| |
Discussion: U.S. Election 2016
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 2/5/2014
Posts: 1,808
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
Thousands of people graduate from the Ivy's every year. Doesn't qualify them to be President. I don't know what you're talking about with "judging people". I love Michelle and Ivanka. Think they're both good at what they do but the reality is they are not fit to be President. Again, they have absolutely no experience and we know zero about their policies. So I highly doubt we'd be lucky to have Michelle run. I do hate Bernie, as he is not a smart man and much too big for his britches, but that's neither here nor there. I did not support Barack in 2008 and I don't think you need to have all of the answers. However, you do need to have SOME type of relevant qualifications. Hillary is unique in that she has a wealth of qualifications, intellect and experience in several different sections of Government.
|
First off, she didn't graduate from an Ivy. She graduated from The Ivies aka the most prestigious and competitive ones.
There's a difference between Brown/Cornell, and the Holy Trinity of Harvard/Princeton/Yale boo boo.
Second of all, she's worked for the Chicago government as well for non profits. She's also worked for University of Chicago Hospital aka one of the best hospitals in the country as Director of Community outreach.
She has more than enough of an accomplished resume. Actually kind of reminds me of another female politician's credentials (Hint: Hillegend).
No one knew what Hillary's policies or platform would be when she ran for Senate. They had a baseline based on her work as a First Lady, but she'd never run for elected political office either.
Michelle Obama is more than qualified enough to run for Senate or the House.
Anyway, this discussion is moot because Mama hates political office and has shown no interest in running anyway.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 14,942
|
Quote:
Originally posted by that G.U.Y.
This is literally what the Nazis proposed and then it turned into Eugenics  |
I'm clearly not a Nazi.  I want stupid people, of ALL races, to not be able to breed.  I want people on welfare to not have a brood of freaking children whom they can't take care of.
Yeah, it may seem offensive to some, but so what. I see way to many chicks getting knocked up for the hell of it, just so they can run to the welfare office or have a kid to claim on their income tax. Some stupid people are abusing the system just to turn around and complain about it.
I would not be opposed the Kingsmen narrative of population control though. We must do what we must!
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/28/2008
Posts: 4,530
|
@6_INCH_HEELS I dont necessarily disagree with your point tbh, I am just upset at china being used as an example of too much procreation when it is literally the country that limits procreation
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 14,942
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mickey
I am not sure if you are serious, but overpopulation in chinese cities I think you are referring to has a lot more to do with rural to urban migration than people ****ing.
Here is a wikipedia article on the phenomenon: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_in_China |
I'm partially joking. I took a class this past Spring semester where I had to do a study of the world's population parameters. China stuck out to me. I also watched a show about the most dangerous places to live, and Beijing being on the list was a total surprise to me. I didn't do any more research after, but I did put two and two together and decided that an overcrowded population in the cities contributed greatly to the alarmingly dangerous pollution hazards found in most Chinese cities studied.
Add that to the implementation of the 2 child per house hold limit, thanks for telling me that, one would only figure that they are trying to control the ever increasing population country-wide. Needless to say, this same problem is prevalent in countries all over the world. The elderly are living longer and more children are being born. It is a substantial problem.
And like my professor states, I'll take a link from hell over a link from Wikipedia.
http://www.prb.org/Publications/Arti...andHealth.aspx
Still, stupid people shouldn't be able to reproduce. This, I'm not joking about.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/16/2011
Posts: 50,981
|
Quote:
Originally posted by that G.U.Y.
This is literally what the Nazis proposed and then it turned into Eugenics |
The Nazis took Eugenics from America, where it was already being used on the poor and people of color. That was the point that I was trying to make on the previous page. America has already been there in regards to restrictive breeding, and we're not going back.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 14,942
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mickey
@6_INCH_HEELS I dont necessarily disagree with your point tbh, I am just upset at china being used as an example of too much procreation when it is literally the country that limits procreation
|
Its fine. I apologize if I offended you. I just think China is a great example to use when discussing over-population. I was also mostly joking, hence my "they're ****ing like wild boars". I actually think its endearing and would love to visit the country one day. As a mentioned, I was shocked learning that people in Beijing wear masks when out running errands and what not.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 2/5/2014
Posts: 1,808
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
Of course there are problems that the middle class face. But I do think everyone has it in them to succeed if they truly want too. And of course, it's about starting early. If you make poor decisions for your entire adult life and then find yourself struggling to get by at 42, of course it'll be harder. As for college (and work in general, really), I'm a pound the pavement kind of girl. If you have at least a bacherlors, you can find SOME piece of employment. It may not be perfect, but you work your way up. If company A doesn't hire you, apply to company B. And then C, D, E, F, G. And if that means you have to apply to every company in your field, DO IT. |
Girl, what?
You're welcome to your opinions but I hope you know that none of this is supported by economists or fact checkers at all.
The value of a Bachelors degree has declined immensely. Young people are finding it increasingly difficult to get hired with one. Most have had to go back to Graduate School to increase their employability.
I'm a chemical engineer. I have one of the most employable degrees out there. I went to a "top tier" school and I did well in school and I'm still struggling to get a job. If I'm struggling, as a white upper middle class person, how do you think someone without my connections and privilege is doing?
This idea that you can just "get" a job is ridiculous. Not to mention that student debt is out of control, and wages have stagnated so even if you do get a job, chances are you'll be desperately trying to climb out of debt for at least a decade.
You've criticized people in this thread for ill informed, narrow minded arguments. I suggest you heed your own critique, and educate yourself before you make wildly inaccurate statements like this again.
They're incredible ignorant.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/17/2013
Posts: 11,464
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Lebanese Dude
The Trump supporter posts in the last few pages are hilariously desperate.
Ah their tears sustain me.
|
This tbh 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 14,942
|
LOL @ poor people simply needing to "work harder". I know my restrictive breeding ideals are crazy, but at least I'm not an elitist.
It's not enough to simply work harder. There are socio-economic constructs that prevent even the hardest of working people from being able to live off of minimum wage, yet alone support a family. How many people get good jobs coming straight out of college? Then there's student debt, taxes, and healthcare needs. Fix the people, fix the economy.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 31,020
|
Quote:
Originally posted by 6_INCH_HEELS
LOL @ poor people simply needing to "work harder". I know my restrictive breeding ideals are crazy, but at least I'm not an elitist.
It's not enough to simply work harder. There are socio-economic constructs that prevent even the hardest of working people from being able to live off of minimum wage, yet alone support a family. How many people get good jobs coming straight out of college? Then there's student debt, taxes, and healthcare needs. Fix the people, fix the economy. |
yeah saying 'work harder' to poor people is super ignorant 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/28/2008
Posts: 4,530
|
Quote:
Originally posted by 6_INCH_HEELS
I'm partially joking. I took a class this past Spring semester where I had to do a study of the world's population parameters. China stuck out to me. I also watched a show about the most dangerous places to live, and Beijing being on the list was a total surprise to me. I didn't do any more research after, but I did put two and two together and decided that an overcrowded population in the cities contributed greatly to the alarmingly dangerous pollution hazards found in most Chinese cities studied.
Add that to the implementation of the 2 child per house hold limit, thanks for telling me that, one would only figure that they are trying to control the ever increasing population country-wide. Needless to say, this same problem is prevalent in countries all over the world. The elderly are living longer and more children are being born. It is a substantial problem.
And like my professor states, I'll take a link from hell over a link from Wikipedia.
http://www.prb.org/Publications/Arti...andHealth.aspx
Still, stupid people shouldn't be able to reproduce. This, I'm not joking about. |
 Your linked article is making the point that the people of China should have more kids? Im not completely sure what the point you are trying to make is... Anyways there are academic papers on the rural-urban migration of China too, its a pretty hot topic, I linked the wikipedia article because it is easily accessible and gives a convenient summary. That is a perfectly reasonable thing to do...
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 14,321
|
Mess at Hillary still having 538 impact on deeply red states and double mess at Georgia having more of a possibility of turning blue than Arizona 52% vs 49.5%
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 14,942
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mickey
Your linked article is making the point that the people of China should have more kids? Im not completely sure what the point you are trying to make is... Anyways there are academic papers on the rural-urban migration of China too, its a pretty hot topic, I linked the wikipedia article because it is easily accessible and gives a convenient summary. That is a perfectly reasonable thing to do... |
Umm, no its not. It's actually addressing the numbering amount of elderly people attributed to its population boost before implementing the one child policy and what they're going to do, health wise, to assist the aging.
Quote:
|
But while China is not prepared to meet the health needs of its growing elderly population, its government has recognized these challenges and is starting to develop a comprehensive response. As a first step, Chinese health officials have implemented various chronic-disease prevention programs at the national level. They are also starting to set up long-term care delivery systems for the elderly. But while China's economy continues to grow rapidly, whether it will be able to allocate enough income to meet these rising health care costs remains as a major concern.
|
No where does it allude to them saying they need to up reproduction to add to the increasingly large elderly population. The article is saying they're at an impasse. The elderly are not dying as much as they should be. It sounds terrible, but yeah. Life expectancy goes up, birth rates go down.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/28/2008
Posts: 4,530
|
Quote:
Originally posted by 6_INCH_HEELS
Umm, no its not. It's actually addressing the numbering amount of elderly people attributed to its population boost before implementing the one child policy and what they're going to do, health wise, to assist the aging.
No where does it allude to them saying they need to up reproduction to add to the increasingly large elderly population. The article is saying they're at an impasse. The elderly are not dying as much as they should be. It sounds terrible, but yeah. Life expectancy goes up, birth rates go down.
|
I was wrong to say that the article is suggesting that China have more children to correct the problem, but they do say something about how China should have had more children. The article is about how limiting the number of children was a cause of this outcome that there are now more elderly than there are children to take care of them. This is apparent from the 4-2-1 discussion and is also mentioned in the abstract, where they talk about the success of the one child policy and how there are now too few children. So limiting population growth is a source of the problem here
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 14,942
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mickey
I was wrong to say that the article is suggesting that China have more children to correct the problem, but they do say something about how China should have had more children. The article is about how limiting the number of children was a cause of this outcome that there are now more elderly than there are children to take care of them. This is apparent from the 4-2-1 discussion and is also mentioned in the abstract, where they talk about the success of the one child policy and how there are now too few children. So limiting population growth is a source of the problem here
|
Exactly my point. Life expectancy has consistently increased amid the birth rate decreasing. Thanks technology. But they can't advocate for trying to increase the population again at this juncture because they would run into the same set of issues. It's going to be hard for them to mitigate a balance between the two without one rising more than the other or both rising.
No matter, the damage is done, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/28/2008
Posts: 4,530
|
Quote:
Originally posted by 6_INCH_HEELS
Exactly my point. Life expectancy has consistently increased amid the birth rate decreasing. Thanks technology. But they can't advocate for trying to increase the population again at this juncture because they would run into the same set of issues. It's going to be hard for them to mitigate a balance between the two without one rising more than the other or both rising.
No matter, the damage is done, IMO.
|
Ok so we agree that the article is saying that the aging problem in China is due in part to limiting the population. But I thought your main point is that there should be population restrictions? I dont see the connection, because it seems to me that the article presents a negative consequence of population restriction.
(Also, China is actually trying to increase the population again... They relaxed their one child policy to a two child policy just this past year to address this exact issue)
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/1/2012
Posts: 15,668
|
Quote:
Originally posted by King Maxx
You see THIS IS TROLLING. One you do know if Hillary is elected then she appoints the 5th liberal judge right? This isn't my hypothesis. This is a fact that scares the hell out of every Republican.
And I know Obama. He wouldn't do that, and has no plan to be SCOTUS. And no Congress or American electorate would stand for that in the 21st century. It's unethical, and I'm ashamed you think that our current president would do something borderline illegal.
|
In what world is that illegal? You even stated that there's a precedent (Taft) 
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/1/2012
Posts: 15,668
|
Johnson IS a major candidate whether y'all like it or not. He's inching towards the debate stage and is polling above 10% in many polls. He will be a major factor of this election and can swing it either way depending on where his support mainly comes from in the end. He IS a major candidate and you simply can't argue against it.... Any candidate who will have a massive effect on the election is major in my book.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/6/2014
Posts: 19,122
|
Hillary wrote a op-ed for Utah newspapers pitching to Mormons  she's coming for those red states. What's wrong with being Confident
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/1/2012
Posts: 15,668
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LuLuDrops
Mess at Hillary still having 538 impact on deeply red states and double mess at Georgia having more of a possibility of turning blue than Arizona 52% vs 49.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
