People generally develop an immunition from the virus for some months after they recover from one attack. But this covid-19 comes again on short interval of time. If you want to live, get a stock of food and go on a hideout.
Doubt that is necessary. It's March, this can't go on past May. |
|
|
|
Always...always sniff very carefully at the FREE CHEESE! |
|
|
|
I've been visiting Somerset in the van for a few days, and last night I stayed in a picnic area and truck stop. This morning I went into the cafe for an early morning coffee, and I was offered a bottle of hand sanitiser, and asked to use some. This is obviously as a result of the Coron Virus appearing in the UK. I had no problem with complying, but I'm not sure how useful it is. Far more of a problem could be the communal use of the 'loos in my opinion.
The hand sanitizer is a protective measure, more effective than masks. I read a meme last night,mask can save us from corona virus but 90% of masks were produced from China.  To OP, using hand sanitiser helps you really because it can wipe off virus if it presented on your hands then you will be less likely affected. But corona is turning into more disastrous than everyone thought. The active ingredient in hand sanitizer is Alcohol. Alcohol in abut 70% concentration is highly effective in destroying virus. |
|
|
|
I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that Bidens chances at winning the nomination just shot up. Na, probably just a coincidence. Senate Republicans plan first subpoena in Burisma, Biden probe"If approved, Johnson’s move would mark the first subpoena Senate Republicans have issued in their probe into Biden and Burisma.""Telizhenko is a 29-year-old Ukrainian national who has fueled the widely debunked theory embraced by Trump that Ukraine assisted former secretary of state Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election with help from the Democratic National Committee."Of course, remember its not actually a subpoena until we can see a copy of the actual subpoena. Until then, its just a baseless witch hunt. The guy they're subpoenaing is a Ukrainian national/Trump super fan. Pretty sure that's a subpoena that can not be enforced, and he'd be happy to come in with a simple phone call. Check out this guys twitter feed: https://twitter.com/AndriyUkraineTeFor a foerign National he sure seems to love Fox News/Oann and literally every single word Trump sayas. What, he likes Trump? And Fox News? Why, that obviously immediately discredits him.  |
|
|
|
Trump seems to have played the outsider card to get in to the Whitehouse but it is highly questionable if he ever was really an outsider. Now all that matters for all parties is what happens in November. I think it will be very difficult to dislodge him because once again the popular vote will probably go with the Democrat candidate but what will happen to the college vote? How many of those will the Democrats be able win? If we're going to talk about what Trump was before the election, I think it's fair to say that he was an outsider. As he truly was. The RNC did try to stop him from getting the nomination, and the Never Trump movement was prominent, but at the end of the day he galavanized enough primary support and free air time to win. He also convinced the party that he'd be able to win in November -- and he did. Trump was an outsider then, but after 4 years in the WH I don't think he can run on that outsider card anymore. He's literally not an outsider, he's the President of the United States. He's the biggest insider. Okay, but still an "outsider" from the view of the Swamp-Creatures. Or are they, now the Outsiders? |
|
|
|
Yes there were lots of things going on during that time, it was a different era and racism was much more overt than it is today across the globe. Having said all that what would be the aim of the California state assembly now? Just an apology and move forward or do you think there is another deeper agenda for making the apology now? (I use the word agenda with neither positive or negative connotations). Looking into it further, I think you are right on some points and so am I. The approximate 1/3 of the group who were actually Japanese citizens - I do not see what could have been done with them except intern them. For the others, it does appear CA had state - level racist policies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_Japanese_AmericansOf 127,000 Japanese Americans living in the continental United States at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, 112,000 resided on the West Coast.[9] About 80,000 were Nisei (literal translation: "second generation"; American-born Japanese with U.S. citizenship) and Sansei ("third generation"; the children of Nisei). The rest were Issei ("first generation") immigrants born in Japan who were ineligible for U.S. citizenship under U.S. law.[10] Japanese Americans were incarcerated based on local population concentrations and regional politics. More than 112,000 Japanese Americans living on the West Coast were forced into interior camps. However, in Hawaii, where 150,000-plus Japanese Americans composed over one-third of the population, only 1,200 to 1,800 were also interned.[11] The internment is considered to have resulted more from racism than from any security risk posed by Japanese Americans.[12][13] California defined anyone with 1/16th or more Japanese lineage as sufficient to be interned.[14] Colonel Karl Bendetsen, the architect behind the program, went so far as saying anyone with "one drop of Japanese blood" qualified.[15] Absolutely it's a "deeper agenda." Part of the new "woke left" is an attempt to create the appearances of their having a moral-ethical voice that dictates when people should do things and when they should say things. That's simply an attempt to gain power over others. Part of this is dictating when one group should apologize to another. In this context, facts and truth are in the way, and go out the window. For example, take the argument articulated by Cnut in this thread. He did not tell you that 1/3 of those put in the camps were Japanese citizens, did he? Most of the others were children of the Japanese citizens. If there was an actual, serious effort to "make things right" what it would consist of would be to give Asians a fair chance in university admissions – There they are still being discriminated against in favor of essentially, racial quotas; eg preference given to blacks with lower test scores, and whites from privileged backgrounds. Oddly it's the same people who try to tell you who needs to apologize to who, and what pronouns you and I should use, that are complicit in the prejudice in college admissions against Asians. |
|
|
|
...Also @Spendulus do you believe that there’s a chance that Trump may grant him a pardon for his acts, and drop all the cases against him in my opinion I feel there’s a 50 - 50 chance of that happening but what do you think?.
Yes but it has to be quietly done. Maybe at the end of his 2nd term, or in a group of pardons. No matter the real facts about Assange he is polarizing and disruptive. But nobody can look at what's happened to him and say it's just fine. |
|
|
|
While some of them might disagree with the results due to their political affiliations, just know that the researchers involved with this project are the some of the most qualified, reputable, and consistent scientists on our side.
Here is what Dr. Masyde Reisad had to say when it came to political affiliation:
"Over multiple weeks the research team has analyzed the projected outcome of various political choices. What we have discovered is that when the individuals in the study aligned themselves with our partisan option, we found a high degree of success in the establishment of positive policies. In fact, we found that as the rate of partisanship approaches 1, so too does the percentage of valuable, unbiased policies!
Strangely, there appears to be a linear relationship between partisanship and political success."
The facts are clear, people. Stop staying on the wrong side of history. For each person that joins the true, logical political party, we are one step closer to a perfect world.
Whoever "THEM" is? No such doc in google, No link. |
|
|
|
....
Exactly. It's absurd and racist to suggest that superficial differences such as skin colour are relevant....
There are numerous genetic differences between africans and various whites, to suggest "racism" in the context of a medically oriented discussion is a level of profound ignorance. when a flu has a 99.8% survival rate for a 21yo for any race, but then dont mention that part. but instead pick up on the fact that he is not asian as the only sole reason for survival. like it is the colour of skin that makes it special this is a massive issue of misinformation and trying to set up a narrative based on skin colour. thus racial based Okay, got it. Outright wrong facts, that would mean actual discussion of racial medical differences is impossible. |
|
|
|
I've been visiting Somerset in the van for a few days, and last night I stayed in a picnic area and truck stop. This morning I went into the cafe for an early morning coffee, and I was offered a bottle of hand sanitiser, and asked to use some. This is obviously as a result of the Coron Virus appearing in the UK. I had no problem with complying, but I'm not sure how useful it is. Far more of a problem could be the communal use of the 'loos in my opinion.
The hand sanitizer is a protective measure, more effective than masks. |
|
|
|
I'm not sure what else to say...
copy and paste then  I know that you can't articulate anything. pro tip: follow the money. who profited? how were the profits "socialized"? Yes, I did copy and paste, just to verify that you cannot articulate a logical argument. It's nothing to me, by the way. I don't care if you consider the German NAZI party socialists or not. you pasted a text about supply and demand, yea I'm sure that price control goes against the principles of liberalism. But call this socialism is a big leap without any basis. I asked you about the profits, where did they go? I'm articulating dude. put your neurons to work. Chip and Dale, hello? "Liberals" have countless real world examples of price control. There was an old today-obsolete concept of liberalism, which sure, maybe that could be argued there, but I doubt it. Why should I care how or if profits were socialized? Actual practice of socialism typically shows the highest echelons of government keep the vast majority of profits, so clearly, the "socialization of profits" cannot be a determination of whether a society is socialistic. It's common understanding among those who have studied the Third Reich, Mises description of the minute detailed control of industry by the state's officials is accurate. |
|
|
|
.....
So are you implicitly siding with the insiders? The people who are willing to discredit the United States democratic system and disenfranchise millions of young people?
Yes, exactly. But I am not a Democrat, I am looking at their antics as an outsider. There is considerable corruption at the local and state level, more in some states than others. Then there are the superdelegates and their influence on the national convention. It is true a lot of people including on this forum believe that the Democratic primary is a democratic process. I do not. The same was sort of right out in the open in 2016 with the Republican decision making process. |
|
|
|
I'm not sure what else to say...
copy and paste then I know that you can't articulate anything. pro tip: follow the money. who profited? how were the profits "socialized"? Yes, I did copy and paste, just to verify that you cannot articulate a logical argument. It's nothing to me, by the way. I don't care if you consider the German NAZI party socialists or not. |
|
|
|
....
The Nazi party campaigned on socialist ideas (and lost), and labeled themselves socialists, but as soon as they assumed power Hitler immediately had the senior officials of every opposition political party murdered along with their families and other supporters.
Then he invaded a bunch of countries and forced every man to either fight for him or have their family murdered.
He murdered almost 10 million people just because they were Jewish, gay, disabled or suspected of criticizing the Nazi party.
Using the Nazi party as an example of why someone shouldn't vote for Bernie is pretty silly unless you believe Bernie has some secret agenda to become a dictator.
But isn't that the very point that people continue to warn about, as a fundamental flaw in the theory of socialism? "as soon as they assumed power " ... they can do anything they want... So why, exactly, should you believe Bernie on anything? |
|
|
|
The state assembly of California maybe sees things differently to you. They believe they implemented the Roosevelt policy when it was presented rather than take stand against it therefore were complicit. That is one reason why they probably apologised. Anti-Japanese sentiment was very high in those days so we do not know which sort of pressure the state of California was under and from which angles - but if they are complicit it stands to reason they should apologise. The state of California was already discriminating against the Japanese as far back as 1913 when they passed the Alien Land Law to stop them buying farmland and 7 years later in 1920 they passed a law to stop anybody with Japanese ancestry from buying farmland so maybe they were not under pressure from any political angle and instead were happy to implement their racist policies before, during and after the second world war and if that is the case then again an apology from them to their victims is probably something they wanted to do: https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10732322-181/california-apologizes-for-japanese-american One solid reason why the state assembly shouldn't apologize is they were not responsible for the decisions, or the implementations of those prison camps. The federal government was. Looking into it further, I think you are right on some points and so am I. The approximate 1/3 of the group who were actually Japanese citizens - I do not see what could have been done with them except intern them. For the others, it does appear CA had state - level racist policies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_Japanese_AmericansOf 127,000 Japanese Americans living in the continental United States at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, 112,000 resided on the West Coast.[9] About 80,000 were Nisei (literal translation: "second generation"; American-born Japanese with U.S. citizenship) and Sansei ("third generation"; the children of Nisei). The rest were Issei ("first generation") immigrants born in Japan who were ineligible for U.S. citizenship under U.S. law.[10] Japanese Americans were incarcerated based on local population concentrations and regional politics. More than 112,000 Japanese Americans living on the West Coast were forced into interior camps. However, in Hawaii, where 150,000-plus Japanese Americans composed over one-third of the population, only 1,200 to 1,800 were also interned.[11] The internment is considered to have resulted more from racism than from any security risk posed by Japanese Americans.[12][13] California defined anyone with 1/16th or more Japanese lineage as sufficient to be interned.[14] Colonel Karl Bendetsen, the architect behind the program, went so far as saying anyone with "one drop of Japanese blood" qualified.[15] |
|
|
|
there are differen't types of islamic extremists, and based on their oppinion you can split them into a left and a right wing.
For me I think having them grouped according to their disposition or stand would make the situation way worse because there will innocent that will be caught in the crossfire of religion segregation, if only these people understand the true message of Qur'an then there will be no more problem. If only there is a presence of love for human race then maybe they will open their minds that they can't force their beliefs to others and that their way of preaching their religion is wrong. I know that religion is a very touchy and I myself is not that religious person so I am not that good with these subjects but it makes me interested in the way they practice. Generally, the words "left and right " have one meaning in the USA, and another meaning across the broader world. I'm of the opinion they do not well fit the variations of Islam and Islamic extremism. |
|
|
|
No, you needed to continue reading that section. That matter was fully explained. You may not agree with it, of course.
"rulers of a socialist state must live in terror of the people." The whole thing is trashy, nonsense collection. but may work well for the illiterate, I see. He's talking about the totalitarian state and pointing THIS IS SOCIALISM. Interestingly, he does not mention a single company that supported the German system. If you were asked to rebut the arguments presented therein, and this is your response, you fully deserve an F. I'm not sure what else to say... There's nothing nonsense, or even second rate intellectually or historically, about Austrian school of economics. I do not fully agree with their viewports, note. However, if you cannot or will not attempt to refute the assertions made, they stand as the winning arguments, don't they? https://mises.org/library/why-nazism-was-socialism-and-why-socialism-totalitarian...practically no one thinks of Nazi Germany as a socialist state. It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed.
The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.
What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.
De facto government ownership of the means of production, as Mises termed it, was logically implied by such fundamental collectivist principles embraced by the Nazis as that the common good comes before the private good and the individual exists as a means to the ends of the State. If the individual is a means to the ends of the State, so too, of course, is his property. Just as he is owned by the State, his property is also owned by the State.
But what specifically established de facto socialism in Nazi Germany was the introduction of price and wage controls in 1936. These were imposed in response to the inflation of the money supply carried out by the regime from the time of its coming to power in early 1933. The Nazi regime inflated the money supply as the means of financing the vast increase in government spending required by its programs of public works, subsidies, and rearmament. The price and wage controls were imposed in response to the rise in prices that began to result from the inflation.
The effect of the combination of inflation and price and wage controls is shortages, that is, a situation in which the quantities of goods people attempt to buy exceed the quantities available for sale.
Shortages, in turn, result in economic chaos. It's not only that consumers who show up in stores early in the day are in a position to buy up all the stocks of goods and leave customers who arrive later, with nothing — a situation to which governments typically respond by imposing rationing. Shortages result in chaos throughout the economic system. They introduce randomness in the distribution of supplies between geographical areas, in the allocation of a factor of production among its different products, in the allocation of labor and capital among the different branches of the economic system.
In the face of the combination of price controls and shortages, the effect of a decrease in the supply of an item is not, as it would be in a free market, to raise its price and increase its profitability, thereby operating to stop the decrease in supply, or reverse it if it has gone too far. Price control prohibits the rise in price and thus the increase in profitability. At the same time, the shortages caused by price controls prevent increases in supply from reducing price and profitability. When there is a shortage, the effect of an increase in supply is merely a reduction in the severity of the shortage. Only when the shortage is totally eliminated does an increase in supply necessitate a decrease in price and bring about a decrease in profitability.
As a result, the combination of price controls and shortages makes possible random movements of supply without any effect on price and profitability. In this situation, the production of the most trivial and unimportant goods, even pet rocks, can be expanded at the expense of the production of the most urgently needed and important goods, such as life-saving medicines, with no effect on the price or profitability of either good. Price controls would prevent the production of the medicines from becoming more profitable as their supply decreased, while a shortage even of pet rocks prevented their production from becoming less profitable as their supply increased.
As Mises showed, to cope with such unintended effects of its price controls, the government must either abolish the price controls or add further measures, namely, precisely the control over what is produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it is distributed, which I referred to earlier. The combination of price controls with this further set of controls constitutes the de facto socialization of the economic system. For it means that the government then exercises all of the substantive powers of ownership.
This was the socialism instituted by the Nazis. |
|
|
|
If you want to argue against the logical argument, by all means do so. Nothing in your reply indicates you are capable of doing that, even if willing to. By the way, when you present a logical argument, it is capable of standing alone, and not requiring references. However, as I earlier mentioned, without precise definitions, none of this chatter is meaningful.
What it amounts to may be no more than "Socialists" not liking to be damaged by comparison with negatives being included in their definition of a word. But, then, there really are many very negative examples of socialism, aren't there? What's one more?
And this is no different than attempts to blur meanings and babble about "democratic socialism."
I went straight to the point and showed the error in the text. price control is not synonymous with socialism, it does not give the government control of the means of production. ... No, you needed to continue reading that section. That matter was fully explained. You may not agree with it, of course. |
|
|
|
yea I know. it's always the same source, the propaganda from the think tanks. The author doesn't even provide bibliographic references. why to worry? "But what specifically established de facto socialism in Nazi Germany was the introduction of price and wage controls in 1936." this is anti liberal, but not socialist. the author states that this kind of control makes the state "owner" of the means of production. this is a lie. corporations did not hand over their profits to the government. it's easy to fall into traps if you don't know the concepts. I stick to the Encyclopedia Britannica, the historians, the Academy, my decades of studies. It's not exactly a choice like fruit juice or soda: "I choose to consume this one!" Deutsche Welle has recently published series of articles to belie this wave of fake news from think tanks. Highly recommended. btw do you know what is really amazing about these think tanks? this part: "Mises Institute is a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions are tax-deductible to the full extent the law allows. Tax ID# 52-1263436" Billionaries "donate" to this cause (their own cause) and get tax breaks. They deliver you propaganda for their cause and indirectly YOU PAY for it. When money is lacking for universal medicare, for example. It's being spent at the golf club of those who delivered you this article. If you want to argue against the logical argument, by all means do so. Nothing in your reply indicates you are capable of doing that, even if willing to. By the way, when you present a logical argument, it is capable of standing alone, and not requiring references. However, as I earlier mentioned, without precise definitions, none of this chatter is meaningful. What it amounts to may be no more than "Socialists" not liking to be damaged by comparison with negatives being included in their definition of a word. But, then, there really are many very negative examples of socialism, aren't there? What's one more? And this is no different than attempts to blur meanings and babble about "democratic socialism." Anyway, I'm not particular interested in your misunderstandings about "think tanks," or the Mises Institute, or any other that seem to not buttress your opinions. |
|
|
|
....
Exactly. It's absurd and racist to suggest that superficial differences such as skin colour are relevant....
There are numerous genetic differences between africans and various whites, to suggest "racism" in the context of a medically oriented discussion is a level of profound ignorance. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
