Magox

Requiring bureaucrats to justify their actions is anathema. This is all true, and this more than anything is at the core of what is wrong with this situation. Another example, TPS, that regulations can stifle progress. However, it still doesn't take away the fact that the company is taking advantage of this by gouging consumers in an ugly way.

For starters, BREXIT was inspired by a number of factors, one of them being what many people view to be too much Muslim migration to Britain. As I've stated earlier in this thread, fear is a powerful motivation. Demagogic politicians leverage that fear to attempt to force policy and unfortunately, the media is often complicit with those attempts.

I don't consider the Department of Justice from other either side of the aisle's administration to be neutral arbiters. Anyone who keeps up with politics knows it's another extension of the partisan politics of the presidency.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/7264/5-statistics-you-need-know-about-cops-killing-aaron-bandler

I'm sure if there were some well-executed very private polling done, you'd see that racism exists just as much in minority households as they do in white ones. There is blatant and what I consider to be ugly racism and then there is soft racism. The soft racism more than anything is a general lack of understanding of cultures. It's not out of malicious intent just that often people tend to react with fear when they don't understand something. This sort of understanding, despite the current political climate is definitely improving as the years go by. People are being exposed to different cultures and as a result there is generally a higher level of tolerance. Don't get me wrong, these things as most things don't move in a linear fashion, there certainly are hiccups along the way. Look at what is happening in Europe, there has been a huge Muslim migration and there has been some severe backlash, it's not just in Britain or France but throughout the Scandinavian countries as well. To be honest, it's not just because there are bigoted forces working against many Muslims who have moved to Europe, but also because many Muslims refuse to integrate themselves to western culture. Some people in the U.S have similar sentiments towards Latino's as well. A similar argument can be made for the relationship between law enforcement and people of color. If you are a police officer, most likely you were someone who decided to become an officer for honorable intentions. I have little doubt in my mind that most officers didn't join the police officer so that they could contribute to becoming an oppressive force in this world. These guys risk their lives, if you take away the racial component and just look at stats, they enter into some neighborhoods that are higher risk areas. They are naturally more guarded. I'm not making the case that the police practices have been perfect or anything along those lines, just that we also have to understand it from their point of view. Fear is part of the equation. It's a two way street, and at the end of the day these things are moving in the right direction. In regards to the article that you were responding to, that people That's quite a supposition, but lets just say there is some validity to that statement. Then that at least means there is more public awareness and consciousness to answer it in such a manner. The other countries didn't even have the awareness to answer it as such, that's if we take your assumption at face value.

Of course not, but that's not how you measure things. Words such as great or in this case harmony are subjective terms. There truly is no right or wrong answer when attempting to gauge the accuracy of the statement when you bring these words into the equation. That leaves relativity. You measure against everyone else and when it comes to racial tolerance, the U.S is at or near the tops. People are entitled to their emotions and feelings. And I'm entitled to bring factual data to attempt to disprove those emotions.

IF that would be the case, then by and large, they'd be wrong.

I would say by and large, yes. On a relative basis, the U.S is an extremely generous country. There are ways of measuring that and the U.S consistently proves that to be the case. Great is more of a subjective term so that is a little more debatable. --- ipso facto if someone says America (you fill in the blank) in this case is an oppressive country, they aren't saying everyone, but the express intent is an explicit admission that they believe by and large the country generally is an oppressive one. To me this is clear, if you believe that there are elements of truth in his statement, then the more correct response would be to say that Kap misspoke and unfairly overgeneralized by lumping in his fellow citizens of this charge. rather than continuing to go down this rabbit hole and attempting to interpret his intended meaning.

What? He has fallen? No man, don't you get it? It's AMERICUH that has fallen!! Or has America always been a fallen country? Maybe we should ask Kap, he does seem to be an expert on this topic.

Weak response. You've been deflecting, dodging and now adding ad hominems via insinuation when left with no substantive argument to stand on.

That is quite a revision of what really has been happening. The US has been adding regulations, adding new taxes, pumping money into the system via stimulus measures. You've got all that backwards. The policy prescriptions that it appears you are advocating for is more stimulus. I'm not opposed to "stimulus" per se, but this is hardly a sufficient corrective response to economies that are going through major structural headwinds. The only way to combat structural issues are with structural solutions. Pumping money only temporarily alleviates downturns, with the hopes that it helps kick start recoveries. That is not what is needed, if anything it is just a supplement to real substantive solutions. Innovation at the end of the day will be the key to getting things on the right track. Let's just hope that government regulations don't get in the way from that happening.

It's not that difficult to understand. This is what he said What he is saying is that the US, by in large is a country that is oppressive to black people and people of color. That the country itself is unjust and racist. So for those reasons, he believes that he shouldn't have to stand up for the National Anthem, essentially because it disgusts him that he would have to do such a thing. He has every right to do that, that in itself is a demonstrable reason to why the country he loathes is one of the most just and free countries on the planet. Surely anyone who believes that a country is racist and oppressive must loathe it, right? And while he has every right to believe in and say what he believes to be the case, I have the right to believe he is an uninformed asshat.

Haven't you been paying attention? We live in America, of course we do this. It is who we are.

Good find. It appears to me that his struggles have more to do with internal conflict than anything else.

Heretic!!!!

Two points. COINTELPRO was how many generations ago? Also, it wasn't a racial based program as much as it was a counter to organizing forces that they (wrongly believed) was disruptive to the government.

Seems like the basis of Kaep's and his supporters arguments, emotions.

Good point, and the guiding principles and dogma's that the BLM movement are showing this crappy nation that oppresses African Americans and people of color are leading the way to a more just and less racist nation. They lead by example, they exemplify everything that is potentially right with this country. God Bless BLM

No, actually they don't

Because we are not a country that oppresses black people or people of color?

C'mon Bman, he's taking a stand and fighting for the oppressed.

He has the right to express his view, I have the right to believe he is an uninformed moron.

Hey TPS. You are correct, all that North American energy production was helpful. Not to mention I think the commodities run is all but over.

It must have been because of the snow storm.

I am all for free markets, but the pharmaceutical markets aren't free, they are monopolized, rigged and crony capitalistic. Just look at how Obamacare was passed. One of the biggest opponents to Clinton's healthcare plan back in the 90's was Big pharma. The Obama administration learned from that and decided to cut out a deal with Big pharma to gain their support in exchange for the promise of government not putting additional price controls (which they are going to renege) and block some imports from Canada and Europe. It is anything but free markets.