China has many more socialized services and their income level is far less indicative of overall quality of life
It has honestly been a long time since I heard someone in the west suggest the chinese economy is struggling at all - i thought maybe something meaningful had happened in the last week or something that changed that picture
if you compare the Democrat and the Republican running in that race you’ll find
This is the fucking problem, right here.
People dont make “”““rational””“” choices when they’re driven toward frustration and desparation, and democrats marketing themselves as ‘not republicans’ in lieu of offering any significant change is a massive source of that desparation.
Birthright isnt a loophole.
If you want to abolish billionaires, you dont need to deal in xenophobic scaremongering to do it; but if you want to abolish birthright, you gotta play all the notes of xenophobia. The billionaire flair is just the lib-spin.
The WSJ publishing this story should tell you everything you need to know about its intent
Edit: otherwise they would be writing about how billionaires are exploiting inheritance
It’s already a bi-partisan consensus that China shouldn’t have billionaires
Fortunately for them, they can’t do anything about the billionaire problem - so instead they’ll focus on the xenophobia
If anything could convince libs of supporting the end of birthright, it’s the threat of hundreds of chinese babies being born to US citizenship.
Does anyone know what the ethical objections acrually were here?
I would have thought they would have specifically called out data falsification if that were the problem that resulted in the paper being pulled - otherwise it leaves the door open to misinterpretation
I simply dont believe the people you’re describing exist - at least, not as you’ve chosen to describe them
If you were describing a werewolf, it wouldnt be a defense of their cannibalism to say they aren’t real.
Literally marching with a communist flag
Lmao, thats actually amazing - which communist flag??
Read the room, kid. I’m an anarchist, but I dont run around pretending not to understand the ML perspective just because it’s easier than treating it as coherent.
There isn’t anything there to be offended by, it’s just a lazy and ill-considered application of a political label
It honestly just seems like you dont really know what the politics are, you just know ‘tankie’ as a loosely pejorative term for someone you have strong disagreements with.
Idk what to tell you bud, boldly declaring that a political label specific to socialist infighting has nothing to do with socialism doesnt somehow make it true.
“Capitalism isn’t the problem, THIS is”
* points to the main thing capitalism does *
I don’t see modern tankies caring about socialism
You’re not talking about tankies then.
What version of ‘tankie’ is the one that would praise the US for literally anything trump does?
Like if there’s one thing I thought I knew about tankies, it was that they fucking loathe the US and Trump
What.
If you’re unfamiliar with him or his quote, I really reccomend reading about Michael Brooks
Ngl your wording choice here sounds like satire
Sure, but the point of that idea is that capitalist exploitation can’t be addressed through personal consumption choices to begin with.
I guess fine, that person is making a shitty choice. But moralizing over consumption habits is pretty counterproductive IMO.
That’s a 10/10 headline, no notes