Page 27 of 46 FirstFirst ...
17
25
26
27
28
29
37
... LastLast
  1. #521
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    4,864
    Quote Originally Posted by josykay View Post
    Ask Anzacs, the relatives of the sailors of the Coronels and the people of Bengal, if Churchill deserves a statue...
    Ask yourself if he was not Prime minister exactly because he was a bastard and that was what Britain wanted at the time?

  2. #522
    Quote Originally Posted by josykay View Post
    Ask Anzacs, the relatives of the sailors of the Coronels and the people of Bengal, if Churchill deserves a statue...
    Ask the people of pakistan if Ghandi deserves a statue

    Dont be like this

  3. #523
    Elemental Lord GreenJesus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    8,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Well he was quite a well known white supremacist but my chief point of contention with putting up statues of the man is the 2-3 million Indian people that needlessly starved to death as a result of his policies.

    As I said before, construct a memorial to the victims of the Bengal famine in its place.
    Honestly, who the fuck cares about some irrelevant shit like that. He helped unite the world against the Nazi's. There would literally be no one in history that is "okay" according to these far left rioters. Get over it that some people didn't live up to your 2020 standards while sitting in your basement on a computer getting fat on cheetos. Privileged ass people that look down on people in a different time and culture. It's honestly incredibly aggravating.

    It's real easy to just sit there on your computer and complain about heroes in the past that weren't perfect or made mistakes while ignoring the great achievements and strides they made for humandkind.
    Last edited by GreenJesus; 2020-06-24 at 04:59 PM.

  4. #524
    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    Ask the people of pakistan if Ghandi deserves a statue

    Dont be like this
    Ghandi was not responsible for multiple million people dying of starvation.
    Churchill's politics did literally cost millions their life.
    And even before that, he was responsible for some horrible losses, the british and their colonies suffered in WW1.
    (And having the dishonor, of causing the first british defeat at seas for over 100 years... which ended with 2 armored cruisers sunk, 1 light cruiser damaged, and over 1600 sailors killed. Against 3 germans wounded)

  5. #525
    I am Murloc! Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    5,601
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenJesus View Post
    Honestly, who the fuck cares about some irrelevant shit like that. He helped unite the world against the Nazi's. There would literally be no one in history that is "okay" according to these far left rioters.
    It isn't irrelevant to the Bengali's. But I am not in favor of Churchill's statue coming down, he is a historically significant character whose contributions are relevant to the way he is being honored.

    He is also a vastly overrated hack, an aristocratic asshole that happily tossed away tens of thousands of lives to further his personal ambitions, a divisive and incompetent leader, a warmonger, and a white supremacist. That history also deserves to be taught.

    Some examples of why Churchill REALLY sucked.

    The Gallipoli campaign. Like the whole damn thing. Churchill proposed the attack, mostly because as the First Lord of the Admiralty, he felt the war was really hurting his career. The German High Seas fleet refused to leave port and give decisive battle, and the Royal Navy had been mediocre at best in attempting to have any impact on the fighting. So he came up with the genius idea of attacking the Ottoman empire exactly where they were strongest. His actual justification for the campaign was that he would use obsolete warships and colonial forces that "Had no significant use to the war effort", so nothing would be lost of value if it failed. Of course obsolete warships are still crewed by sailors. Long story short, unmitigated disaster, absolutely no strategic benifit, killed so many ANZACs that both nations still treat the anniversary as their version of memorial day, recalling the absolute horror that Winston Fucking Churchill put them through for no damn reason.

    He totally failed the British navy as first lord of the Admiralty, emphasizing "Good order and discipline" over combat performance. This led to such charming practices as painting entire warships as often as twice a month, without stripping the previous paint first. So solid steel plate wound up covered with dozens of layers of thick, flammable, paint. When German shells hit British ships, they burned like candles. The budget being spent on paint, polish and parades meant little emphasis was given to gunnery drills, so in order to maintain adequate rates of fire, turret crews took to leaving the blast doors open between rounds. With nothing to stop a flames from a hit on deck going straight to the armory, this tended to result in British ships exploding spectacularly, killing their entire crew of more than a thousand. This did not happen to any other navy (At least not with that cause), it was a solely British phenomena, directly resulting from Winston Fucking Churchill's political ambitions.

    The aforementioned Bengali famines were a particularly horrific example of a planned famine, with death tolls in the millions. Following the Japanese invasion of Burma, the British Government anticipated an invasion of India. The plan Churchill's government came up with to stop this, was a premptive scorched earth tactic, to destroy Bengal and the rest of eastern India, to prevent Japanese soldiers from foraging food while they moved. The "Denial Policies" were a deliberate seizure and destruction and removal of rice and other food stuffs. Allegedly this was supposed to apply to "excess rice", but the catastrophic loss of food and starvation that followed obviously contradict that. Two to Three Million Bengalis starved to death, victims of an invasion that never happened. Because Winston Fucking Churchill felt that Indian life was expendable as a defensive tactic, and starved 3 million people to death.

    When someone leaves deep national trauma on at least 4 nations (Australia, New Zealand, India, and Bangladesh) that is vividly remembered and memorialized even today, he probably isn't a great person. But he is significant, and he is part of history. He is a "Great Man" but definitely not a "Good Man".
    "We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine." DJT- Jan 22, 2020
    "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done." DJT- Feb 26, 2020
    “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” DJT- Feb 27, 2020

  6. #526
    Elemental Lord GreenJesus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    8,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapemask View Post
    You keep referring to Niemöller's poems, but you're doing it wrong.

    A slippery slope is saying one thing will lead to a completely different kind of thing. Gay marriage today, dog marriage tomorrow! But there's no logical connection between gay marriage and dog marriage unless you've been hit in the head.

    In Niemöller's poem, first they came for the communists. He's referring to an objectively bad action by the Nazis to remove the communists and their belief - and I'm actually quoting Hitler here - that "all men are equal," because "equality is a sin against nature." You may only know of communism from what it is today and what rabid right wing media says about it, which is neither here nor there, but in the 1920s and 30s it was seen as promoting basic civil liberties. This poem is not about Hitler eradicating a bad thing and then it led to them eradicating good things because no one stood up for the bad thing. It's about the Nazis doing an objectively bad thing and then more bad things happened because no one stood up against the other bad things.

    This is what makes your thing a slippery slope. Removing racist statues is a good thing. Gay marriage does not naturally lead to dog marriage. Removing racist statues does not naturally lead to removing you.
    Slippery slope has actually been pretty accurate in recent times. "Lol.. what will they do next? Tear down Thomas Jefferson or George Washington?" And look. They are trying to do that now.

    Unemployment checks of $600 a week during corona? "Give us this unemployment check forever so we never have to work again!"

    Once you give an inch, they'll try to steal a mile.

  7. #527
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenJesus View Post
    Slippery slope has actually been pretty accurate in recent times. "Lol.. what will they do next? Tear down Thomas Jefferson or George Washington?" And look. They are trying to do that now.

    Unemployment checks of $600 a week during corona? "Give us this unemployment check forever so we never have to work again!"

    Once you give an inch, they'll try to steal a mile.
    600 sure sounds great but by the time you pay for health insurance, offset the lost earnings on unemployment, offset the loss on retirement/pension employer contributions and other lost benefits... the 600 becomes a lot less impressive when the tally comes due at the end of the month.
    "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president," - McConnell

  8. #528
    Elemental Lord GreenJesus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    8,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Zan15 View Post
    600 sure sounds great but by the time you pay for health insurance, offset the lost earnings on unemployment, offset the loss on retirement/pension employer contributions and other lost benefits... the 600 becomes a lot less impressive when the tally comes due at the end of the month.
    Oh wait. I was mistaken. I only put $600. It is an ADDITIONAL $600. So they are actually making $1200 a week. 40% of workers are currently making more from unemployment than they would by working. It's insane.

  9. #529
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Late Capitalism
    Posts
    50,438
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenJesus View Post
    Oh wait. I was mistaken. I only put $600. It is an ADDITIONAL $600. So they are actually making $1200 a week. 40% of workers are currently making more from unemployment than they would by working. It's insane.
    Indeed, it's insane that wages are that low.
    This website is not a place of honor. No highly esteemed deed is commemorated here. Nothing valued is here. What is here is dangerous and repulsive to us. The danger is in a particular location. The danger is still present in your time as it was in ours.

    Get in loser, we're saving the USPS.

  10. #530
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenJesus View Post
    Oh wait. I was mistaken. I only put $600. It is an ADDITIONAL $600. So they are actually making $1200 a week. 40% of workers are currently making more from unemployment than they would by working. It's insane.
    40% of workers are making more than their current salary....but how many are making more than their total compensation including the benefits they lost.

    I bet that number drops substantially.

    then how many of those making more than their current salary will not be back at work come july 31st and those people who earned more than they did while working will quickly drop given the fact that unemployment max is what at best 50% of just your salary.


    So for a little while these people have some extra money.

    An additional 600 is not needed for most everyone, I think its a good number as it is given all the extra benefits lost.



    for example my cook neighbor would only get 239 dollars a week unemployment vs 525 salary.
    So he is making 839 right now instead of 525.

    His boss said there is a good chance they might only bring back 6 of the 10 whom were laid off in the kitchen.



    16 payments of 839 = 13,424 - Total salary $8400 = $5024 extra (if you don't assume the health insurance he used to pay 50% for)

    16 payments of 839 = 13424 - 8400 salary - (86 dollars a week insurance) 1376 = $3648 extra

    August unemployment 239 - salary 525 = -286 a week. So in the same time frame 16 weeks he will lose the extra $5024 he made.

    Now that is assuming he does not buy health insurance his employer used to pay half for. Include now the 100% he has to pay for insurance he would be Even after just 12 weeks.

    Of course depending on what state he is in he could once he drops to 239 qualify for Medicaid or subsidized ACA. But a large percentage of people can't.


    This is just one example of how the $600 is really not all that substantial of a windfall. Maybe for the people get right back to work July 31st but anyone after that point not really
    "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president," - McConnell

  11. #531
    I will say this. Whether the statues are of positive role models or of negative role models from history, the public square isn't the right place for them. We have places for remembering history. It's called museums. I have no issues with having sections of museums related to the preservation of knowledge of the darker sides of history in America. I 100% understand the motives of the people knocking down these statues. I just feel destroying them isn't the way to go. A compromise would be to move them to a museum.
    Quote Originally Posted by blobbydan View Post
    We're all doomed. Let these retards shuffle the chairs on the titanic. They can die in a safe space if they want to... Whatever. What a miserable joke this life is. I can't wait until it's all finally over and I can return to the sweet oblivion of the void.

  12. #532
    The Undying Themius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    36,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    I will say this. Whether the statues are of positive role models or of negative role models from history, the public square isn't the right place for them. We have places for remembering history. It's called museums. I have no issues with having sections of museums related to the preservation of knowledge of the darker sides of history in America. I 100% understand the motives of the people knocking down these statues. I just feel destroying them isn't the way to go. A compromise would be to move them to a museum.
    Consider that many of them were put up by white nationalists or kkk members or kkk affiliate groups durrng the civil rights era and other times when major laws for black Americans were passed.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Zan15 View Post
    40% of workers are making more than their current salary....but how many are making more than their total compensation including the benefits they lost.

    I bet that number drops substantially.
    Stopped here because I do not agree with this conclusion, being that the jobs lost were mostly lower paid jobs, while unemployment for higher tier jobs was quite low. Service type jobs and customer facing jobs were those that went.

    These people often do not have benefits, or substantial benefits. Many people within this tier forgo benefits because they can't actually afford even the partial payments required of them.

  13. #533
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    Stopped here because I do not agree with this conclusion, being that the jobs lost were mostly lower paid jobs, while unemployment for higher tier jobs was quite low. Service type jobs and customer facing jobs were those that went.

    These people often do not have benefits, or substantial benefits. Many people within this tier forgo benefits because they can't actually afford even the partial payments required of them.
    https://www.census.gov/library/publi...o/p60-267.html

    In 2018, 85.1 percent of full-time, year-round workers and 68.5 percent of people who worked less than full-time, year-round had private coverage.


    24.7 percent of people in households with incomes below $25,000, the lowest income category, had private coverage in 2018
    47.9 percent of people in households with household income of $25,000 to $49,999, had private coverage in 2018.
    65.9 percent of people in households with household income of $50,00 to $74,999, had private coverage in 2018.


    a substantial amount of those people who are getting the 600 dollars had to replace the private coverage they had. This does not include public coverage (Medicaid) since most of that is cost free.

    From a poverty tracking:

    Total, poverty universe = 67.3% had private coverage.

    Below 100 percent of  poverty 22%
    Below 138 percent of  poverty 24.7%
    Between 100 to 199  percent of poverty 41.6%
    "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president," - McConnell

  14. #534
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    Consider that many of them were put up by white nationalists or kkk members or kkk affiliate groups durrng the civil rights era and other times when major laws for black Americans were passed.
    That's why I don't think they should be on display. Clearly people who were involved in the slave trade shouldn't have statues in the town square honoring them.
    Quote Originally Posted by blobbydan View Post
    We're all doomed. Let these retards shuffle the chairs on the titanic. They can die in a safe space if they want to... Whatever. What a miserable joke this life is. I can't wait until it's all finally over and I can return to the sweet oblivion of the void.

  15. #535
    Brewmaster Yadryonych's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Матушка Россия
    Posts
    1,290
    Quote Originally Posted by josykay View Post
    Ask Anzacs, the relatives of the sailors of the Coronels and the people of Bengal, if Churchill deserves a statue...
    Why don't ask Britons? Oh wait they have already been asked


  16. #536
    I am Murloc! Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    5,601
    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    That's why I don't think they should be on display. Clearly people who were involved in the slave trade shouldn't have statues in the town square honoring them.
    I think it is totally appropriate to display them in a museum. However unpleasant, both sides of the Civil Rights movement are part of our history. The lynchings and beatings are forever part of the story of the marching and speeches. It is uncomfortable, it is embarrassing, but it is true. The fact that places still have statues of Nathan Bedford Forrest in their parks in 2020 is something that is noteworthy, and worth remembering. It is worth remembering Forrest himself, and all the horrible things he did. The slave-trading, POW slaughtering, KKK forming, Terrorist son of a bitch is part of American History, and forgetting him does a disservice to our understanding of history.

    But outdoor public display is seen as an honor to that persons memory. It is making a positive statement about that persons impact on history. We don't need the sun to shine on that shit, put it in a museum and surround it with the context of his behavior.
    "We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine." DJT- Jan 22, 2020
    "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done." DJT- Feb 26, 2020
    “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” DJT- Feb 27, 2020

  17. #537
    The Undying Themius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    36,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Zan15 View Post
    https://www.census.gov/library/publi...o/p60-267.html

    In 2018, 85.1 percent of full-time, year-round workers and 68.5 percent of people who worked less than full-time, year-round had private coverage.


    24.7 percent of people in households with incomes below $25,000, the lowest income category, had private coverage in 2018
    47.9 percent of people in households with household income of $25,000 to $49,999, had private coverage in 2018.
    65.9 percent of people in households with household income of $50,00 to $74,999, had private coverage in 2018.


    a substantial amount of those people who are getting the 600 dollars had to replace the private coverage they had. This does not include public coverage (Medicaid) since most of that is cost free.

    From a poverty tracking:

    Total, poverty universe = 67.3% had private coverage.

    Below 100 percent of  poverty 22%
    Below 138 percent of  poverty 24.7%
    Between 100 to 199  percent of poverty 41.6%
    What does this indicate? You've not indicated the worth of the benefit...typically there are benefits but they are 1)a large portion of the salary 2)not very robust, with still high payments

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...s-cost-voxcare

    Half of all Americans get their health insurance through work. Trouble is, doing so is becoming less and less affordable — especially for already low-wage workers.

    In 2019, the Kaiser Family Foundation Employer Health Benefits Survey — an annual account of roughly 2,000 small and large businesses’ employer-sponsored insurance — found the average annual premium to cover a family through work was a whopping $20,576, and $7,188 for an individual. Employers cover most of that, but families still contributed an average of $6,015 in premiums, and single Americans covered about $1,242 of the annual cost.

    The kicker? Over the past 10 years, the cost of the portion of employer-sponsored health insurance premiums that falls on American families has increased by 71 percent. Overall, premiums have gone up 54 percent since 2009. That’s faster than the rate of inflation and faster than the average wage growth.

    Nearly half of all Americans get their health insurance through work, a system that covers roughly 153 million people. And for lower-wage workers it’s a system that is increasingly unaffordable.

    Workers at companies with a significant number of low-wage employees (which the Kaiser Family survey quantifies as a company in which at least 35 percent of employees are making an annual salary of $25,000 or less) have lower premiums than those who work at companies with fewer low-wage workers, probably because their plans cover less. But at the same time, workers at firms with a significant number of low-wage employees are faced with high-deductible plans, and also pay a larger share of the premium cost than workers at companies with fewer lower-wage employees.

    According to the survey, workers at lower-wage companies pay an average of $7,000 a year family plan — $1,000 more than employees at companies with higher salaried workers.

    “When workers making $25,000 a year have to shell out $7,000 a year just for their share of family premiums,” Drew Altman, the president of Kaiser Family Foundation, said in a statement, that’s where cost becomes prohibitive. Such employees are putting almost 30 percent of their salaries toward premiums.

    The takeaway is clear. Health care is getting more and more expensive, and families and employers are having to bear more of the cost, which research has shown not only has an effect on how much workers are actually getting paid, but how many workers are hired.
    I noted that they do not have substantial benefits having benefits, and having benefits worth a damn are two totally different things.

  18. #538
    Merely a Setback JohnBrown1917's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The Russia that is very communist, da.
    Posts
    26,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Yadryonych View Post
    Why don't ask Britons? Oh wait they have already been asked

    People vote for shitty people, anything else is new? Not even a mention of Alan Turing?
    Joe Biden and Donald Trump are rapist and their supporters are rape apologists

    Capitalism is the most deadly system to ever be used in the history of humankind

  19. #539
    Quote Originally Posted by Yadryonych View Post
    Why don't ask Britons? Oh wait they have already been asked
    Nothing like decades of conservative hagiography to fix a vote.

    Of course he wouldn't have made it through WW2 without Clement Attlee as deputy PM who oversaw all domestic affairs during the war. Attlee became PM after the war and established the NHS in 1948. The NHS being the favourite government function amongst all Britons.

  20. #540
    I am Murloc! Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    5,601
    Quote Originally Posted by Yadryonych View Post
    Why don't ask Britons? Oh wait they have already been asked
    Of course they did. Part of the story of Winston Churchill is understanding the image of Churchill. He was charismatic, funny, and stubborn. He was a person they looked too when the times were desperate, and he was there for them. Churchill built an image of himself as the icon of British resilience, and it wasn't total bullshit. People were more then willing to overlook his incompetence because he projected strength.

    The US was more than willing to play along, even as Churchill's international political capital evaporated. He was an extremely useful propaganda tool, but an incompetent fool. The UK military was an absolutely pathetic mess for the entire war, not at the tactical level, where their soldiers were just as brave and resourceful as any other nation, but the upper ranks were infested with the sort of arrogant, incompetent, hereditary fools that defined Britains caste system. Even ignoring his insanely bad moral record, which I posted before, he had an absolutely pathetic track record in the war.

    A couple things to consider about Churchills "Brilliant" Leadership:
    The Fall of France- I know this one mostly falls on the French, who had similar systemic failings, but come on, the British Army there was pathetic. They had all the advantages and they lost to a numerically inferior force they knew was coming. Churchill's genius here was managing to spin Dunkirk as a victory. I am not misusing the term there, that does take a special kind of genius to make Dunkirk sound like a victory because some of you survived.

    The Fall of Norway- This one is even worse. Look at a map. Tell me how the most powerful navy in the world lost Norway to the Germans... The answer is directly tied to political incompetence by Churchill, who was obsessed with holding the navy in reserve for a decisive engagement with a German fleet that didn't exist (The same strategy he used in WWI, but with even more disaster). During this clusterfuck, the Royal Navy managed to lose a large aircraft carrier to a pair of battleships. The HMS Glorious was just sailing along, with no real escort and no fucking idea what was going on, and bumped into the only two German Battleships in the North Sea, which were also completely unnoticed and unmolested.

    North Africa- Like all of it. How the hell did the Royal Navy not control the Mediterranean when they controlled 3/4s of its shoreline, either directly or by alliance? They had a massive fleet, no real opposition by the Italian Navy, and the French navy was never used against them. Once again, Churchill managed to spin the disastrous attempts to resupply Malta as a victory, while Rommel was resupplying with absolute impunity. Once again, a fundamental problem was Churchills unwillingness to actually commit his fleets to supporting his armies. He let thousands die, to preserve Britain's fleet, which he viewed as critical to preserving the post-war empire (Which didn't exist, because Britain was never going to make the rules again, thanks to Churchill).

    I could go on. The whole war was a repeat of the same. Over time, Americans increasingly sidelined Churchill and Montgomery, cutting them out of key decisions. Their operations were inherently political, with no significant insight into strategic reality. Operation Market Garden is a perfect example.

    Once again, Churchill, the charismatic master orator and charmer, spun all this as proof of his greatness. The man almost singlehandedly destroyed the British Empire, made the Royal Navy an irrelevant joke (Instead of the most powerful force on the planet, which it was when Churchill got control of it, and had been for 4 centuries), and turned the UK into a satellite of its former colony. He is basically the opposite of Thatcher. Who was an unlikeable bitch that got shit done.
    "We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine." DJT- Jan 22, 2020
    "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done." DJT- Feb 26, 2020
    “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” DJT- Feb 27, 2020

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •