Yzermandius19

the left did far more damage when it comes to rioting than the right did at the capitol pull your head out of your ass the capitol riots was a nothingburger compared to the BLM riots after George Floyd died be serious, enough of the partisan hackery

you are ignoring the good and acting like the bad is all there is America is great the biggest reason Canada is a nice place to live is it's proximity and relationship with the most prosperous and powerful nation on earth haters gonna hate

1) low taxes on the wealthy the rich get rich by providing products and services to those less well off they help the poor far more than they hurt them the idea that the only or main way to be successful is to exploit the unsuccessful and keep them down is a myth free market capitalism exploits the fact that best way to get rich is by helping others and rewarding them for doing so it's is not a coincidence that places with lots of wealthy people have more well off disadvantaged people living in those places than the places that have much less wealthy people living there 3) and 4) it's not word salad it's a generalization that the right is good at solutions to problems and bad at finding problems and the left is good at finding problems but bad at solutions to problems there are outliers, of course, but it's a good generalization of both wings of the spectrum

the alt-left is far more prominent than the alt-right and should be taken more seriously, including by you

Zeitgeist and OftenWrong make some very good points in this thread particularly in the last two posts mad dap to both

the best way to help the disadvantaged is not punish the advantaged Robinhood economics for the fail no taxes isn't the way to go, that's going too far but low taxes on those who can most afford to pay them works quite well Milton Friedman's Hong Kong, this is the best model I have encountered they are the shining city on the hill to emulate no tariffs, free markets, rule of law, low taxes and minimal regulation this results in well funded safety nets without the need for heavy handed government to do so best of both worlds the left are great at identifying problems but are terrible at finding solutions to those problems the right are much better at finding solutions, but are weaker on identifying the problems believing that one side cares about the disadvantaged while the other doesn't care is not only false, but leads to shitty analysis and solutions it's a strawman used to try and claim the undeserved moral high ground without having to think critically

look to the countries who have the most well off disadvantaged groups they ain't the countries who most heavily rely on central planning via high tax rates to give handouts to the disadvantaged they are the countries with the freest markets and less government intervention that way that taxes that are collected are taken from a much larger pie and result in better funded safety nets that is not a coincidence

look harder

unhelpful af I used to be on the economic left because I thought central planning was the best way to help the disadvantaged and I thought the only reason people didn't support central planning to help the disadvantaged, was because they didn't care about them just like MH thinks is the case in this thread but once it was pointed out to me that the data shows the central planning is counter-productive to helping the disadvantaged that the best way to help them was to level the playing field and maximize equality of opportunity the countries who did this the best had the most well off disadvantaged groups the economic right did in fact care about the disadvantaged but merely disagreed on the best way to help them and proposed more helpful solutions then I flipped to the economic right

when that "help" hurts the disadvantaged group more than it helps them clearly it isn't the people who object to that "help" that don't care about that disadvantaged group these people care more about results for the disadvantaged than the intentions of misguided do gooders with their counter-productive suggestions those who cling to government intervention as the only acceptable means of "helping" the disadvantaged group they are the ones who don't care about helping them these people care more how much counter-productive government intervention is supported to "help" them than the actual results of those policies the road to hell is paved with good intentions, that's what the woke central planners do not seem to grasp

in aggregate Black folks in America as a group are wealthier than any other group of Black folks in any other nation in the world if America is systemically racist at any meaningful level it's doing a piss poor job of holding people back

the Irish closing the gap is evidence that current disadvantage can be overcome despite xenophobic attitudes as is the upward mobility of many immigrant groups who started from the bottom but are now even more successful than the supposedly white privileged WASPs systemic racist effects on disparity in economic outcomes especially in the long run particularly in North America is vastly overrated

could be an indicator of systemic racism but most people crying systemic racism can't actually point to any and simply assume that disparity alone is proof of it so at this point with all the boy who cried wolfitis about racism that claim needs to be backed up with actual evidence upon assertion or at least upon request for clarification otherwise the claim is spurious on the face of it racism is not actually hiding under every rock as the woke like to claim

If the white people are so advantaged relative to others in Canada and America through structural oppression of non-whites then how come many East Asian and South Asian groups in those countries are more successful than those of White European descent? riddle me that if all disparities are evidence of systemic discrimination, then Canada and America must be Asian Supremacist countries who are oppressing White Europeans and other groups, by that logic or perhaps disparity is not necessarily evidence of discrimination and disparity in outcome is the norm, especially in countries with the most equality of opportunity

three days off, that's July 4th also the Dominion of Canada wasn't born on July 1, 1867 that was just the day the British Empire announced it's birth in the paper the day they released a memo announcing the Confederation that already occurred nothing much actually happened on July 1, 1867 when it comes to important things that happened related to the birth of Canada on July 1st The Battle of the Boyne in 1690 is the far more important event

it's more of a Nazi thing Germany changed it's flag to a Swastika in 1935 Canada changed it's flag to a Maple Leaf in 1965 the Nazi flag has red on the outside and white in the middle the Liberal flag has red on the outside and white in the middle the swastika is black, the maple leaf is red, that's the biggest difference the Nazi's changed the flag to replace German history with revisionist history filtered through Nazi ideology the Liberals changed the flag to replace Canadian history with revisionist history filtered through Liberal ideology the Nazi's wanted to hide Nazi Germany's roots in Imperial Germany the Liberals wanted to hide Canada's roots in the British Empire

by all means investigate perhaps you are correct perhaps not too early to jump to any conclusions yet

this is speculation can't prove they waited to try and evict everyone at once as that never happened you're just assuming the worst based on mind reading skills apparently what actual evidence is there that this was the plan?

the majority don't have rights to infringe on the minorities rights though the minority doesn't only have rights if the majority allows them to, not how it works

you believe in lies it is hard to discuss with you and you don't post in good faith

Chins uses prices to centrally plan the allocation of resources closed state run monopolistic markets is not open consumer driven free market capitalism they ain't Singapore, they ain't Hong Kong, and neither is Russia China's economic liberalization has been greatly exaggerated don't buy into the hype

you are confusing classical liberals with progressives classical liberals are the ones driving the positive changes in society not progressives the only progressives helping to drive positive change are those pushing the extension of classical liberal values classical liberals running the show results in the Glorious Revolution and American Revolution progressives running the show results in the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution and Chinese Communist Revolution siding with the latter over the former is asinine many conservatives today are trying to conserve classical liberal values while many progressives today are trying to tear down classical liberal values this is the major fault line in the culture war

progressives pursuit of a utopia leads to dystopic results sanctimonious priggish progressives for the fail the road to hell is paved with good intentions and progressives are gung ho to pave that road though at least they will tear Canada down on that road but unfortunately they will try to throw the baby out with the Confederation bathwater progressives don't build things up they tear things down and not just the bad, but the good as well including classical liberal values and the enlightenment they rode in on due to their misguided belief in a Rousseauian state of nature when really all they are doing is ushering in a Hobbesian state of nature and they will seek to accomplish that task via the Hegelian dialectic with a Nietzschean and Malthusian ethos driving the dialectic

they are free to oppose abortion as they please if one wants to force them to support it, then they are just as bad as those who want to force people to oppose it free will works both ways, you are free to make and face the consequences of your choices

then it is free to do so