I've already addressed this idiocy.
So there were people who said "don't give her attention".
Let's see what happened. We criticized her, she was discredited, and sank into oblivion.
Let's see what happens when they are not criticized. Full McIntosh (who is even crazier than Anita) started a Youtube channel with widely acclaimed videos calling everything sexist, completely under the radar.
Looks like the first approach was the better.
if it's one of those modern art exhibits where someone smeared some turds on a canvas
Ah, so luxury modern art musea. Normally, you'd expect a banana tied to the wall.
No, fortunately, it's very strictly separated.
There's something to the notion that right wing parties started winning elections in Europe almost the moment USAID dried up.
They were on a very long-term upward trajectory. And they're still not winning outright.
There's no reason for them to be self-loathing and culturally suicidal.
How did you get that impression? If you talk to any European, left or right, no one likes immigration. The problem is with the political system. Europeans aren't given a choice.
Large art museums are a must though, if you're interested in that sort of thing, with the added benefit that there is not much cultural enrichment there.
I think this is too simplistic. The point of beauty and art in churches is to give the believers a very imperfect glimpse of heaven and their religion. For example, Saint Mark's dome represents heaven, and in the old Gothic style, it is covered in gold. All the art helped believers, who were historically mostly illiterate, understand the religion, and I think even now it's a way of making things real in a way that they're not when you merely hear stories. It's one thing to hear about the Passion, and quite another to see an Ecce homo.
It's a great experience even when it's a music concert that's given in a church.
And a cathedral does not belong to any one man. It's the possession of the community. Just like city buildings or aqueducts. It doesn't make you rich.
Got it, that makes a lot of sense.
I see a lot of English/Canadians in particular who shill for the US big time, even a Canadian here who says that the Iraq War was a gigantic success for the history books, so you basically don't know what to expect.
Yes, I'm talking about economic effects. You need to pay for oil at the world market price regardless of whether the oil is external or internal. I guess you may advocate socialism and confiscation in cases of emergency, hence your resiliency, but other than that, I guess I'm too dumb to see your great points.
I guess. But this is basically the home you see everywhere, no matter how poor a family is supposed to be.
That's funny, because I'm pretty staunchly anti-war.
Yeah, I didn't want to suggest that you're not. It's just one of the pro-war talking points that seeps through because it sounds vaguely plausible.
Energy self-sufficiency actually means there is zero reason for us to be there.
I'd argue that it doesn't make that much of a difference, without commenting on the costs and benefits of being there.
No, but you can build infrastructure around them in the long term. I'm not asking "why don't the Americans and their allies start pumping more oil immediately?", I'm asking "why haven't the Americans been building their infrastructure around allied oil since the 70s?" Apparently, despite being at war with them for over 50 years, Iran has had control of their most vital resource (and never crashed them, until now) but the Americans never bothered to diversify their supply chain?
LOL. Yeah. I assume it's because it wasn't immediately profitable. And of course, these are private companies and if it is more profitable right now to use Middle Eastern oil, then they will. Or maybe they didn't think that anyone would be foolish enough to stick his finger in the hornet's nest.
Well, I actually work for a living, so a booming energy sector means employment opportunities for people like me.
You're only looking at one side of the equation. This is the equivalent of boomers believing that it's great for housing prices to go up. Truth is, you want housing to be as cheap as possible, and the same is true for energy.
Not just the (well paying) jobs in the actual industry, but homebuilding, personal services, secondary markets for goods, they all benefit.
How so? All these things need energy. If energy prices go up, everything gets more expensive. So it's not a net benefit, rather a gigantic loss. The benefits are concentrated and the losses dispersed.
Which Canada and Venezuela both are.
Canada definitely not. Venezuela, maybe. But the US? Definitely not. Oil needs to be a gigantic percentage of your economy for you to benefit from higher prices rather than be hurt by.
There's not much of a difference between 'external energy' and 'internal energy'. You're still paying $200 a barrel if the price skyrockets. Problem is, you just don't understand economics.
Half a million people a year? That's half the population in 40 years.
Canada and Venezuala have more oil than all of the ME combined.
That's a facile argument generally used by pro-war people to try to say that messing with the Middle East won't cause problems. Truth is, there are different types of oil based on sweetness etc., for which different types of refineries are specialized. You can't just switch out one type for another.
Furthermore, as I I think I said, it's a world market. That's why "it's good for us because we produce oil" is a very stupid argument. When prices rise, you don't earn more money unless you have stocks in Big Oil, but you do pay more for everything that uses oil as input. Unless you are a petrostate, then higher oil prices are bad for you.
That's why Trump, even though he claimed that high oil prices are good for him (and they may be for his cronies) ultimately relented.
Well, what did 'being close to America' get the UK? Not much. And even so, the rest of Europe has decided to follow you and become even more of a vassal state to the US deep state than we were in 2003 during the war in Iraq.
The other is anyone but seething mentally ill leftists absolutely loves “flyover country”. Europeans aren’t posting about how “amazing” the big cities are, they’re posting Bass Pro, Buc-ee’s, BBQ, and In and Out.
That's what I thought too, but I haven't been exactly following it. Because I've heard nothing but complaints from people who visited places like SF or LA, particularly about the druggies - even though there are druggies here too!
Most Europeans have a very caricatured view of America and Americans, and I say that as someone who doesn't particularly like either. I'm sure seeing that there aren't shootings every five minutes is a revelation to them.
The people I've talked to liked it, enough to go back, although they were very disturbed by the state of American cities and the druggie problems - and that even though European cities are hardly pristine anymore. I heard that people liked the waffle places. Well, that is very understandable to me, I wish I had a place dedicated just to waffles here.
For my own view, there is two things that I do love about America: more free speech than we have, and the houses that are enormous by European standards. You will have a beggar family on TV that lives in a larger and nicer house than anyone I know, like the Simpsons or something. Oh, and primaries are pretty great. Here we choose between the people the party leadership decides we get to choose between.
You're off by several orders of magnitude.
Canada's population being 40 million, this number is 1/400 of that, so 0.25%.
Sir, this is the Canadian government. You haven't seen horrific, depraved, evil yet...
Like "replacement migration" and "Jews controlling the media and Hollywood", it's only a conspiracy theory and hate speech when you say it's a bad thing.
it was Europe and China that needed the Strait open.
Anyone who uses this thing called 'oil' needs the strait open. It's remarkable how many people don't understand what an 'international oil market' means.
They probably aren't willing to endure the price they would have to pay for that. Even Iran didn't do it during the last war. Only this time when it was clearly existential for them.
AI. I got lucky too because I had a large haul of hardware late last year.
750 USD for a 'lifetime' pass that lasts until they go bankrupt?
Make the owned politicians operate out in the sunlight. It will only drive more people to our side
That Ted Cruz interview seems like a turning point.
For a bunch that pretends to be capitalist, you sure have difficulty understanding how it works.
If the international oil market says that oil is $200, then foreign buyers will be willing to pay up to $200 for oil, including American oil. This means that you will be paying $200 for oil. The "we produced this at home" participation trophy won't do you any good when you're consuming that oil as an input.