• 3 Posts
  • 30 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: November 23rd, 2023

help-circle







  • Always go to the study!

    The disparity between red and blue states has little to do with anything Biden has done, experts interviewed by ABC News said, noting that federal policy typically holds minimal influence over state-by-state economic trends.

    Instead, they added, the dynamic owes in large part to the appeal of warm weather states for workers and businesses, as well as the combination of company-friendly state policies and Democrat-leaning cities that attract young, educated workers.

    Warm weather and Democrat-leaning cities are responsible for economic growth in red states.

    Or on the flip side

    "Dating back to when the president took office, he has enacted a set of historic legislative accomplishments that have very directly driven the historic labor market recovery and historic economic growth we’ve had,” Daniel Hornung, deputy director at the National Economic Council, a Biden administration group that advises the president, told ABC News.

    Moreover, Hornung rebuked the notion that Biden’s policies have little to do with the particularly strong performances among red states, citing** legislative achievements that, in some cases, have disproportionately benefited red states. ** Biden’s legislative accomplishments are responsible for economic growth in red states.

    OR, on even a third side, somehow…

    “Presidents don’t really have a lot to do with state economic performance,” Terry Clower, a professor of public policy at George Mason University, told ABC News.

    Instead, experts said that relatively strong red state performance results in part from business-friendly policies and attractive weather.

    But George Mason University is basically a conservative school, so he would say something like that.


  • So what?

    Do you think the solution to mis-/dis-information is censorship or otherwise attempting to marginalize what you believe are “garbage and lies”? What makes his arguments invalid? Which of his statements are false and lies? How do you know? And why are you definitely right and why is he definitely wrong?

    There’s this really interesting humans do. We become convinced of some viewpoint, whether through reason or, more likely, uncritical acceptance of some framework. It’s the right viewpoint. We assume others must also share our viewpoint. The truth is obvious to us. So disagreement is often treated as lies. The one who disagrees knows the truth, but chooses to say otherwise. They’re nefarious, despicable, and disrespectful for their duplicity in the face of an obvious truth.

    But here’s the thing: people genuinely hold beliefs different than you. What you see as “faulty, intentionally dishonest foundations” can only be true if you are of the mind of Pizzamane and can definitively say he believes in something else entirely. You must have the mind of Pizzamane. Unless you’re really a psychic, you cannot do that. He may actually believe the foundations of his beliefs and you’ve been wrong this whole time. You can’t know that’s true either.

    So what to do?

    As hard as it might be, you have no choice but to except Pizzamane and other liberals and leftists at face value. You can consider our beliefs as garbage all you want. But leftists have every right to participate in this community, just as you do. And, I assure you, we often consider your beliefs garbage. When we disagree, then we should argue about the arguments, the statements and conclusions.

    In short, he, or anyone else for that matter, will not be banned by me as long as they bring arguments. (…and don’t tell people to fuck off…😠)

    If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person wereof the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.—John Stuart Mill







  • So, I know where you’re coming from because I’ve read stuff by Edmund Burke and other conservatives. But, unless the conservative you’re talking with is the intellectual type, they probably haven’t. They’ve probably just internalized some version of social conservatism but would also be appalled that you’d accuse them of supporting social stratification even as they support it.

    I learned some time ago that this particular argumentative strategy is incredibly pointless. They don’t care that you know the historical and philosophical foundation of their beliefs. For them, that foundation isn’t there for them. They probably don’t know it! Their life experiences inform them more than anything else.