Of course, the speakers represent the Democrat Progressive viewpoint toward government
Ah, I see you didn't listen at all, but think you did and then think you're clever. It's kind of undermining the exact point of the very podcast, which talks about people like you who act like they know it all, when they really don't.
This current issue is about a group that does not assimilate. Yes, some do. But a vast amount do not. You are talking about a group that holds extremely backward and intolerant views on women and gays. A group in which some of the younger members can be and have been radicalized fairly easily.
This is a load of absolute bullshit. The same thing has been said about EVERY major wave of immigration, including my own relatives. What you're talking about is revisionist history. After immigrants do assimilate (and they almost always do by the 2nd generation) peopel forget about how they insisted that they did not.
Each new wave of immigrants tend to cluster in areas with people from where they came from -- which totally makes sense. If you were travelling to a brand new place with a different language/culture/foods, wouldn't you seek out at least some people who you were more comfortable with?
There were complaints in the 19th century about Chinese and Irish immigrants and the fact that they wouldn't assimilate. I mean there was a whole freaking political party dedicated to the fact that the Irish were a problem because they wouldn't assimilate (research it...).
Ditto for Jewish and Italian immigrants in the early 20th century, followed by Latin American immigrants. And today it's still being used against all kinds of immigrants.
Actually talking about the topic at hand, Uber's Senior VP for Policy and Strategy is David Plouffe, Obama's 2008 campaign manager. It's likely that he's responsible for making the policy call on disabling surge pricing and it's highly unlikely that he did so to stop the demonstrations.
Um. I'll just say that's not Plouffe's job at all. He's basically focused on lobbying. He's not making the call on when to drop or leave surge pricing.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's take the emotion out of it...
Ah, so 1 country is ok, its just a little bigoted. But 7 is too many. Is 3 ok?
Except, again, what Obama did with that one country is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT than what Trump did with the 7 countries. One involved revamping the review process of a specific group of refugees -- no ban, no block. The other involved a blanket ban that was so broad it covered green card holders, people who already had been through "extreme vetting" and were on their way to the country, those who were dual citizens or citizens of allies who just happened to have been born in a blocked country... and more.
To say they're the same, or that the only difference is the number of countries suggests someone being willfully ignorant.
Stop playing for your team and start playing for humanity.
I have a nephew in the Border Patrol at Nogales, AZ. I have seen first-hand the path of illegals: discarded trash of every sort littering the landscape. So first comes the illegal entry into the country, then the trashing of it as you pass through. If that isn't enough, then find someplace that will give you food and shelter and probably money as well. And you didn't have to do one damn thing to earn it. Well, gee........isn't that what criminals do? They steal from others and give nothing back except hurt.
Ah, my favorite type of nonsense argument. It's the "I have a semi-distant relative who saw a thing" anecdote, which I now take to be a perfect example of what the broader reality is, even when the data and facts disagree with me.
Anyway, if you're going to use Mexicans coming across the border as your argument, you do realize that net migration between Mexico and the US has been negative the past few years (as in, more people are going back to Mexico than coming to the US). But who cares about that, your nephew saw some litter and you're positive it's because Mexicans are stealing from US taxpayers.
Hilarious article from Mike Masnick- a guy that doesn't even use Netflix.
I don't use Netflix because I don't watch very much TV, so it's not worth it to me. At some point in the future I fully expect to subscribe though. When I have more time.
We all know what he uses, don't we? ;>
I am curious what you think I use. I'm guessing you think I'm pirating stuff, but that's not even close to true. I've said it before and I'll say it again: I've never downloaded unauthorized music or movies from the internet. I've taken some DVDs out of the library lately. And also rented something from FandangoNow. But that's basically been the extent of my media diet. Again, the issue is one of time, mainly.
Why do you insist on living in the stone age, Mike?
Well, you know, if I didn't have to spend so much time correcting trolls who make stupid assumptions, perhaps I'd have more time to watch shows on Netflix or something.
Surge-pricing is an illegal practice equivalent to price-gouging. No amount of deflection and propaganda will cover the stench coming out of uber.
Well, first off, you're wrong. Price gouging has very specific characteristics and surge pricing doesn't match them. Second, there are strong, and compelling, arguments that price gouging laws are actually dangerous and do much more harm than good.
But, most importantly, if that's your argument, shouldn't you be happy beyond all belief that Uber DROPPED its surge pricing for this situation?
Or are you just a kneejerk "uberevil" kind of person?
No non citizen has a right to enter a country and every government has a duty to control its own borders. And every country (not just Trump's America) does just that.
I don't support this order either, but don't be absurd. It's not a radical departure from past behavior. It is a temporary halt to some immigration while processes are revamped.
You're correct, that no one has a right to enter a country -- but all of the people being turned away DID have that right, because they ALREADY HAD visas or green cards or other permanent resident status. And this is NOT about controlling the borders, because there was nothing in this order targeting "out of control" borders.
And, sure, some other countries may have idiotic policies like this, but if that's your metric, you're really setting a low bar for the US.
And, finally, yes, if you were even remotely familiar with the history of immigratin policy you would recognize that this is a massive and very radical departure from past behavior -- with every indication that it is not temporary, and no "processes" are being revamped.
Re: Re: Re: Since this is now a political news website
I clearly recognize the left lean of TD
And as we've told you, that's not true. CNN once refered to us as a "right wing" site. A copyright maximalist has called me a socialist.
We're not right wing/left wing, because that's a made up fantasy that lets idiots claim "my team/your team." We tend to be big believers in innovation and whatever will most help innovation and the public dissemination of the benefits of that innovation. That does not fit neatly with stupid "left wing/right wing" memes. I disagree, heavily, with plenty of Democrats who seek to put in place onerous regulations on technology that harms innovation. And I disagree, heavily, with those on the right wing that look to interfere with civil liberties or who embrace greater surveillance.
But you seem to use "left wing" as an explanation for why we sometimes disagree with your view of the world. That's silly.
We're not left wing or right wing. We don't fall anywhere along the traditional spectrum, and attempts to classify us along that spectrum tend to only reflect poorly on those who wish to classify us.
Maybe he's talking about the enforcement that hadn't been going on. Like arresting protesters that turn into rioters. There have even been reports that cops stopped policing high crime/majority black areas, for fear of public backlash. And crime went up.
"There have been reports." Yes, and all of those have been debunked by actual data:
*If do they do leak anything via Wikileaks, they better use a VPN to do so. Wikileaks does use a database backend that the Feds can break into to get the metadata and trace down any leaker.
I do believe that is how they Bradley/Chelsea Manning, in a way where the fourth amendment would not get in the way. They could break into the MySQL database backend, and get the data they needed, and Wikileaks would never know the Feds were there, because MySQL keeps no logs.*
FWIW, Manning was caught because she reached out to Adrian Lamo, thinking Lamo would be a kindred spirit. But Lamo immediately went to the feds and handed over Manning. https://www.wired.com/2010/06/leak/