Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Theodarzna]

99.9996% want to take X out and cut their still beating heart out of their chest, but X's objections do not matter. (Yes, excessively dramatic example but the principle remains.)

I think the problem is everything you allegedly are for preserving and having as the core keystone of the United States is entirely undermined by your preferred economic policies which have turned families to dust, towns to dust and rendered Middle America a hellscape of desiccated towns and communities with a declining life expectancy and birth rate.

This isn't to say the PMC striver market focused policies of say a Warren are really that different from your own economic agenda, but how on Earth can you be both a free marketeer, for a global imperial project but also think somehow you'll also preserve that small town America when you are for there being zero barriers to international capital and no restrictions on the very businesses that sucked the very lifeblood out of the heart of your own country?

[Kellhound]

This is kind of the root of the whole issue.

The left wing's basic premise is "let's make things better for everyone".
The right wing's basic premise is "let's pick winners and losers so we can shit on the losers and exploit their suffering".

You can't both-sides that, as if the left-wingers are just "picking different winners". That fundamentally ignores their actual positions and tries to argue as if they're just different-minded right-wingers.

- - - Updated - - -



Then pay more.

Seriously; if you cannot get enough qualified workers, pay for training, and upkeep during training. Hell, put a contractual obligation for so many years of work after they graduate, if you want; I'm not opposed to the company ensuring a return on their investment, within reason.

You're complaining that employers aren't willing to shoulder the costs of training employees. Well, tough nuts. If you're not willing to pay for training, and positions are going unfilled, you clearly don't need to fill those positions that badly.

If you can't get people to take jobs at what you're offering in pay, pay more.

Particularly as "well above minimum wage" in the USA is meaningless; even if you're living in the boonies, being offered less than $40k/year or so is an exploitative insult. If you're expected skilled labor, you should be offering significantly more.

Oh we could pay line grunts the wage we pay techs, but then we have to pay our techs like engineers, and bump our engineer salaries. We DO train our employees. Even after training they STILL can't follow simple written instructions. At some point the cost of retaining and training grunts exceeds the cost of automating those jobs or becomes so expensive it makes more sense to ship production overseas.

- - - Updated - - -

That's not what those words mean, no.

Refusal to accept reality is not an argument. It's just you being obstinate.



It's amusing when you directly contradict yourself within just two sentences, but I'm baffled as to how you seem unaware that your position is internally contradictory.

I am not arguing what the words actually mean, I am arguing what you are taking them to mean.

Its not contradictory, you just dont think beyond the surface.

[Endus]

Oh we could pay line grunts the wage we pay techs, but then we have to pay our techs like engineers, and bump our engineer salaries.

So?

We DO train our employees. Even after training they STILL can't follow simple written instructions.

Seems like either a colossal failure in hiring practices, or in training. If you're having these issues consistently, it's your company's issue, not the labor market you're in.

At some point the cost of retaining and training grunts exceeds the cost of automating those jobs or becomes so expensive it makes more sense to ship production overseas.

Again, so?

[Kellhound]

you believing this isn't surprising, what is surprising is you seem to think this will convince others that your point of view isn't objectively terrible.

Show me the laws that state that biological male/female athletes are prohibited from playing the sports that match said gender.

[uuuhname]

Show me the laws that state that biological male/female athletes are prohibited from playing the sports that match said gender.

who the what? the point I was making is you "small government" types are not as freedom, liberty loving as you claim to be. so you saying "biological" males and females should stick to their sports is simply proving my point. going full speed on the transphobia isn't a winning argument here dude. heck, if I wanted to be radical I'd argue that gender has no place in sports, at all.

[Kellhound]

Focusing on terms like "biological males/females" is just transphobic/TERF anti-scientific horse shit, in this context. "Biologically", sex is not a binary to begin with. There are many categories of intersex, biologically speaking. And that's without getting into the point that sex and gender aren't the same thing, and tying the two together is an argument rooted in bigotry and without merit. Or that gender isn't even a given binary to begin with, either; there are plenty of historical examples of gender non-binary individuals, and even cultures who respected more than two identified and codified gender roles.

On biology, we don't even need to dig any further than androgen insensitivity syndrome; women with AIS are morphologically and by expression female in every respect; the only way to identify them as having the condition is genetic testing.

Are they "biologically female" because of that morphology? In that case, any "biological male" who adopts that feminine morphology, by whatever means whether they be hormonal or surgical, is also "biologically female".

Are they "biologically male" because of their XY genetics? Sure, you go try telling those women they're "actually men", despite having a uterus and so on.

Either way, your bullshit transphobic "biological" argument falls apart. And that's before getting into a few dozen, if not few hundred, other iterations. Your views aren't based in biology, they're based in personal bigotries against transgender people, and nothing more.

Those cultures that have more than male/female also have divisions on what the other "sexes" can do. Biologically, great apes fall into three categories: genetically male, genetically female, and genetical mutation (which are rare). Most of what you are talking about is social construct differences, not biological differences.

Also, my statement was concerning the absolute that they could not play any sports. I neither agreed nor disagreed with the laws.

- - - Updated - - -

Excessively dramatic and pointless. The Temple of Doom is a movie yo.

Human sacrifice is real, yo. It is frowned upon in "modern" society, but that was not always the case.

- - - Updated - - -

You're making an argument against "tyranny of the majority" here.

The problem with this is twofold.

First, the obvious; all government, in this argument, is tyranny. If not tyranny of the majority, then tyranny of some minority. And historically, those other tyrannies, the aristocracies and dictatorships and so on, they've almost always turned out worse for the people. Whining about "tyranny of the majority" is just avoiding discussing what tyranny you want to inflict on everyone else, against their interests, instead.

The second, more dishonest, problem, is that you consciously enjoy the benefits and protections of that "tyranny". No one advocating this wants to be sovereign; they want to retain all the protections and benefits of living in that society. They just don't want to accept the costs and duties thereof. It's entirely self-serving and has nothing to do with individualism or liberty. It's just "fuck you, got mine".

Given those two problems, anyone expressing this attitude can safely be discarded as having nothing to say worth hearing.

Government exists to tell you what you cannot do and what you must do. Tyranny, by definition, need not exist in most forms of government. I agree with neither the tyranny of the majority nor with the tyranny of the minority. Both must be guarded against.

- - - Updated - - -

So?

Seems like either a colossal failure in hiring practices, or in training. If you're having these issues consistently, it's your company's issue, not the labor market you're in.



Again, so?

We would end up with the same level of incompetent line workers, just higher paid. The net result would be just a significant increase in the cost of doing business.

I have observed the same issues in multiple companies. It is the quality of available labor that is poor.

So, no jobs are better than lower paying jobs?

[Edge-]

Human sacrifice is real, yo. It is frowned upon in "modern" society, but that was not always the case.

When was the last time there was a popular vote on ripping out someones beating heart?

[Kellhound]

who the what? the point I was making is you "small government" types are not as freedom, liberty loving as you claim to be. so you saying "biological" males and females should stick to their sports is simply proving my point. going full speed on the transphobia isn't a winning argument here dude. heck, if I wanted to be radical I'd argue that gender has no place in sports, at all.

Only the view of the trans athletes matter, not the athletes' they will competing against?

Reality says it has its place. If males and females competed together in the 2016 Olympics, no a single female would have won a medal in track for instance.

- - - Updated - - -

When was the last time there was a popular vote on ripping out someones beating heart?

If people have done it in the past, they are fully capable of doing it in the future.

[uuuhname]

Only the view of the trans athletes matter, not the athletes' they will competing against?

Reality says it has its place. If males and females competed together in the 2016 Olympics, no a single female would have won a medal in track for instance.

my point isn't that Trans people competing in sports is itself some issue that needs to be addressed. it isn't, it doesn't have to be, people, like you, make it an issue and it only goes to show you very much like it when the government regulates peoples lives when you agree with it.

I'm pointing out your hypocrisy. triple down on it and keep proving my point.

[Gestopft]

Reality says it has its place. If males and females competed together in the 2016 Olympics, no a single female would have won a medal in track for instance.

However the evidence that trans women would dominate simply does not exist.

[Endus]

Those cultures that have more than male/female also have divisions on what the other "sexes" can do. Biologically, great apes fall into three categories: genetically male, genetically female, and genetical mutation (which are rare). Most of what you are talking about is social construct differences, not biological differences.

This is both scientifically incorrect, as well as ignoring that gender is a social construct to begin with and bringing up biology is, thus, a deliberate and dishonest moving of goalposts.

I repeat; anyone making the "biological male/female" arguments with regards to transgender rights is a transphobe whose goals are to abuse, victimize, and subjugate the transgendered. It is not and has never been about protecting anything.

Government exists to tell you what you cannot do and what you must do. Tyranny, by definition, need not exist in most forms of government. I agree with neither the tyranny of the majority nor with the tyranny of the minority. Both must be guarded against.

If you're calling democracy "tyranny of the majority", it can only be because you've defined "government" as "tyranny".

If you aren't, then you can't speak to "tyranny of the majority" in the first place.

You're being dishonest and manipulative, here, not participating in good faith.

We would end up with the same level of incompetent line workers, just higher paid. The net result would be just a significant increase in the cost of doing business.

Then your training methods are either incompetent, or you're not paying workers enough for them to give a shit and make an effort. Either way, the problem is with your company, not the labor pool.

I have observed the same issues in multiple companies. It is the quality of available labor that is poor.

For unskilled labor? That's just false. Speaking as a teacher, whose job it is to teach every student in their classroom, whatever their challenges or issues. My job would be to get every single student to meet the standard for graduation. And while failure due to personal inability is possible, if it's anything more than like one in 500 students, the teacher's the one who's fucking up, not the students.

So, no jobs are better than lower paying jobs?

Given that I believe in providing a UBI, yes, no jobs is better than exploitation via duress.

Only the view of the trans athletes matter, not the athletes' they will competing against?

It isn't about "beliefs". It's about facts.

Reality says it has its place. If males and females competed together in the 2016 Olympics, no a single female would have won a medal in track for instance.

And no one is suggesting men compete against women.

Transgender women competing with other women, though, there isn't any data suggesting there's any issues there. The lies pushed by TERFS and other bigots don't hold up to even the most basic of scrutiny, and I'd really have to question your critical thinking if you fell for that bullshit.

- - - Updated - - -

my point isn't that Trans people competing in sports is itself some issue that needs to be addressed. it isn't, it doesn't have to be, people, like you, make it an issue and it only goes to show you very much like it when the government regulates peoples lives when you agree with it.

I'm pointing out your hypocrisy. triple down on it and keep proving my point.

It's as much an "issue" as letting blacks play in major sports leagues was.

And, unsurprisingly, is rooted in exactly the same kind of petty bigotries as that was.

[Blur4stuff]

The trans athlete issue is a great example of how republicans are incapable of being good leaders and how they have zero ideas for the real problems we face. As others have pointed out elsewhere, only a tiny fraction of the population is trans. A tiny fraction of those will participate in sports of any kind. An even tinier fraction will have the ability or desire to compete at a meaningful level.

Based on the level of shit stirring republicans are doing on this issue, you could get the impression that trans athletes are invading all sports everywhere and constantly trying to fuck things up. When in fact they hardly exist.

We all see this for what it is. Republicans want their base to be angry at an "other". It's disgusting. Yet another reason why it's impossible for me to consider voting for a republican. This has annoyed me for years. I'd love to have choices in an election instead of knowing ahead of time I can't vote for a republican because of how terrible they've become.

[Shadowferal]

When was the last time there was a popular vote on ripping out someones beating heart?

The last presidential election?
Metaphorically, yes?

[uuuhname]

It's as much an "issue" as letting blacks play in major sports leagues was.

And, unsurprisingly, is rooted in exactly the same kind of petty bigotries as that was.

it is, but I only brought up trans in sports as an example of what an oxymoron "small government" is, I don't want to derail the topic but I guess some people really want to die on that hill.

[Kellhound]

my point isn't that Trans people competing in sports is itself some issue that needs to be addressed. it isn't, it doesn't have to be, people, like you, make it an issue and it only goes to show you very much like it when the government regulates peoples lives when you agree with it.

I'm pointing out your hypocrisy. triple down on it and keep proving my point.

There is no hypocrisy, because I did not take a stand, other to say it is incorrect to say they cannot participate in sports.

[Bodakane]

No, your "quantifiable and qualifiable" are just what you perceive the answer to be.

No, again, they are representing individuals. They may act on the aggregate, but it still comes down to individuals.

- - - Updated - - -



They can play sports. Biological males can play male sports, and biological females can play female sports.

Its immensely ridiculous that you willingly put an 's" on individual"s" and for the life of you cannot understand how that 100% changes the meaning of the word.

[Kellhound]

However the evidence that trans women would dominate simply does not exist.

Immaterial to the statement I was addressing, that divisions in sports based on gender should not exist.

[Kaleredar]

As lovely as this all is, I don’t quite understand how the rights of trans people pertains to the overall thread.

On topic, I am continually amused by how trump supporters can’t come up with any actual digs on Biden and/or Harris and have to resort to talking about random nonsense.

[uuuhname]

There is no hypocrisy, because I did not take a stand, other to say it is incorrect to say they cannot participate in sports.

"I take no stand, other than the stance that "biological" males and "biological" females must stick to their "biologically" designated sports." just because you don't outright say there should be laws enforcing this it doesn't make the message you're actually putting across any less clear. who do you think you're fooling here? you're better off moving on to something else because I'm not derailing the thread anymore with you desire to be transphobic.

- - - Updated - - -

As lovely as this all is, I don’t quite understand how the rights of trans people pertains to the overall thread.

On topic, I am continually amused by how trump supporters can’t come up with any actual digs on Biden and/or Harris and have to resort to talking about random nonsense.

I only brought it up as an example but some people cannot pass up on the opportunity to be bigoted and pretend it's virtuous.

- - - Updated - - -

but I guess it really goes to show how vapid this "small government" mentality is that you can never actually address a simple, straight forward argument, and instead choose to talk ad nauseum about the parts of the argument and not the argument itself.

[Kellhound]

This is both scientifically incorrect, as well as ignoring that gender is a social construct to begin with and bringing up biology is, thus, a deliberate and dishonest moving of goalposts.

I repeat; anyone making the "biological male/female" arguments with regards to transgender rights is a transphobe whose goals are to abuse, victimize, and subjugate the transgendered. It is not and has never been about protecting anything.



If you're calling democracy "tyranny of the majority", it can only be because you've defined "government" as "tyranny".

If you aren't, then you can't speak to "tyranny of the majority" in the first place.

You're being dishonest and manipulative, here, not participating in good faith.



Then your training methods are either incompetent, or you're not paying workers enough for them to give a shit and make an effort. Either way, the problem is with your company, not the labor pool.



For unskilled labor? That's just false. Speaking as a teacher, whose job it is to teach every student in their classroom, whatever their challenges or issues. My job would be to get every single student to meet the standard for graduation. And while failure due to personal inability is possible, if it's anything more than like one in 500 students, the teacher's the one who's fucking up, not the students.



Given that I believe in providing a UBI, yes, no jobs is better than exploitation via duress.



It isn't about "beliefs". It's about facts.



And no one is suggesting men compete against women.

Transgender women competing with other women, though, there isn't any data suggesting there's any issues there. The lies pushed by TERFS and other bigots don't hold up to even the most basic of scrutiny, and I'd really have to question your critical thinking if you fell for that bullshit.

- - - Updated - - -



It's as much an "issue" as letting blacks play in major sports leagues was.

And, unsurprisingly, is rooted in exactly the same kind of petty bigotries as that was.

It is not scientifically incorrect. Sex is hard coded in one's DNA, gender is a social construct. They are not the same thing. And I am not arguing for or against either view on transgender participation in this discussion.

Democracy can be a tyranny, they are not exclusive of each other. Nor is it impossible to have democracy without tyranny.

The requirements to graduate are not exactly set very high. When you set the goals to meet the abilities of the least common denominator it is a goal that is easy to meet.

Define transgender female.

- - - Updated - - -

Its immensely ridiculous that you willingly put an 's" on individual"s" and for the life of you cannot understand how that 100% changes the meaning of the word.

The impacts of every law are individual in nature.

- - - Updated - - -

"I take no stand, other than the stance that "biological" males and "biological" females must stick to their "biologically" designated sports." just because you don't outright say there should be laws enforcing this it doesn't make the message you're actually putting across any less clear. who do you think you're fooling here? you're better off moving on to something else because I'm not derailing the thread anymore with you desire to be transphobic.

- - - Updated - - -



I only brought it up as an example but some people cannot pass up on the opportunity to be bigoted and pretend it's virtuous.

- - - Updated - - -

but I guess it really goes to show how vapid this "small government" mentality is that you can never actually address a simple, straight forward argument, and instead choose to talk ad nauseum about the parts of the argument and not the argument itself.

I never said they had to. I said there is a reason they are currently. Just because someone does not come out 100% supporting your view does not mean the 100% oppose your view. You are doing what you accuse others of doing.