Economic Disruption Will Kill and Endanger Millions of Third World People

Your beliefs have nothing to do with science. And whatever failure the US experienced can be blamed on its governors, since they were the ones primarily responsible for the response to COVID. By far, the worst performing governor was Andrew "Grandma Killer" Cuomo of New York. Just another Democrat failure whose ineptitude is only exceeded by his arrogance.

 

1) Technically, they aren't mine. Dealing with pandemics is part of science.

2) The countries that were successful had strong national plans. We are a failure because we failed to do that.

3) This disease has a steep learning curve, and without a strong national response he did the best he could. But you can say he learned what Trump did not, and cannot.

 

As if conservatives care one bit about third world countries, which they usually lump into the "shi$hole" category. They only use them as political football to further their anti-lockdown agenda.

A starting point would be to address poverty and generally low standards of living in those countries, where people are forced to live hand to mouth (like Bill and Melinda Gates, for example, are working on). i doubt, however, that the "America first" crowd has any interest in that.

 

Liberals love foreign aid. Ask Biden. He and his crackhead son skimmed off of it for years.

 

I'm against lockdowns, so I must be conservative... impeccable logic.

You might want to familiarize yourself with a country called Sweden. They didn't have a lockdown. And guess what? They're not what most would consider a "conservative" country.

Amazing, isn't it? That one can disagree with lockdowns without being a conservative?

Try thinking outside your narrow partisan confines for three seconds.

A starting point would be to avoid policies (like lockdowns) that create poverty or worsen existing poverty in developing nations.

 

This is discussion forum. He is welcome to talk about this with or without something to contribute. Whining isn't limited to non-liberals.

 

You welcome whining, I don't. I welcome facts, well reasoned arguments, ... something that contributes to a discussion.

It's not? Hmmm... I would have never guessed.

 

.And there you were, whining about his post

Ironicle!

 

No, I welcome freedom of speech.

 

Nope! I was stating facts about that post.

But it is a known flaw on the right not to understand the difference between facts and.... everything they say, actually.

 

Good to know you welcome me ridiculing irrational babble and propaganda.

 

Good thing I'm not on the right then.

I have found over the years that the right and the left have that in common though- facts aren't relevant unless they fit their particular world view.

Now no doubt you will resume your almost incessant whining, if not about @Ethereal 's post then about mine.

 

Actually that doesn't have to do with the right or the left. It has to do with people who make generalizations with no basis. Just like the one you just made.

BTW, on this forum (as in most colloquial interchanges), by "left" or "right" we mean that they tend to agree with Democrats or Republicans. But not necessarily that they can't be objective when the circumstances call for objectivity.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not a Trump-style right-winger. But too many have come here stating, as you do, how "independent" they are, and then turn out to be the most consummate loyalists. So we'll see.... The problem is not about being "independent" or not. It's about being objective. The only way you can demonstrate objectivity is, not just saying that you are objective, but demonstrating it. And as far as objectivity goes, I am more suspect of self-proclaimed "independents" than of people who are not afraid to take a position that they believe is the right one.

 

Yes, it does. The right and the left must do this otherwise it is impossible to hold said beliefs. In order to do so they must 1) utilize extreme compartmentalization 2) replace reason and critical thinking with cognitive dissonance.

If they were objective, they would not tend to agree with Republicans or Democrats.

I did not self proclaim myself as an independent. That is your assumption. Besides, I feel no compunction to demonstrate anything to the likes of you, but if you wish to learn you may Google "Rational Anarchy". You will learn that I do not hold that the concept of popular sovereignty is legitimate. I believe Democracy is just the tyranny of the majority and that when it comes to the left and the right in this country they are more alike than they are different. Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden...they are all the same to me.

 

Whoa! Stand back there. What "beliefs" are you talking about?

Wow! Now that's a belief! A completely baseless one. I agree with both! Depending on the issue of course. Sometimes with neither, but very often one of them is right. Depending on the issue, of course.

I think what you are accomplishing here is to prove exactly the contrary of what you stated before. I would hold that you don't understand what the word "objectivity" means. It's clear you have no concept of "objectivity" vs "subjectivity".

Prove me wrong. Above I said "depending on the issue". Can you explain why that is objective. While "agree with Republicans or Democrats" is subjective?

My bet is that you can't!

Of course! That's the answer I expected: "Google my arguments"

“If you can’t say it simply and clearly, keep quiet, and keep working on it till you can.”
— Karl Popper

BTW. I grew up on Robert Heinlein. Read every single one of his books when I was a teenager. I'm betting you don't even know who that is. Or who Karl Popper is, for that matter. Either one would be shocked by your nonsense.