3 ms·

I do think corona shows rather nicely how critical good leadership is. We should assume that other things also had impacts for people lives. Otherwise it woul

by Rillen 6y ago

I do think corona shows rather nicely how critical good leadership is. We should assume that other things also had impacts for people lives. Otherwise it would mean that a President isn't relevant at all. While one person takes care of a self-serving deal for golf courses, the other person would sit down and educate themselves on topics like climate change, education and current education system issues etc. I'm quite bewildered, that you actually prefer a self-serving deals over everything else he could do. And your two options are missleading arent they? Its not a black and white topic.

coldtea 6y ago
>I'm quite bewildered, that you actually prefer a self-serving deals over everything else he could do Notice that this is weasely phrasing. I didn't say I prefer it over "everything else he could do". Nor I spoke of any kind of "self-serving deal". I literally said "I'd rather have self-serving deals for golf courses than the nth trillion dollar invasion...". He did less invasions and wars than Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama, more self-serving deals of the cheap kind, and less self-serving deals of the trillion dollar Wall Street bailout kind. He also spoke about globalization's issues and losing jobs to China, which was not allowed to do in polite company before... >While one person takes care of a self-serving deal for golf courses, the other person would sit down and educate themselves on topics like climate change, education and current education system issues etc. And how did that worked out thus far, up to 2016? Wasn't the climate getting all worse, education all the worse and college more expensive under the last, say, 10+ last of your presidents? Did any of those things got suddenly or especially bad in 2016-2020? >Otherwise it would mean that a President isn't relevant at all. Well, politicians are not that relevant in corporatism. It's only when they try to do anything besides business as usual, even as lip service, that they become somewhat relevant (e.g. slow down outsourcing of jobs to China, stop the war machine and intervenionism, cater to the middle class, as opposed to the welfare-level poor and the 10%, and so on).

by Rillen 6y ago

coldtea 6y ago

>I'm quite bewildered, that you actually prefer a self-serving deals over everything else he could do Notice that this is weasely phrasing. I didn't say I prefer it over "everything else he could do". Nor I spoke of any kind of "self-serving deal". I literally said "I'd rather have self-serving deals for golf courses than the nth trillion dollar invasion...". He did less invasions and wars than Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama, more self-serving deals of the cheap kind, and less self-serving deals of the trillion dollar Wall Street bailout kind. He also spoke about globalization's issues and losing jobs to China, which was not allowed to do in polite company before... >While one person takes care of a self-serving deal for golf courses, the other person would sit down and educate themselves on topics like climate change, education and current education system issues etc. And how did that worked out thus far, up to 2016? Wasn't the climate getting all worse, education all the worse and college more expensive under the last, say, 10+ last of your presidents? Did any of those things got suddenly or especially bad in 2016-2020? >Otherwise it would mean that a President isn't relevant at all. Well, politicians are not that relevant in corporatism. It's only when they try to do anything besides business as usual, even as lip service, that they become somewhat relevant (e.g. slow down outsourcing of jobs to China, stop the war machine and intervenionism, cater to the middle class, as opposed to the welfare-level poor and the 10%, and so on).