bloviate

We all agree that crazy people should not have guns. In Switzerland there are established ways to take away the guns of crazy people. We don’t have that. We have 2a which says shall not be abridged meaning that children get nukes. Fuck 2a.

Me too especially given that he can launch nukes and kill every mammal on the planet

I’m shocked by the nih funding graph. Funding dropped under W during the Iraq war, but that isn’t reflected in the graph.

Why couldn’t they all be his? He might need a fancy one, a casual one, different gauges, one that shoots fire, etc etc

That image made me wonder how the woman is choking him from behind.

Still no plans I see

Ok still no plans though.

Ironically your comment here is also an ad hominem attack. For the 9th time, does anyone have a practical plan for getting these political plans implemented? Please do not answer with anything but that.

So still answer for “how will this make a political impact in the US?” But lots of ad hominem attacks.

You know, I don’t think guns are very safe.

Evidence of the impracticality of what you propose.

Finish your argument before you start a new one sweetie.

This is condescending and intended to distract from the main point by being inflammatory You keep dodging because you don’t have an answer.

You have to either accept that your point was wrong and integrate that acceptance into your line of argument or argue for your point being correct - This is done by either supplying sufficient empirical data that helps create some synthesis with the rest of the data or you go through the given data and explain why it is faulty or insufficient as a basis for a rebuttal.

As the rest of the comment you are responding to explains, you have still yet to do this.

Nah. It can’t be popular enough to work here. If it could, you would have said how. You’re just diverting from that fact because you don’t actually have an answer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

Lmk when you want to actually make progress on anything regarding this topic and not just nitpick tediously. The main point is that there’s no way to get those political systems to fly here because people don’t want them currently.

https://lemmy.world/comment/26373832

That does not mean it is popular here

Factually untrue, as the data shows.

Then why don’t we have this as our current form of government? How to you propose to get everyone to buy in to this in the US? If you can’t reduce it to practice, this is just impractical Internet bullshit talk.

I assert that that’s all this will ever be. We have zero chance of this being implemented here.

We do however have a chance of getting back to regulated capitalism. All we need is a new TR.

Ok great some people affected liked it. You win and have a huge penis.

That does not mean it is popular here and I still don’t see a way forward for it.

Until we all see that, we will generally bounce between unregulated capitalism and (what I favor) which is well regulated capitalism with worker and environmental protections.

Biden won, BTW.

You didn’t address any of my questions. If this stuff is so popular, why isn’t it used more? How do you propose to overcome the objections of the vast majority of Americans and Europeans, including the rich and powerful?

Very glib. My point remains though - if this stuff were popular, it would be used more. So why don’t we have it in the US? How do you propose to get around that?

50s now, so went to college during reunification.

I know several former East Germans. None of them was happy. They all agree that things are better now. You don’t have a good example.

To the extent that the bourgeoisie are able to vote, buy political ads, hire private police, use private schools which reinforce their preferences, etc this will never fly. Again you need to find a third way that is popular. My solution is regulation, but I would happily jump on a bandwagon that has people on it. GDR is not that bandwagon.