Jump to content

jazzdude

Supreme User
  • Content Count

    729
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

jazzdude last won the day on January 25

jazzdude had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

430 Excellent

About jazzdude

  • Rank
    Gray Beard
  • Birthday September 18

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Charleston AFB

Recent Profile Visitors

7,596 profile views
  1. I generally agree with you, and you have valid points regarding guns making violence easier. My intent was that getting rid of guns doesn't eliminate the underlying problem of violence in schools, which many anti-gun advocates claim. https://everytownresearch.org/report/a-plan-for-preventing-mass-shootings-and-ending-all-gun-violence-in-american-schools/#intro https://www.nea.org/student-success/smart-just-policies/gun-violence-prevention That's what I'm trying to refute. It's a two prong problem: - Reduce access or means to commit violence (securing guns, limits for purchase, etc) - Reduce/
  2. Sounds like Modena and Pfizer are working on a booster shot for the south african variant, but best case that's probably 9 months out (driven mainly by testing, like the original vaccines). But even though it's not as effective on the new stains, the hope is that the current vaccine at least reduced the chances of a severe illness requiring hospitalization. And more people vaccinated means slower transmission, which means slower mutations. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/25/covid-vaccine-moderna-working-on-covid-booster-shots-for-south-african-strain.html https://www.businessinsider.in/scienc
  3. I don't think the race issues weren't new in the Trump era- that's stuff that's been festering for decades like you noted. I think what changed under Trump was that white supremacists and those sympathetic to them were emboldened by Trump's rhetoric, combined with ever increasing usage of social media by all sides (and traditional media following suit), and that forced the issue to the forefront. I don't think the complaints really rise and fall with the party in power, just how much focus is placed on it by media and the PR from both parties. So it's unfair to say these recent racial issue
  4. If voter ID was actually viewed as important/critical, the infrastructure allowing voter ID to be put in practice should be fully funded. This includes ID issuing sites, polling sites, backend databases, and verification (both before issuance, and at the polling sites to stop fake IDs from being used). Since it is not, it's not really important, and there's nothing a politician can say to convince me otherwise. Where we spend our money shows us what we value in our capitalistic society. So I agree, many times politicians calling for voter ID are using it as a means of voter suppression, be
  5. This problem isn't deranged kids with guns, it's deranged kids with intent to commit violence. Guns make it easier (so yes limiting their access is important), but if someone is intent on hurting people, they will find a way. But it's easier to talk removing guns than to address mental health issues and treatments, class size (smaller sizes encourage teachers to build a better relationship with students), bullying in schools, and parental responsibilities regarding their child.
  6. If mail in voting is secure for a subset of people like you caveat, why is it not secure for the general population? Waiting in long lines to vote is a failure of the voting system; it means the voting infrastructure does not support the number of people that are voting. Either not enough voting sites, or not enough voting booths. Same with long waits at DMV; long waits exist due to inadequate staffing. In addition, how would requiring everyone to vote in person actually work? It would require a complete closing of our economy for every election/vote. Otherwise, how do you ensure those
  7. I guess I'm naive to believe that the GOP would hold to it's professed values, and boot extremists from the party. Instead, they clung to "well, they'll increase our voter base" in the name of maintaining power ahead of maintaining their values. So they sold out their soul to increase party membership, and that caused a shift in values, which was reflected in the party's nominee. Trump is the symptom, not the disease
  8. Either way, it was still a vote for Biden. Just like in 2016 many votes for Trump were not so much votes for Trump, but votes against Hillary. Biden (outside his age) makes sense: had name recognition (especially among older voters, who are consistent voters), executive experience, more moderate than the other Democrat primary candidates (more attractive to independents and Republicans who hate Trump, and may at best encourage them to vote for the democrat nominee over abstaining from voting, or at worst voting for Trump as a vote against a perceived worse far left candidate). That's why
  9. Who doesn't love a good conspiracy? Biden was popular enough to win, moderate enough to pull independents and anti Trump Republicans, and paired with a female VP. He's old, 25th amendment for mental acuity/inability to execute his duties, and bam, 1st female president who's much further left. On a serious note, isn't age a protected class in employment?
  10. I think we're taking a bit last each other with the GPS example, and I'm too lazy to do some more digging (this has been a pleasant distraction from both work and homework). But I think we both agree that there a delicate balance, and it can be hard to draw the line. I also don't think Tesla meets the threshold to hold a monopoly on EVs or their charging infrastructure either, and wasn't my intent. But they were also not the only ones to receive tax credits: several other car manufacturers also received tax credits, though the other manufacturers elected not to pursue EVs (and associated ta
  11. No spears here, agree with you. "Best" is a nebulous term, especially with people, since you get there after trading off and considering several variables.
  12. The US holds individualism and meritocracy up as a pretty central tenets on what it means to be American, so it can be jarring when we see things happen counter to that. For a highly individualistic minded person, they'll see their attaining power as a reflection of their actions, and will be less inclined to surround themselves with those from their group/tribe/family. This helps to enable meritocracy, but still can be abused (they could surround themselves with people who would increase their personal gain as the leader, rather than the best person for the job) For a collectivism minded
  13. Yup, and that's an easy one to point out because it's so egregious. Is it really draining the swamp if you replace said swamp with a nastier swamp? ETA: Meritocracy often gets painted by both sides as a left vs right discussion, but it's really a discussion about how to "fairly" manage power. Both sides abuse power, and neither side "owns" the idea of a meritocracy as a means to manage power in an organization or society.
  14. GPS only went public after the soviets shot down passenger airline that inadvertantly entered their airspace due to a navigation error. It wasn't originally planned for public use. And it wasn't until a decade after that US government also changed its policy on the option to shut off gps to the public for military reasons. I don't think we'll see eye to eye on Tesla. I still believe it was good money invested to see how to create EV infrastructure, so site selection for individual charging stations, and develop technologies to rapidly charge vehicles. Sure, Tesla profited with the help of
  15. I'm not sure if it's necessarily what's wrong with America. Making investments solely to help out donors is wrong, and you're right, both sides do that. But that doesn't mean good investments aren't made by the government. Think of it as a strategic investment in new technologies for the common good for all Americans. What Tesla did for electric cars isn't design good electric cars (they are decent, but have issues that legacy car manufacturers have worked out, from manufacturing issues, to just keeping their displays working because they went cheap on flash memory in the car, leading to a
×
×
  • Create New...