I think that’s a fair stance to take. I just don’t believe that the state protects us from the wealthy, though I do think it could. But, I would rather dissipate the power the state holds so no one can use its mechanisms against the people, and whether that be by distributing power away from centralized sources or through some other means, such as periodic redistribution, I think they’re workable solutions.

But, I’ll admit my stance is a bit too rigid, but take that as my optimal solution, and not my only acceptable one.

Groups can organize without a leader. Rules can exist without rulers. It is silly to say the only thing protecting us from the wealthy is the state, when the wealthy are far more protected by the state.

But, I do understand what you’re saying. What happens when someone breaks the rules? Who enforces those rules? But when the wealthy capture the state (and that is ultimately the goal of the wealthy), the rules will still be unenforceable against them. So, I’d say it kinda fundamentally falls apart eventually.

But, that’s not an answer. The real answer is that it is on the citizens to topple corrupt states, but they don’t necessarily need a state to make that possible.

The rich didn’t create themselves, buddy.

Ain’t no fucking way you’re not a troll.

Why do we need to replace all the moderate Democrats that did EXACTLY what you said you wanted them to do?

Because they didn’t do what I wanted them to do. Obviously. Did you not read?

Do you have any actual PROOF that Schumer engineered the capitulation? Your personal opinions on the matter aren’t really what’s under discussion here. Just vague and unsubstantiated accusations, pretty Trumpian if you ask me.

Like, either he sucks at his job and needs to go or he coordinated this and needs to go.

Idk, man, it’s literally right there.

You should try harder?

Ain’t no fucking way Chuck Schumer isn’t responsible for this. That motherfucker has been doing shit like this for a while. But, let’s be fair and say, for some fucking reason, that Schumer had nothing to do with this. Then he has absolutely no control over his party, and he should go.

Like, either he sucks at his job and needs to go or he coordinated this and needs to go. And I no longer think he is bad at his job. Out of touch? Yes. A fucking dipshit? Yes. But bad at his job? No. I am not stupid enough to believe that for one second.

Which means we need to replace every Dem senator with progressives. Every senator should be followed everywhere by homeless people in their state. They should be seated next to starving families in restaurants. They should be forced to share medical treatments with the people whose healthcare they just sacrificed.

Honestly, I had a similar feeling to that, too. That people were becoming too left for them.

And now I will spend hours of my time making sure every single Democrat in every single election is as far left as I can make them. I am going to show up and fucking berate the shit out of every centrist Dem I see. I want them to dread seeing my fucking face. I am absolutely pissed.

Count Chocula. I’ll be out in the parking lot.

Highly recommend it. Sounds cool. Sounds like kum-pah-dray. Roll the R. Means companion or friend. Let’s you say howdy and y’all for free.

Compadre? Compadre is not uncommon here in the States, especially in the South, due to the dialectical intermingling of Spanish. Though it is similar, it has different connotations than comrade, but, you know, I don’t read, so I can’t tell the difference.

Sorry you don’t like de lingua, buddy. I can adjust that, but your comments weren’t particularly helpful in that regard.

I think you’re taking what I said too literally. Fair, I said it’s not canceling out something, but that refers to an act, as you can imply from the second post, not a group of people, but I do see the confusion.

Personally, I don’t see people and actions as the same, so if you do, then that would be our miscommunication. Does that help, compadre? It’s sorta like a guy stopping fire fighters and another guy stopping that guy and you’re over here going “Wow, can’t believe these two guys are both stopping people.” Does that make sense to someone that acts like a three year old but definitely isn’t?

… You didn’t listen. Democrats don’t say that. They say that it cancels out what Republicans are doing. Not that it cancels out Republicans.

So, yes, it does suck to suck. You either don’t know what you’re talking about, or you are lying. It’s that simple, buddy.

Because I don’t think that Republicans say it cancels out anything. Unless you’re saying that they say it cancels out California when it happened afterward, which is obviously false.

Personally, your lack of specificity is your problem, so… Eh, sucks to suck.

This post: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/22416821

Woah man, you can’t just say that politicians rape women without consequences.

They also rape children, too.

Skilled people are not born that way. You can be predisposed towards certain skills, and you can even argue that only some people can be the best at something, but all those can do is decrease the amount of time it takes to become skilled. No matter what, you can learn to do something. You can learn to draw. You can learn to write. You can learn to tell stories. You can learn to be creative. You can become skilled at most things. You may not be able to be the best, but practice will always get you closer to best than predisposition. You are literally not just born with it.

That is a very selective list. You can argue that they’re neoliberals with this, and that’s true, but you can’t argue they’re the same as GWB, lmao, the dumbest president we had had at the point. Anyone who tells you they were the same as Dubya has memory issues or is lying.

You let me know where they defunded the schools or got us into trillion dollar wars, just unbelievable that people think they’re the same and forget ol’ fucking Dubya and his mission accomplished, “God told me” bullshit.

Smart people don’t know everything. Smart people change their mind when confronted with things they are wrong about or don’t know enough about.

I can tell you still haven’t finished your homework.

That wasn’t an answer. That was a deflection. Why do you think infinity isn’t a number? A lot of people are told this in middle school and high school mathematics, and it is true that infinity is not a real number, but this can lead to the misconception that infinity isn’t a number.

But… Infinity has many practical applications, the least of which are limits, differentiation, and integrals in calculus, as well as its opposite infinitesimals. There are many scientific and engineering principles that rely on these mathematical functions. That’s a silly thing to think :p

Why do you believe that? We can potentially fix that if you explain your reasoning, and I can point out the issue with it, since hyperreal numbers are not the only set of numbers that contain infinity, but was an easy example to show it.