The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)

[Biff_T]

50 minutes ago, M2 said:

Space Force general decries 'anti-LGBTQ+' laws at Pentagon 'Pride' event, claims they affect hiring decisions

 

Did anybody ever tell her she's not supposed to do this as a member of the US military?  Lol

She's pushing politics as a f-ing GO?  Good job AF, good job. 

 

[uhhello]

Who isn't getting into the service due to these 'anti-LGBTQ+' laws?  

[gearhog]

2 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Mumm, disagree I guess.

People with non-standard gender expressions in my opinion aren’t advantaged over “regular” people, quite the opposite. Not too many folks jump at the chance and choose to be a persecuted class of people for one reason or another.

And I don’t really have or need traditional “objective standards” for what clothes other people wear or how they cut their hair or who they want to sleep with anymore. That does affect me in any way I found out!

Is this a good person? Do they do good work? If so great, you be you and good luck. Obviously it’s easy to default to what was traditional when you grew up, but times change and so does the world, like it or not.

I’ve often found those who espouse the idea that others can choose to do whatever but I don’t have to condone/endorse/can speak against are often just assholes. To me being accepting by default (which is hard!), even when you may not understand or fully accept a choice someone else makes, has been be a better policy.

I have high standards and specific expectations for a lot of things, but not this thing. And I have a lot of recent, first-hand experience, so it’s not a point of view I come to lightly or held right away necessarily.

How are they disadvantaged/persecuted? If the DoD has official programs to recruit, retain, and promote certain groups over another, is that not an advantage?

Check out the Joint Base Langley-Eustis website. https://www.jble.af.mil/Resources/Breaking-Barriers-Alliance-BBA-/

Air Force Money and manpower are being expended to promote and host several events over the course of an entire month to promote one group over another. That's persecution?

https://twitter.com/usairforce/status/1666491502426480642?s=20

Is that persecution?

If someone disagrees with your opinion on tolerance, they're just an asshole. Can you spot the irony?

When you say you have a lot of recent first hand experience with the issue, what specifically do you mean? I mean no disrespect or ill-intent, but it does beg the question: Are you a member of the LGBTQ community? If so, that would help in understanding your position.

[gearhog]

authorized to use unit funds to....

Edited June 16, 2023 by gearhog

[nsplayr]

3 hours ago, gearhog said:

How are they disadvantaged/persecuted? If the DoD has official programs to recruit, retain, and promote certain groups over another, is that not an advantage?

Are you asking if LGBTQ people are disadvantaged/persecuted? I can provide a litany of examples if you need.

3 hours ago, gearhog said:

If someone disagrees with your opinion on tolerance, they're just an asshole. Can you spot the irony?

No, if someone is an asshole, they are an asshole. Disagreeing respectfully with an opinion is fine. Also everyone's a little bit of an asshole on some things, so I don't mean it necessarily maliciously.

3 hours ago, gearhog said:

When you say you have a lot of recent first hand experience with the issue, what specifically do you mean? I mean no disrespect or ill-intent, but it does beg the question: Are you a member of the LGBTQ community? If so, that would help in understanding your position.

I appreciate you asking and no ill-intent received. No, I am not LGBTQ myself but have close friends and family members who are gay and also have someone close to me recently going through gender identity issues. Separately have also recently gotten a great layman's education on mental illnesses so it's a bit top-of-mind for me. More on mental illness in a sec.

BL: I've learned new things during this process and changed some opinions I had, which is partly why I'm saying the things I'm saying here.

I started out basically thinking, look, all this trans & gender-fluid stuff is kinda BS and we need to pump the breaks on these people demanding so much of the rest of the world when they're like 0.1% of the population. I still don't totally disagree with that view. Gay rights happened very slowly over time before they happened seemingly very quickly when Obergefell was decided. I do want folks, even those being persecuted, to understand that they're not necessarily special snowflakes so much that the world has to immediately turn 180 degrees on their every whim. Everyone deserves equal human rights, but you also have to account to a reasonable pace of change that most humans are willing to accept.

All that being said, my recent experiences have opened up my aperture a little bit in that, in my new understanding, people that want to define a third gender (nonbinary) or see themselves as gender-fluid aren't really fundamentally different than people who are gay. I have been told by the person I know this isn't a choice, I wish I could just "feel normal," but that this is how I am and I just want to be loved & treated equally just like anyone else. In the end even if I don't really understand it fully, it's really not too much to ask IMHO.

So yea, my old-man opinion has changed a bit and other than some fringe issues like competitive sports participation where there are some legit concerns, I am now more of the opinion that just there's much greater acceptance for folks who are gay, whatever people wanna do with their lives & their gender expression is fine. If you want me to attempt to use they/them, that is fine, I will try. If you want to feel more masculine one day and more feminine the next day, that's fine. What haircut you have, what clothes you wear, if you dye your hair blue or have a body full of tats, that has next to zero bearing on A) my life, and B) if you are a good person or not or if you deserve equal, basic human rights or not. It costs me very, very little to be loving and accepting and it means a lot to people who genuinely feel God made them this way.

On mental illnesses...
 

Edited June 16, 2023 by nsplayr

[nsplayr]

5 hours ago, aeroplanez said:

I’ll accept them and treat them with compassion just like I would anyone with a mental illness.

Ok Dr. Aeroplanez, let's talk mental illnesses and fitness to serve.

5 hours ago, aeroplanez said:

You cannot argue that their brains are working correctly.

What do you mean by this? What specifically does "correctly" mean? Does it mean typical? Does it mean functional? At what level?

5 hours ago, aeroplanez said:

What it does mean is that they should not be able to hold sensitive positions that require security clearances.  They should not be police officers, pilots or in the military….and so on. Go be a realtor, insurance agent or any one of another 1000 jobs out there.  Just like a schizophrenic wouldn’t be able to get a clearance or FC1, nor should they.  

Ok do you want to define "mental illnesses" as anything diagnosable in the DSM-5? If so, I've got bad news for your theory.

• PTSD - a diagnosable disorder in the DSM. You can, in fact, have PTSD and still serve in the military, have a security clearance, be a cop, etc. I know people who are doing this right now.
• Depression and anxiety - diagnosable conditions in the DSM. Same as above, I know people with these diagnoses who serve honorably every single day
• Autism - same as above. Alan Turing and Albert Einstein were both very likely autistic and had higher level security clearances than either of us ever will...I think they did some pretty good work!

I could go on. Mental illnesses/disorders/conditions are like physical ones, they're not somehow more shameful, more disabling, or more able to painted with a broad brush.

Some mental and physical conditions do indeed prevent someone from holding a sensitive or security-related position, and that's fine. You won't be a good infantry troop from a wheelchair unfortunately. And some mental illnesses are that way too. But not all, not the ones I listed above, and importantly, not gender dysphoria, another DSM condition.

Gender dysphoria is primarily diagnosed when you have discomfort with your biological sex and the gender-norms that go along with that. It is treated in ways that are meant to reduce that discomfort. The level of discomfort may or may not rise to the level of being disqualifying for some positions in the military/police/etc. Just like back pain.

New flash: not every person who is nonbinary or gender-fluid experiences discomfort with their biological sex! The person I am close with going through some of these issues says they are nonbinary and gender-fluid, but is also perfectly comfortable in the body they have and does not experience discomfort with their body. So, they are not actually diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

I did not understand the nuances of this even a few months ago, which is why I'm wasting my time typing all this shit out here. Hopefully if any of this can help even one of you numbskulls better understand and support one of your kids, one of your troops, etc., it's worth the effort.

[nsplayr]

5 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

you can't change your gender. that's a fact. sorry it is. has been since the beginning of time. and it's actually science too. follow the science after all.

This is a common misconception and is not true. Biological sex for humans 99.9% is one of two options, male or female, that is a fact. You can technically be intesex, but I digress. Some animals also have other options but we're talking humans.

Gender on the other hand is, "...a social construct and generally based on the norms, behaviors, and societal roles expected of individuals based primarily on their sex." Ask any psychologist or mental healthcare provider and they can explain this to you if you don't have experience in dealing with this concept.

So yea, people can decide, "Ya know what, I don't feel fully male or female or feel like some combination of the two, and I don't accept the norms, behaviors and societal roles & expectations that come along with my biological sex." A lot of change in society's norms/expectations/etc. over time has taken place by people doing just that! What jobs men and women can and should have, can women vote, etc., were all questions that arose not just out of the ether, but by people being like, "Wait a minute, f that, I wanna do X and why not??" Today men can be nurses, women can be senators, I can wear a skirt if I want and my wife can wear a top hat and tails if she wants...I think society is better for it.

Some percentage of people saying they want to identify as nonbinary (neither male nor female in gender) or gender-fluid (fluctuating back and forth between primarily-male and primarily-female gender expressions) is no different than any of the past changes. Society is usually (1) at first aghast, then  (2) tacitly accepts in some places or circumstances, then (3) widely accepts the change, then (4) eventually there's a generation of people in charge who believed the change is perfectly normal.

Perhaps you're on step 1 and I'm saying a lot of people, myself included, are now on step 2. All the Zoomers and Gen A kiddos I've known and observed seem to be on step 3, and when they are in charge of things welcome to step 4 my friend. You and I will be left behind and return to dust regardless of how much we yell at the clouds, and how painful that is for each of us to some degree depends on how well we accept that this process is inevitable and maybe it's better to accept it rather than to just grow old and bitter.

You don't have to like it, you don't have to feel like your gender is in any way in question, but there are people who say a non-typical gender expression is an innate quality that they cannot change and are asking to be treated with respect and to have the same basic human rights as everyone else. I would advocate being accepting of other people as a general policy, and at minimum letting people be themselves without undue burden from your opinions of them.

Is someone a good person? Do they have a solid moral system as evidenced by their behavior? Do they work hard? Do they treat others with kindness? Those are relevant questions for the people I want to associate with - who you want to bang and how you want to be addressed / dress / look / feel is not super relevant to me.

Edited June 16, 2023 by nsplayr

[Jam]

9 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

it's only within the last few years that this illness has exploded...WHY IS THAT!?

why for thousands of years of human history has transgender not been a thing....and SUDDENLY it's a huge evolutionary human condition.

 

[tac airlifter]

4 hours ago, nsplayr said:

….but there are people who say a non-typical gender expression is an innate quality that they cannot change and are asking to be treated with respect and to have the same basic human rights as everyone else….

Here is the core issue, and your characterization is false.  The trans movement is not asking to be treated with respect, they are demanding I conform and threatening me when I don’t. 
 
I don’t care if men dress up like women. I don’t care if they do it in public, and I definitely don’t care what happens in private with consenting adults.  But I am not going to call a man “she” because that imposes their world view on me.  Trans people don’t want respect, they want compelled speech and compelled thought.  They want my children to watch them dry hump at drag shows, they want to destroy sports for my daughter then force her to look at dicks in the locker room.  They want my kids to cut off their private parts without telling me.  They want my pastor to cease preaching the “hate speech” of my religion that God created man & woman.  Trans people say “speech is violence” then do actual violence opposing laws prohibiting genital mutilation of minors.

You may counter with “I know trans people & they are nice” but that’s irrelevant and I don’t care.  There is a militant branch of transgender ideology that is violently and ruthlessly and tyrannically forcing their viewpoint on others against their will whose actions now define this discussion. The issue is not LGBTQ+IAP ideology per se, but rather are we a society that allows individual freedom or one that opposes it?

[gearhog]

7 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Are you asking if LGBTQ people are disadvantaged/persecuted? I can provide a litany of examples if you need.

No, if someone is an asshole, they are an asshole. Disagreeing respectfully with an opinion is fine. Also everyone's a little bit of an asshole on some things, so I don't mean it necessarily maliciously.

I appreciate you asking and no ill-intent received. No, I am not LGBTQ myself but have close friends and family members who are gay and also have someone close to me recently going through gender identity issues. Separately have also recently gotten a great layman's education on mental illnesses so it's a bit top-of-mind for me. More on mental illness in a sec.

BL: I've learned new things during this process and changed some opinions I had, which is partly why I'm saying the things I'm saying here.

I started out basically thinking, look, all this trans & gender-fluid stuff is kinda BS and we need to pump the breaks on these people demanding so much of the rest of the world when they're like 0.1% of the population. I still don't totally disagree with that view. Gay rights happened very slowly over time before they happened seemingly very quickly when Obergefell was decided. I do want folks, even those being persecuted, to understand that they're not necessarily special snowflakes so much that the world has to immediately turn 180 degrees on their every whim. Everyone deserves equal human rights, but you also have to account to a reasonable pace of change that most humans are willing to accept.

All that being said, my recent experiences have opened up my aperture a little bit in that, in my new understanding, people that want to define a third gender (nonbinary) or see themselves as gender-fluid aren't really fundamentally different than people who are gay. I have been told by the person I know this isn't a choice, I wish I could just "feel normal," but that this is how I am and I just want to be loved & treated equally just like anyone else. In the end even if I don't really understand it fully, it's really not too much to ask IMHO.

So yea, my old-man opinion has changed a bit and other than some fringe issues like competitive sports participation where there are some legit concerns, I am now more of the opinion that just there's much greater acceptance for folks who are gay, whatever people wanna do with their lives & their gender expression is fine. If you want me to attempt to use they/them, that is fine, I will try. If you want to feel more masculine one day and more feminine the next day, that's fine. What haircut you have, what clothes you wear, if you dye your hair blue or have a body full of tats, that has next to zero bearing on A) my life, and B) if you are a good person or not or if you deserve equal, basic human rights or not. It costs me very, very little to be loving and accepting and it means a lot to people who genuinely feel God made them this way.

On mental illnesses...
 

While not in my family, I too, have seen in the local rural community at a rapidly increasing rate. I do have compassion for these young people, but I think they have an unjustified confidence in their explanation as to why this is happening to them. Gender is not a spectrum. There may be a spectrum within each gender such as men with some feminine characteristics or females with some masculine qualities, and many children struggle with this concept. The feel they can't compete with earlier social ideals of what the ideal man and woman should be. Comparison is the thief of joy. But with the advent of social media, status in a crowded space can otherwise be achieved simply through being different, extreme, or proclaiming oneself a victim for engagement in a society where they otherwise wouldn't be noticed. The outpouring of online sympathy and affection for anyone who might be experiencing a "tough time" with life only encourages the idea that we don't dictate our circumstances, but are a victim of it, and that victim status yields benefits such as the ability to emotionally manipulate. Our kids have been told our sexual ideas and impulses are to be shamelessly acted upon while demanding acceptance for it. It's a slippery slope. Where does it go next? Cliches aren't cliches because they are wrong.

Sure, I want people to be happy. But kids who go through the transgender process can only convince themselves they're happy until the social media fad and fashion fades, and they no longer receive attention heaped upon them, and after the permanent irreparable harm has been done. In a few years, I predict a suicide rate that will grow exponentially. These children, and most encouraging adults, do not understand that this phenomena, which has never occurred at this rate in history, is an infectious idea imposed on them by their online social environment. It's not entirely an organic physiological/psychological process within one's own body. There's a deliberate organized campaign of outside influence and manipulation.

Nature doesn't care. If a person chooses to abruptly bring an end to their own genetic lineage by consciously rendering themselves a sterile human, is that a bad thing? That's just Darwinism playing out, right? I care because I know the nation and society I was born into was made great through the flourishing of humans and human productivity enabled by traditional family values. When 20% percent of young people identify as LGBTQ, we're not facing a population stagnation, we're facing population age distribution so top heavy it will collapse upon itself.

Similar to COVID, this in an infection of an idea. This is an old video that I've often thought about. Perfectly explains many things we're seeing in our culture. Especially at 9:09.

 

Edited June 16, 2023 by gearhog

[dream big]

12 hours ago, Biff_T said:

Did anybody ever tell her she's not supposed to do this as a member of the US military?  Lol

She's pushing politics as a f-ing GO?  Good job AF, good job. 

 

Non partisan apolitical military, unless the left is in charge and you’re touting their narratives. Brandon probably pooped himself in joy watching his generals push his agenda. 

[lloyd christmas]

7 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Words

You attempt to explain away everything.  That’s all you do.  It doesn’t matter what the topic is.  It could be COVID policy, corrupt politicians, the destruction of our major cities or the harm caused by the trans gender movement.  Facts are presented but it doesn’t matter.  The truth comes out in time, as it has with COVID and many examples of political corruption, but it doesn’t matter.  You double down and dig in. Gotta give it to you.  You are consistent.  

Edited June 16, 2023 by lloyd christmas
Punctuation

[Vito]

#Pride Month,

 

 I’m still trying to figure out what are they proud of? 

[Lord Ratner]

On 6/15/2023 at 9:56 AM, nsplayr said:

Seems like he might be from or live in New Hampshire and doesn’t want any of you dickheads to get any bright ideas like moving there and messing it up 😄

We call that the Texas conundrum.

[Lord Ratner]

17 hours ago, M2 said:

Space Force general decries 'anti-LGBTQ+' laws at Pentagon 'Pride' event, claims they affect hiring decisions

A high-ranking officer in the U.S. Space Force used her speech at a Pentagon "Pride" event last week to rail against what she called "anti-LGBTQ+ laws" introduced in state legislatures across the country.

Lt. Gen. DeAnna Burt, deputy chief of space operations, also claimed that such laws affect her hiring and promotion decisions, sometimes leading her to choose a "less qualified" candidate because of a preferred candidate's "personal circumstances."

"Transformational cultural change requires leadership from the top, and we do not have time to wait," Burt told those attending the event. "Since January of this year, more than 400 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have been introduced at the state level. That number is rising and demonstrates a trend that could be dangerous for service members, their families, and the readiness of the force as a whole." 

"When I look at potential candidates, say, for squadron command, I strive to match the right person to the right job. I consider their job performance and relevant experience first. However, I also look at their personal circumstances, and their family is also an important factor," she said...

This is just another example of the shit that we saw all the time in the Air Force before this trans insanity happened. How many times have you heard about some pilot that was a total bro when he was a captain or major or even a squadron commander and then they become a general and at best standby idly while ridiculous nonsense is imposed upon their subordinates, and at worst, participate?

 

The types of people who are willing to do what is necessary to get to these jobs are not the type of people who often have deep-seated beliefs. And so when the beliefs of those they must rely on for further promotion are insane, they adopt them.

 

Then you see someone on a podium who 20 years ago wouldn't have imagined they'd be spouting the ridiculous nonsense they are, but because it's the present rallying and cry of the cultural elite, all of a sudden they are true believers.

 

It seems unbelievable that so many apparently intelligent people are spouting this nonsense, but that's because you're (not you specifically, M2) operating on the assumption that they put any thought into it at all. They haven't. These people don't have values other than their own progression. Once you accept that, everything they say makes perfect sense. They spent an entire career doing what other people told them to do to get where they are, so it shouldn't be surprising that they will also say what other people tell them to say.

Edited June 16, 2023 by Lord Ratner

[FourFans]

Has anyone else here read the Eden Chronicles by S.M. Anderson?  The first book "A Bright Shore" was written in 2018, during the genesis of all this social upheaval.  With all the excellent justifications provided by some liberals in government service on this forum concerning the 'correctness' of normalizing what began as 'fringe' and celebrating what was once simply tolerated, that first book is beginning to read like a societal prophesy.  Simply look at the social narratives coming from our 'apolitical' politician general officer leadership.

Students of history understand exactly what his happening.  It happened in Greece, Persia, Rome, China, and several others.  Hard times make strong men, who make good times, which makes soft men, who make hard times.  Unfortunately, the soft men can make that cycle come to a screeching halt.  In historical context, we have gone so soft, for so long, that those with opinions of governance which are rooted in neither integrity, fact, nor history can now set policy, which will result in the collapse of our society.

To the liberal ideologs here: If you sincerely think that forcing the celebration (which is exactly what pride month is) of LGTBQ+, redistributing wealth, and enforcing ideologies that will eviscerate the family unit will improve things in our currently domestic and international environment, I request you please put it down in a journal and go re-read that in about 10 years and see how it aged...assuming we make it that long.  You are supporting ideology that will destroy our society.  History already proves it, we're currently living it, and you're supporting it.

Edited June 18, 2023 by FourFans

[Negatory]

2 hours ago, FourFans said:

Has anyone else here read the Eden Chronicles by S.M. Anderson?  The first book "A Bright Shore" was written in 2018, during the genesis of all this social upheaval.  With all the excellent justifications provided by some liberals in government service on this forum concerning the 'correctness' of normalizing what began as 'fringe' and celebrating what was once simply tolerated, that first book is beginning to read like a societal prophesy.  Simply look at the social narratives coming from our 'apolitical' politician general officer leadership.

Students of history understand exactly what his happening.  It happened in Greece, Persia, Rome, China, and several others.  Hard times make strong men, who make good times, which makes soft men, who make hard times.  Unfortunately, the soft men can make that cycle come to a screeching halt.  In historical context, we have gone so soft, for so long, that those with opinions of governance which are rooted in neither integrity, fact, nor history can now set policy, which will result in the collapse of our society.

To the liberal ideologs here: If you sincerely think that forcing the celebration (which is exactly what pride month is) of LGTBQ+, redistributing wealth, and enforcing ideologies that will eviscerate the family unit will improve things in our currently domestic and international environment, I request you please put it down in a journal and go re-read that in about 10 years and see how it aged...assuming we make it that long.  You are supporting ideology that will destroy our society.  History already proves is, we're currently living it, and you're supporting it.

From “da libruls”: Trans rights becoming this important is too much emphasis, agreed. I don’t care to overcompensate, and I don’t think the majority of folks actually care.

I personally agree that the woke-ness of some of the messaging is terribly annoying and not focused. And we should stop.

Also, I agree that the family unit is important, who said it wasn’t?

But wealth inequality is an actual problem that needs to be solved. History also shows that the higher wealth inequality goes the worse society gets. And if you look at society from an average 25 year olds eyes, you’d see that American capitalism as is hasnt made much progress since the 1970s when real wages stopped increasing.

Wouldn’t recommend you throw totally separate ideals into one set of issues, because it’s harder to find common ground.

[pbar]

31 minutes ago, Negatory said:

<snipped> And if you look at society from an average 25 year olds eyes, you’d see that American capitalism as is hasnt made much progress since the 1970s when real wages stopped increasing.

Wouldn’t recommend you throw totally separate ideals into one set of issues, because it’s harder to find common ground.

Perhaps, but we don't have a capitalist system, we have a crony capitalism and therein lies the problem.  And socialism/fascism are not the answer.  If they were effective, North Korea would be far better off than South Korea.  I'd like to see us return to a free market capitalist system but the cronies have DC bought and paid for...

[brabus]

Actual conversation with actual gay friends (before someone accuses me of being “hateful”) - they’re concerned the takeover of the pride movement by the extreme left will cause a backlash and big pendulum swing backwards in time when things weren’t so great for them. Enter the new Gallup poll: 7% decline in the last year of Americans who think same sex relationships are morally OK. Now that’s not a “all hell breaking loose” poll, but it does validate their concern is not irrational. This extreme movement will likely galvanize otherwise “keep to themselves” type of people, and it’ll be people like my friends above who suffer from it. 
 

It’s simple, keep to yourselves and don’t try to shove things down people’s throats and generally everyone will just move about their day. Go crazy pushing things and enough people are going to get pissed off it’ll backfire. 

 

[FourFans]

2 hours ago, Negatory said:

From “da libruls”: Trans rights becoming this important is too much emphasis, agreed. I don’t care to overcompensate, and I don’t think the majority of folks actually care.

I personally agree that the woke-ness of some of the messaging is terribly annoying and not focused. And we should stop.

Also, I agree that the family unit is important, who said it wasn’t?

But wealth inequality is an actual problem that needs to be solved. History also shows that the higher wealth inequality goes the worse society gets. And if you look at society from an average 25 year olds eyes, you’d see that American capitalism as is hasnt made much progress since the 1970s when real wages stopped increasing.

Wouldn’t recommend you throw totally separate ideals into one set of issues, because it’s harder to find common ground.

I agree with most of what you're saying.  There is, and should be, a heated debate about wealth vs income inequality, as well as whether that's even a good metric to determine the health of a society.  Income does not equal wealth.  One is a policy item, the other is a behavior item.  Lots to debate on that in some other topic.  To the point: The current administration states that it's trying to lower the income and wealth inequality, when in fact it's expanding it.  This is perfectly in line with it's stance on most topics: make it a hot topic then do nothing to actually heal the topic.  A healed and corrected topic can no longer be a hot button to push for votes whenever they want...therefore they haven't actually fixed anything.

The current economic woes hit the poor hardest.  Inflation, increasing interest rates, and lowered real income value hit them worst...thereby expanding BOTH wealth and income inequality.  Which recent administration actually saw the highest rise in both wealth and real income value of the poorest section of American demographics?  Yeah, that was the last one.  I'm no trump fan, but that's an economic stat precious few administrations have achieved.

Edited June 17, 2023 by FourFans

[HeloDude]

5 hours ago, Negatory said:

But wealth inequality is an actual problem that needs to be solved.

Are you suggesting the wealth should be equal amongst every person in the country?  The world?

[brabus]

I’m curious too. It’s a nice sound bite, but what do people actually mean by that? What does  this “hypothetical equal wealth society” look like? Why do I care if Bill Gates has a bajillion dollars?

Vivek Ramaswamy has a very interesting take on this subject. Everyone should listen to it. I think his argument is a pretty sound “common ground” between left and right. 

Edited June 18, 2023 by brabus

[nsplayr]

12 hours ago, FourFans said:

To the (my) liberal ideologs (friends) here: If you sincerely think that forcing the celebration (which is exactly what pride month is) of LGTBQ+, redistributing wealth, and enforcing ideologies that will eviscerate the family unit will improve things in our currently domestic and international environment...

I too can write a caricature about the right and what "they support" and then propose it to folks online asking, "HoW cAn YoU sUpPoRt ThIs???!" My man, I/we disagree with the premise of the things you wrote there.

Pride month allows LGBTQ folks to celebrate their struggle for equal rights and the progress that's been made there, no different than other "XX history" months. I'm neither radically in favor of over-the-top celebrating differences but I'm not against people doing that either.

Some redistribution of wealth via taxes is a hallmark of an advanced economy & society, we can quibble about how much but I support free & fair market capitalism backed by a robust welfare state to help catch people when they fall. A floor, not a ceiling.

I'm not sure what vague "ideologies that will eviscerate the family unit" you mean so you'll have to be more specific. I have a very traditional, conservative-friendly family unit and we're doing just great! Other families I know that are quite different than my own are doing great as well. Some people struggle, as always. I hope the same can be said for you and yours.

8 hours ago, brabus said:

Actual conversation with actual gay friends (before someone accuses me of being “hateful”) - they’re concerned the takeover of the pride movement by the extreme left will cause a backlash and big pendulum swing backwards in time when things weren’t so great for them.

This I actually agree with, as do some of my gay friends, although not all. Younger people tend to see it all as the same struggle, but LGBTQ people closer to my age or older I know say that the wild explosions of different identities, flags, tiny shredouts of identities is counterproductive and that radical trans activists need to follow the model more or less of plain-ole-gay rights and not try to move so rapidly as to diminish support from a general populace of straight people who don't live and breathe this stuff and just want to go on with their lives. I am straight, so I don't wanna speak for others, but I tend to agree.

8 hours ago, brabus said:

Enter the new Gallup poll: 7% decline in the last year of Americans who think same sex relationships are morally OK.

It's mostly from the right in terms of statistically significant losses of support, but it is concerning either way if you are a fan of gay people having the same human and civil rights as straight people.

8 hours ago, FourFans said:

To the point: The current administration states that it's trying to lower the income and wealth inequality, when in fact it's expanding it.

The current economic woes hit the poor hardest.  Inflation, increasing interest rates, and lowered real income value hit them worst...thereby expanding BOTH wealth and income inequality.

I'm gonna say this up front and it applies to everything below, you need to update your data / assumptions.

Income inequality specifically has declined for the first time in decades in the COVID recovery where there is very robust wage growth specifically among the lower-paid 50% of workers.

Depicted below is this metric during the Biden Admin, Jan 2021 to EOY 2022. I would argue that both the broad, world-wide post-COVID economic conditions + the Biden admin's actions + Fed/ECB actions have led to our current tight labor market where workers have more leverage than at anytime during my lifetime to negotiate higher wages, switch jobs, or generally leave shitty, low-paid work for greener pastures.

Having a hard time hiring servers at a greasy spoon diner that pays tipped minimum wage isn't a sign of a recession, it's a sign of a strong/tight labor market because those waitresses are working at the other businesses down the road paying $15+ an hour. TBH if you want plentiful low-wage workers, you need to encourage more immigration, as immigrants are often more willing to take low-paid jobs than native-born citizens.

8 hours ago, FourFans said:

Which recent administration actually saw the highest rise in both wealth and real income value of the poorest section of American demographics? Yeah, that was the last one.

This used to be true, if you only counted Jan 2017 through March 2020 Trump admin. If you take the whole time Trump was President, it was never true due to the huge losses during COVID. Understandably there are some asterisks there, and rightfully so. Trump did not cause COVID and the whole world took a beating.

BUT, it's no longer true. The Biden admin has set new records for declines in income inequality, low unemployments rates, "black unemployment" as Trump so frequently touts, etc. Trump often says on the stump he had the lowest black unemployment rate ever...which is a good thing and was true!

But it's not true anymore. Lowest under Trump was 5.3% in August of 2019, current under Biden is 4.7% in April 2023 and continuing to drop. I support a low unemployment rate for all Americans, and the Biden admin is leading the way on employment.

Bottom line: if you wanna debate current events, you have to stay current.

Edited June 18, 2023 by nsplayr

[gearhog]

15 hours ago, pbar said:

Perhaps, but we don't have a capitalist system, we have a crony capitalism and therein lies the problem.  And socialism/fascism are not the answer.  If they were effective, North Korea would be far better off than South Korea.  I'd like to see us return to a free market capitalist system but the cronies have DC bought and paid for...

Exactly. And it's not just DC. Your average socialist wringing their hands over wealth inequality fail to realize they will never defeat cronyism as long as their agendas, ideologies, and movements can easily be purchased and co-opted.

[gearhog]

8 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Bottom line: if you wanna debate current events, you have to stay current.

Some back of the napkin ballpark 4th grade math:

A 4% increase in the top 10% income lower threshold of around $14,500 a month = +$580

A 7.5% increase in the bottom 50% upper threshold of about $5800 a month = +$435

Would you say income inequality is increasing or decreasing under Biden?

Bills are measured in dollars, not percentages of income.

Edited June 18, 2023 by gearhog