I agree that he's doing a better job, and I think it might actually be for the right reasons. That said, I'm not sure he states why he actually does it. He ought to be starting a trade war with China because she is an unethical colonialist would-be power which has violated numerous treaties to which she is a signatory. She has proven herself a threat to political and individual sovereignty. I would absolutely support the idea of sanctioning her for such actions, but I think Trump doesn't spin his actions that way because it does not fit with his brand of populism. And though he's doing better, that's honestly a pretty low bar. I'm still embarrassed we let them into the WTO in the first place. I remain honestly hopeful we don't reach a trade deal until China rights her wrongs.
And to those who would say, "but sovereignty though!", I would respond that we are free as Americans to vote with our wallets. If we wish to choose with whom we do business, that is our right.
I personally blame social media for a lot oft this. Mob mentality has been a problem since forever, but Twitter has created a nation-wide 24/7 mob which is angrier than ever and never disbands. I blame that for the elections of President Trump, Congresswoman Ocasio, and other such divisive figures. I also think it's responsible for the phenomenon of each "side" seeing the other as morally wrong, inuhame, and almost not people. It's been known for a while we're meaner on-line because we can't see any one on the other side; I think that's a significant part of the problem.
This, of course, begs the question: how do you fix it? I don't know.
That's not a fair assessment. Your opinion of a "sensible position" on "gun control" is almost certainly different from mine. I would take the perspective that people openly supporting socialism is a much further-leftward lurch than any thing on the right. [0] You also brand the NRA as "fringe" and as "general nutcases", which is again unfair. Your political opinion is not the single source of truth or the center of the political spectrum. Your implication here is that the right has become fringe, but the graph linked above shows otherwise.
I'm really sorry to hear that google ads got even more, and now they're going to complain about a monopoly. Things like GDPR also make it harder to start a competitor, as paperwork and red tape always do; I have not personally worked on GDPR for any thing, but know some one who does and it's a nightmare.
If stringent government regulation got you here, maybe it will be less of that, not more, that gets you out.
America's population is mainly growing from immigration, according to the Brookings Institute's synthesis of census data [0]. Is government-funded sterilization the most productive solution for us, or even necessary, if most of the new people are being born in other nations?
I understand you don't buy the idea of growth continuing through 2100, but I don't buy the idea of it ending beforehand until I see a citation. I found at least one estimate that supports my position; I haven't seen significant evidence to support the idea of growth ending that soon. All the things you list keep people employed.
I wouldn't just point to the "right wing" as authoritarian; that seems like needlessly politicizing a social problem. Dictators have no values or political alignment but their own moral gain.
With respect to your earlier comments around advertising, I don't know about Europe, but America has never advertised having a large family or a small one. Not sure it's the role of government to try and shape social norms; that's generally referred to as brainwashing.
How do you propose to do this? Genuinely interested in the answer, as this is probably the most practical if we can figure it out. Especially considering that nations retain sovereignty over their own policies, what's in it for them? They would lose economic growth.
> limit mass migration to countries with high per capita emissions
Again, can you clarify? Are you going to tell people they must remain in third-world undeveloped poverty? That's how you get wars.
> ask people to forgo affordable energy
Again, good luck. Most people aren't amenable to the idea of returning to a stone age.
Africa still has yet to industrialize, but it's coming, and with it a huge population boom. It would be a massive challenge to stop this, especially since it would likely economically cripple an already poverty-stricken continent and prevent or seriously inhibit economic growth. They are arguably the biggest concern here; not sure what we can do to stop it. Much of what you're saying seems premised on the "I'm-king-for-a-day" way of thinking.
I just looked. About one-third is drivel, one-third is pro-Trump, and one-third is just normal stuff (there's a picture of a 1930's vintage dress, and a pretty picture some one took of Cork, Ireland). Show me the social network which is clean. It's probably a similar breakdown on many others, just biased to the right rather than the left. Also, I think Gab doesn't do the kind of algorithmic filtering, promotion, and demotion of twitter/fb/etc.
> You use "post-modernism" like Jordan Peterson uses "post-modernism"... incorrectly, and likely without having read any of it.
Incorrect on both counts. And I use it to describe the philosophical base that essentially, there is no absolute truth and nothing can be taken for reality. Which, ironically, post-modernists use their only absolute truth.
> reducing population (not through genocide obviously) for expedience is actually a very neoliberal idea
What makes you think I'm a neoliberal? And what does that have to do with what I said? More importantly, how would you reduce it? It took hundreds of years for the West to reduce birth rates. Cultural factors often mean people have many children, even if they have access to birth control. See the attempts to do this in Africa. There has been some success, but not a ton.
"In the North Korean capital city of Pyongyang, Western news articles reported that a hidden camera was placed to catch citizens with improper hairstyles. This was part of a television programme broadcast at the same time as Let's Trim Our Hair in Accordance with the Socialist Lifestyle. The offenders would then be interviewed by the presenter and asked to explain themselves. Their name, address and workplace would be announced to deter others from being embarrassed and ostracized."
From the article. Also, this comparison is like saying that Soviet Russia producing propaganda was a sign that the gulags didn't work.
Oh yay, a new interface to learn. Just what every body asked for, not. Companies do this all the time to justify higher prices. Some times, a well-done piece of software can just go into maintenance mode for a while.
But do you know what I hate about dropbox? Dropping support for most linux filesystems. Seriously, why? That was the one deciding factor for me. I had looked at other options, but that did it. Owncloud does a fine job, and most people at my company like it fine.