage nor having generator which are still vulnerable to failure and needs manual intervention. Reactor design can compensate for all of these, completely automatically. You can criticize them for not having generators and if they did, for not using it when they needed it. But we don't even need that in modern reactors. There is nothing to be scared of. Yes because that's the example of the worst that can happen in the worst possible scenarios, that too in the technology of the 70s and all that happened was a some radio active fuel leaked. Even that is mitigated for in current designs that you really couldn't do any better. Even with all this knowledge if you are still fear mongering against Nuclear energy, then you are effectively causing climate change.

Universal college is not necessary although it's pretty good. I don't think it's needed. People who want to learn things will learn on their own in the age of interest. We need to set up a lot of labs & infrastructure for building and practice. It's okay even it's partially govt subsidised. Free health care yes. But you should not have to wait 5 days to see to see a doctor. I think we need a combination of both. For mission critical injuries and medical care we need paid ones and free is for other ailments. Health care delayed is health care denied. And UBI will also be nice. These are really the only solutions we have at the moment.

It has been mitigated now. There are automatic passive cooling systems that switch off in the event of earthquakes. The reactor was made in the freking 60s and sanctioned in the 70s so the tech was not advanced engineering enough to take account of disasters. Even Japan has been building more reactors even now. If they are so unsafe and they had their lessons they should have stopped building it but they only accelerated it. Even if a Tsunami/Quake happened in a wind farm or solar power plant, that would still kill people. But you would attribute that to the plant itself. It was a natural disaster. Also, realize that what you saw was not a "Nuclear Explosion". It's just some mixture of hydrogen gas filled with other gas that escaped that exploded. People expected a lot worse to happen which didn't even with an ancient nuclear reactor that too in a 9 magnitude earth quake with Tsunami combined. Modern nuclear reactors don't have that problem at all. They are remarkably safe. Nothing of the sorts of Chernobyl happened in the worst possible circumstances. That goes on to show how safe they are. Which is why they are building even more. Even the Fukushima reactor was safe enough that no one was directly killed from it. All of this is not to mention that nuclear waste disposal is so spectacularly easy. It can be done on site deep underground. It's too safe and too clean.

Fukushima is a testament for how safe the nuclear reactors are even for those from 1970s. There is no case for them exploding like bombs or like Chernobyl but merely a leakage of radioactive waste that too in 9.0 earthquake and Tsunami combined. Most places on the earth do not have this Problem. It all boils down to how much you want to solve climate change and the length you go to deny the obvious solution that is lying dead in your face.

Go check the stats. https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/ Although green energy deaths are minimal, it will start to get a lot higher as the overhead of scaling comes into picture. It's in the same range as nuclear, although singular events have caused the mammoth share for the deaths of nuclear energy. It's not even representative of the current state of nuclear energy technology which has grown manifold. All deaths from Nuclear energy has to do with ancient technology which is meaningless in this day and age and you keep citing them to keep them in fear.