Split (1)

train · 6.74k rows

subreddit stringclasses 11 values	text stringlengths 246 28.5k
worldnews	I don’t have a finite amount that I can bitch. I’m exceptionally capable of making multiple objections and being a dick about a plethora of lies. I’m not picking this one thing only to hinge my entire stance against Trump on. If we are using hills as a metaphor then this hills adds to the others to create a mountain that I’ll die on. If I had to order it by importance then yeah, this would be pretty low. I can still address it and the other stuff though. We were just talking about this one thing so far though. Where would you dig your heels in? We probably align there tbh.
worldnews	You don't think it is weird, at all, that Obama paid them straight cash in foreign currency? I say Obama because it was the Executive branch without Congress. The reason it was done that way is to circumvent U.S. and international sanctions... it was a shady deal dude. Also, it was U.S. Tax payer money that went to Iran. "The money came from a little-known fund administered by the Treasury Department for settling litigation claims. The so-called Judgment Fund is taxpayer money Congress has permanently approved in the event it's needed, allowing the president to bypass direct congressional approval to make a settlement. The U.S. previously paid out $278 million in Iran-related claims by using the fund in 1991." Also, $400,000,000 of the $1,700,000,000 was contingent on the release of U.S. captives. In other words, it was ransom money. Source: http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-iran-payment-cash-20160907-snap-story.html
worldnews	As Chinese, I really want Google to come here to rescue us from baidu... Stopping Project Dragonfly won’t change CCP, but doing that can save lives from baidu’s horrible “Auction Ad” “Auction Ad” means baidu will place ads in the same place as search results and only have a small notes below. The number of ads can range from 0 to 10. Then whenever a company pays higher price, it will be placed at the top. Even hospitals can do this. Which results in, people go to baidu to search for hospitals, and baidu advertise for bad hospitals which may have wrong medication and make them die.
worldnews	> “Auction Ad” means baidu will place ads in the same place as search results and only have a small notes below. The number of ads can range from 0 to 10. Then whenever a company pays higher price, it will be placed at the top. Google does the same, the only difference between a search result and an ad on a Google search result page is an indiscriminate "[Ad]" box next to the URL. The ads used to have different background color but those probably stood out too much from regular results. Now the first 3-4 results and the last 3-4 results of a popular search will be ads. Ironically this is against the Terms of Use for Google's AdSense platform where you can't make your normal content look like AdSense textual ads.
worldnews	No, not really Sounds to me like the government cares about shutting down anti-state commentary; I doubt they care at all whether or not a certain company wins out over another, so long as they're able to prevent said commentary on the site I mean they probably care about baidu's profits but only because they already have a firm grasp on their policies and trust baidu to be compliant with whatever policies they push out. If there was another compliant search engine, they probably wouldn't give a shit
worldnews	The problem is that if Google makes a substantial investment in the Chinese market, the Chinese government can threaten this investment at any time unless Google does their bidding in western markets. For instance, displaying Taiwan as a separate country than China in search result or Google Maps. We already know the Chinese government is willing to do this, because they have already attempted to do this with the US airlines. If Google begins making money in China, then at any time the Chinese government can threaten to take these revenues away unless they start adding censorship in favor of the Chinese government to their English language and foreign search websites as well.
worldnews	It would be worse if Google cooperated with the Chinese government, because if Google starts making substantial money in China, the Chinese government could threaten this revenue stream unless Google began censoring topics abroad outside of the mainland as well. We have already seen that CCP is willing to use economic leverage to threaten international corporations to do its bidding, for instance when it successfully forced many US airlines to delist Taiwan as a separate country on their websites.
worldnews	Hi, I’ve got a coworker here in the US who was born in China but has been here for 9 years (he’s late 20’s). I was amazed to hear his perspective in that he thinks China is right in all they’re doing. He said Chinese people naturally gravitate towards power and that China does the things it does to maintain order and to establish itself. As a result, when I asked him, he actually said he places human rights near the bottom of priorities, and that China should silence dissenting opinions. His motto was “don’t be stupid and don’t cause problems and you won’t have any problems.” Is that the attitude of the majority of people there?
worldnews	Google AdSense textual ads are ads you can place on your website. They're 'textual' because instead of a graphic banner it's just text. You can style your normal content (like say links to another section of your website) to blend up nicely with the textual ads. However, because Google thinks this 'tricks' the user into accidentally clicking the ad when they think they're clicking on a link to another page on your website, this is prohibited. Google has conveniently made an exception for their own textual ads on their search result pages. This double standard is what happens when the ad network (Google AdSense) and publisher (Google Search) is the same company. When you start buying out a lot of online advertising companies (as Google has done), you don't have many choices for ad networks as a sole publisher and so Google can force arbitrary rules like this.
worldnews	>It really bothers me that western tech firms have been selling out decades of research and development to authoritarian governments for just a little extra lucre. Time was when technological, engineering, or scientific development by western democratic societies was proof of the superiority of our culture, and providing it to authoritarian governments was treasonous. Because they would simply use that stolen knowledge against their own citizens and us. Guess what. They still do that, but somewhere along the way selling out our society for one more dollar became acceptable.
worldnews	Honestly, I've been in the situation of driving someone in distress to the ER. I left work to do it, because an ambulance ride is crazy expensive. I got home to find her curled up next to our front door in a puddle of vomit. We waited at the nearest ER for an hour while she was in the fetal position on the floor, puking, writhing in pain and moaning. If I had to do it again, and saw a billboard with 5 minute wait, I'd divert to that ER in a heartbeat. It's an ugly system, but you can't deny that's some quality marketing.
worldnews	It’s a bigger problem with capitalists being able to have preferential treatment for their products and services in search engine results, based simply on the money they can bring to the table. It’s a problem in China with Baidu, as well as in the rest of the world. At least in China, the government is severely limiting the power these capitalists have in the marketplace, and transitioning to more democratic control over the economy. In the western world, we basically let them do whatever they want - the human cost be damned. Anything to preserve and expand the power of the bourgeoisie.
worldnews	Yeah I spot them easily, but my mom might not. Google did a pretty good job of blending ads with real search results. Anyway, if you're informed, there will always be an "ad" marking to look for. No need to glorify Google, they just have a really good PR team. like everyone is hating Facebook for their use of user data but not Google when Google is clearly worse to me. The always on location tracking should have made a huge scandal but I don't know how, they still found a way to make it be forgotten in a matter of days. Facebook would have been shut down if they were found to be doing this.
worldnews	I spent a year living in Beijing and can confirm the options currently available of Baidu and Bing are dogshit, especially if you don't know Chinese. It's also a serious annoyance to have to use an unreliable VPN to check Gmail and potentially dangerous if you have business stuff that you could miss. Censorship or not, any alternative developed by Google is likely to be far superior to the current state of affairs. Trying to protest by staying out of the market achieves nothing and is arguably harmful for an anti-censorship cause by making people unfamiliar with Western search engines when they go abroad. People shit talking Google for this really have no idea what they're talking about.
worldnews	Haha, Cogent? Damn, I’m out of my depth here. I like the cut of your jib though, so I’ll indulge you. > At least in China, the government is severely limiting the power these capitalists have in the marketplace, and transitioning to more democratic control over the economy. They are by definition authoritarian, with no democratic control over anything let alone their companies. Company control is authoritative much of them state owned but in no way shape or form could you ever describe this as democratic. Its laughable. You know the old Soviet jokes? In China the State is the Capitalist. Literally. It doesn’t just support it, it is it. > In the western world, we basically let them do whatever they want - the human cost be damned. Anything to preserve and expand the power of the bourgeoisie. Maybe you’ve missed China buying baby powder from abroad because their own is known to poison their babies. Maybe you’ve missed the compete lack of control of pollution and environmental degradation. China is hyper capitalist with barely any regard for any external factors. Maybe you’ve missed the asbestos they still use in regular building materials. The list goes on and on, these are examples I’ve just thought of now. The west is the gold standard for nearly all (I’m sure there are some exceptions) regulation on capitalism in the world and all that regulation is passed by democratically elected governments. So I said it reads like a bizzaro world because you painted China as democratic with a safer market for its consumers (completely false). And you painted the west as hyper capitalist with no regard for consumer safety at all, when the west has a super regulated market. You switched the two, it’s bizzaro. Not sure why you believe what you do, but it’s not factual. It kinda reads like Chinese propaganda for westerners who don’t know any better.
worldnews	Well, either there was some pretty special circumstances or a triage nurse f-ed that up. Maybe there was a ten car accident and they had tons of lives to save, who knows. Most nurses are wonderful and care about people, but there are reasons they have to input codes on medicine cabinets to keep nurses from stealing the drugs too. Some people care and want to make the world a better place and some are screwing around. Sometimes literally.
worldnews	Yes, completely serious. It is a fundamental tenet of geopolitics that media can be used to destabilize geopolitical opponents. Look at the ruckus over 2016 election inteference by Russia and the outrage it caused when it is tiny fraction of what the US does to other countries. It would be silly for countries with less than stellar relations with the US to not impose some media controls of some kind to limit the influence.
worldnews	> I budget over 30% of my monthly budget to charities. So, are you spending that other 70% on yourself? If so, once again, according to your logic, you care more about money than life. As a teacher, you make FIFTY TIMES more money than half the world. Again, if we're following your logic, if you're not giving away virtually all of that money, then you care more about money than life. Why is your compassion pushed aside because of your selfishness?
worldnews	> But me needing $250 a week for food, rent, and utilities is being selfish? You’re scum. Actually, YOU set the standard for compassion and who is scum. You said that if people don't give away their money in the way that you see fit, then they care more about money than they do about life. You're just mad because you can't live up to the standard you set for the people you derisively call 'scum'. >Have you actually mistaken selfishness for survival? How much do you think people who sell insurance make? Probably about the same as you, so any thing you can say about yourself about not being selfish you can also say about those who work in the insurance industry - or as you call them, 'scum'. And the fact is, any company has to make profits to exist, and if they don't, you might laugh and feel good about yourself because the evil bastards went out of business, but the actual people hurt would be people just like you when they no longer have a job. >Clearly you’re not comparing companies or CEOs needing an extra million dollars for their survival. Well, let's compare the NEA, massive superintendent salaries, and the HUGE amount of tax dollars spent on education each year then. Are you telling me all those salaries and education dollars are 'needed for survival'? The only real difference is that if you don't want to deal with the 'evil insurance companies' you don't have to. When it comes to the massive education complex, we're not only forced to send our kids to crappy schools, but we also are forced to pay taxes for other kids if we don't have kids. Don't like insurance companies? Don't do business with them. Simple as that. >You can hide behind the anonymity of the internet and sneer at the screen like an idiot Actually, EvisceratedInFiction is hiding behind the anonymity of the internet. My username is andypro77, which is just a shortened version of my name, Andy Prosseda. >But everyone can see straight through you. No, I saw straight through you, and it only took one comment to do so. You claim that people who don't give away their money the way you think they should 'care more about money than life', but then you fail to live up to YOUR standard in your own life. I'll refrain from calling you scum, because that's not something a nice person would do.
worldnews	Honestly if you’re holding your breath for Manafort to be the silver bullet against trump you probably shouldn’t. Manafort was brought in temporarily for his delegate skills and left. Likely he wasn’t in the inner circle. But how about you and me agree to not speculate any more and just see what happens. If trump did something then Mueller sure should find it. And if he ends up getting impeached let’s put our full force of support behind President Pence for 9 years.
worldnews	It's a voluntary moratorium on catching whales that only applies if you are a member of the IWC. If you are not a member of the IWC the moratorium doesn't apply to you. You can also hunt whales for certain reasobs: scientific - Japan, aboriginal hunting - America If Japan decided to leave the IWC it would turn in to an organisation filled with non whaling countries that would have no reason to keep the IWC going.
worldnews	This is so disengenuos. The origional comments thinks the whaling ban has something to do with race(it doesn't) and the person you replied to pointed out that white people are also hunting whales and are subject to the same rules. the "discussion" here is ridiculous. You could argue about their right to tradition, but i find that a very weak arguement as well. Currently japan whales exclusively for tradition, whale meat is very unpopular, so it's not even hampering their diet or food sources.
worldnews	Iceland and Norway didn't accept the moratorium, so it does not apply to them. As long as IWC does not set quotas there are no quotas for these countries need to follow, so these countries stile technically being members does not make the organisation less obsolete. The quotas for 'First Nations communities' was just increased once again to 80 a year in total which is both an insignificant number and more than these relative few communities are able to hunt. So it does not really need a fairly comprehensive organization to handle this.
worldnews	There's very little and it's all spread out. Each impurity will be pulled but only exert a small force on the area it's in. Since it's distributed pretty evenly basically the force is everywhere and it can levitate it. I'm sure if you crank it even higher than yea it would rip the impurities out, but you get to levitation before that. Remember you're talking about a strawberry, not an elephant. It doesn't take much force to lift it
worldnews	Have you seen how fast shit is found out nowadays due to civilian paranoia and snooping? It's more likely that no company would be able to get away with shit (like now), but would no longer have government protection (since the lack of regulation comes with a lack of government shielding). And if the fines are down, it seems like we have a much more pressing problem to deal with, since it means the EPA can just be paid off and the companies can continue doing their shit under government protection.
worldnews	> There are no cars on the roads of Brussels and Paris on Sunday. On the eve of the event, the mayors of the two cities called for all of Europe to follow suit and hold an annual vehicle-free day. > The call came in a joint statement by Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo and her counterpart in Brussels, Philippe Close, in which the two pointed to "the urgency of climate issues and the health impact of pollution". > Both capitals are holding their annual car-free day on Sunday as part of the European Heritage Days 2018, a weekend of cultural events staged every year in countries throughout the bloc.
worldnews	Locally in Brussels it's known by city centre inhabitants as being the day the cyclists who never commute come into town and forget all the road rules. It's chaos, and people are really selfish. The police try their best to insist it's "car free Sunday" and not "law free Sunday" but it's really hell. Brussels and Paris aren't the only European cities doing this sort of initiative annually, despite what they may imply with such an announcement. Brussels also has "peak pollution days" where under certain criteria they can enforce lower speed limits or even prohibit cars with odd or even number plates from being on the road. It hasn't come into effect in years regardless of "peak pollution" so once again it appears the economy drives decisions above environmental needs. For context, there are local (city) elections in Belgium next month, including Brussels, so Philippe Close is busy posturing while trying to sweep a number of scandals his party has been involved in under the rug, so the sentiment is pretty hollow.
worldnews	Arsehole cars (plenty in Brussels) are more predictable than arsehole bikes. They don't drive at full speed down pavement or between tables on a cafe terrace or through a market or down stairs, they follow one way streets down the right direction and have to obey traffic lights unless they want to be crushed. They park in predictable places instead of the middle of.. everywhere. Being a pedestrian in Brussels city centre on car free day is a suicide mission, especially for your kids. It's been like that for more than a decade and as more and more non-commuters come into town for the event it just gets more chaotic every year. So no, I don't like being nearly run over by a bike, or being yelled at for crossing on a green light or at a zebra crossing. I'll concede when they change the name of the day to "nobody is allow out unless they're riding a bike day" but until then, cyclists need to stop being selfish on these days.
worldnews	That is not how the 4th geneva convention works, while it is distasteful for people to move to illegaly annexed/settled land it does not make them war criminals, it makes their goverment guilty of it due to them encouraging civilian population movement there. And absolutly no one deserves to die even if they have crappy morals. You are being no better than the other side who calls everyone terrorists. You ought to be ashamed of yourself for writing any of this.
worldnews	https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gush_Etzion Land owned by jews back in the '20s and further inhabited by jews back in the '40s, then massacred and taken by the Arab League in the '48 war and at last reclaimed by Israel in '67. That's not occupied land my friend,you can argue using the Geneva Convention as long as you want,I rather listen to actual facts and historical events rather than laws pissed upon by every single state.
worldnews	I honestly don't know how I would deal if I was English instead of a Kiwi (New Zealand). Like, the idea at least half my country is dumb enough to get duped into Brexit, or actively think it would be a good idea without being lied to, which is even worse. EDIT: Correction. Half of those that voted. But I still think if you didn't vote in such an important referendum, you are dumb or unluckily restricted from doing so.
worldnews	>Like, the idea at least half my country is dumb enough to get duped into Brexit This is a silly mindset, as if there is one objectively correct side. For Leave voters (majority of voters), ending free government and returning all law making powers to the British Government voted for by british people. Deutsche bank will still be in London. Frankfurt as a financial city doesn't come close to the importance and power of London
worldnews	If you have all or most of the information needed there is an objective right or wrong ... quite obviously. Under game theoretic circumstances there are always good and bad decisions. Brexit very much looks like a bad decision, not so much on its surface , mostly because UK just made a powerful (economic) enemy just across her borders. And unless she finds allies and fast, she loses this (politcal/economic) war. The last two times that most of Europe was allied against UK, UK (and her allies) won. This time it may not be so. Things have changed and it helps that most of the EU countries are not being led by megalomaniacal dictators or kings. It seems to me that there would be a trade war, or at least heavy pressure. EU countries have been eyeing the City for decades now, they are now in a position to put pressure to UK to give them at least part of that wealth. IMO it is for that reason why Brexit seems like a bad decision. It didn't come from a position of strength. In war and international politics you should act from a position of strength. It looks like a gamble in the hopes that UK would create a network of allies anew. At the time of the referendum -in fact- I though they had one at-a-ready ... I was incorrect. It was "pissing in the wind" ... let's see how it works out. Maybe throwing pasta at the wall and see what sticks can work this time...
worldnews	> Economists thought joining the euro would be good. Of course people make mistakes, but is that a good reason to dismiss their warnings when all they do is learn and study about the subject? Compare it to other professionals making mistakes.its not unheard of for doctors To get a prognosis wrong. Does that mean you shouldn’t listen to their advice given that they are right 90 % of the time and not 100%? Now coming back to economists, oftentimes their predictions are fairly spot on, but should we dismiss them because they don’t have a 100% track record? You should note that free trade is probably the one issue pretty much all economists agree on.
worldnews	If you listen to the Obama adviser’s interview he says Cameron was talking about establishing a trade deal with the US and Obama said, rightfully, that it was something to think about after Brexit, that a deal with the EU was already in place and one of Cameron’s entourage said “we’d be at the back of the queue then” and Obama said yes. Then Cameron asked if he could state that point during the conference about to happen. It wasn’t a lie. It was and remains the truth. You’re at the back of the queue, even with Trump. I don’t like it, as I said, but that’s the reality of it. I’ll link the video https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-44688534/obama-adviser-on-how-cameron-asked-for-brexit-warning
worldnews	We got your point, we're arguing the fact that you stated "last quarter was one of the UK highest economic growths in years" is incorrect. Maybe that didn't receive as many upvotes because it's untrue? And if a 0.4% increase in GDP is "the highest economic growth in years" then I think we need to re-assess what qualifies as "high economic growth." You can only argue that this sub is biased on comparable issues. Perhaps some sort of social experiment is required? You're probably right, this sub is biased, but you used a poor example.
worldnews	> So they all the made mistakes on the last few momentous decisions Britian has made That statement is problematic for several reasons. First, the IMF said that the brexit vote could prompt a recession, not that it would 100% cause it. Second, where is the list of the last few momentous decisions that Britain has made? Are you just remembering the ones where the IMF wasn’t spot on? Third, free trade is the one economic issue where pretty much every economist agrees on. It is not a new issue for the IMF to analyze. The results of free trade and lack of it have been observed again and again. Let me repeat this, it’s not a new issue.
worldnews	To be entirely honest, i think that the EU is in fact interested in stripping the UK a bit. I think they want to state an example to states who think it‘s a good idea to leave. I also think that the UK have navigated themselves in a position in which the EU can actually take advantage of them, which i think will happen. Overall the UK is worse off alone than if they had stayed within the EU.
worldnews	That is a misinterpretation of the argument. You first stated that the reason for not listening was that they had been wrong before, to which he answered that they had been right before as well. The correct reasoning would be to then consider listening to them and lowering the value of their opinion based on what other sources of information you have over the topic. What you did was turning the argument of „they are more often right than wrong so theres a good chance they are right again“ into „but they were wrong before so they will most likely be wrong again“, which neglects they quote of being right.
worldnews	> And they were wrong No they weren’t. Could!=would. > Are you just remembering the ones where the IMF wasn’t spot on? >> Which was when? I don’t have the list. I would presume you would since you said so presumptuously that the IMF has been wrong on all the last momentous decisions Britain has made. So I’m guessing you admit to being wrong since you don’t even have the list. Sad! > Not just IMF, Bank of England too. They were also wrong I’m afraid you didn’t get the point. Free trade is one of the oldest economic issues to be settled. There has been much empirical evidence in regard to the long term effects. So much so, that economists almost reach a consensus that Free trade->better economy No free trade-> no better economy. Brexit involves many things. However the fact that it’s leaving the free trade zone is enough to understand that its economy is going to weaken.
worldnews	I didn't say trade war, no. That's the extreme end of what will happen. What I wrote word for word is "a trade war, or at least heavy pressure" An all out war, like you pointed out, is unlikely. But antagonistic behavior and straight on pressure is not only likely, it is expected. Like I said, I was surprised that UK seemed to have made this move (calling for a referendum) without being in a position of power first. IMO they should had at least surpassed Germany as the most powerful economy of Europe before attempting to antagonize the whole Continent (UK was in her way to do so in 2020s) Last two times that the UK did so was still an empire. International politics should be cold hard calculations. IMO the UK was/is not in a position to pull a Brexit without being heavily ... manhandled by the EU. In international politics there is no such things as alliances. Alliances can shift all the time. And while EU is unlikely to turn hostile to UK, it would certainly openly antagonize UK from now on. There would be heavy pressure. It's already apparent in fact. Either the UK would capitulate, or further being pushed into the corner. She has many valuables that the EU would rather have.
worldnews	not only dumb, but lazy. Really lazy. They even don't make the effort to go check what Nigel was saying. When an issue is too much complex, they will rely on a man who just want power... And this issue is not only applicable for UK. Take for example flat earther (the dumbest and laziest ones). They just have to make a a balloon and go check themselves which is far easier than understanding politics! &#x200B; so, welcome to a world with dumb and more importantly, lazy peoples
worldnews	"They" don't want to check what Farage has been saying. He's just saying what they're all thinking. Lots of British voters who want Brexit haven't been duped, they vehemently believe Europe is shit and immigrants are all rapist job stealing benefit scroungers and we can make it on our own. Who's fault is it? It's certainly not the people themselves. They form opinions based on what they read and what they hear and the groups they sit with at the pub and chat with on Facebook. And who are we to say they can't form their own opinion? The fault lies squarely with Government and cheap tabloids and "share if you agree".
worldnews	Which EU rules impede the national interest? Will you trade with the EU after Brexit? To trade with them, will your industries not still have to abide by a set of regulations that you no longer have influence over? Is a hard border with Ireland a good idea? What if your government fails to end freedom of movement, as a condition for an economically favorable Brexit? In what ways are the default WTO trade rules preferable to Britain than deals made by the whole EU with large trading partners like the US and China? Will Britain pursue new unilateral trade deals instead? Is independence preferable to geopolitical relevance? Since you've poured over each of these issues in order to form your opinion, Id love to get your take on each one.
worldnews	> The BNP failed, and the Neo-Nazis in it moved to UKIP. UKIP is failing and they are now moving to the Conservative party. Hang on a minute mate you said this: > Signing up to a party run by a literal Neo-Nazi is neo-fascism, yes. Which is not true, because Farage is basically an outcast now and his party is now irrelevant. So are you going to retract that claim or nah? And now you make the claim that the Tories are some Neo-Nazis, care to prove that the Tory party are Neo-Nazis? Because to be honest from an international perspective of right-wing parties they're really quite tame.
worldnews	Maybe so, but this was over 2 years ago. He is talking about gaining power and people signing up to a party run by a neo-nazi. UKIP is no longer run by Nigel nor is it even that politically relevant. They're not gaining power, and then he did what to be honest I expected him to do and just cop-out and say "Well the Tories are Nazis now" which is just stupid.
worldnews	>Like, are you genuinely convinced that you're living through the second coming of the Third Reich? I would rather be in error by being overly cautious about Nazis gaining power than insufficiently cautious, wouldn't you? The simple fact is that UKIP leadership is Neo-Nazi. The whole fundamental purpose of the European Union was to stop Nazis. That is why the EU exists. Damaging the EU is one of the basic aims of any Neo-Nazi groups hoping to rise in Europe.
worldnews	This is verging on a 'no true Scotsman'. There are plenty of remarkably well-educated people with significant understanding of the Financial Services sector who have genuine concerns about Brexit's impact on London's future as the FS capital of Europe. Passporting is one of many major issues, but you can also consider the potential brain-drain, the implied difficulty of securing work visas for top talent, regulatory discrepancies with the EU and reduced confidence in the consistent reliability of the UK's legal & regulatory environment - to name but a few. No one (or at least very few people) are suggesting that when whatever the fuck happens in March '19 actually happens we'll suddenly become a business Siberia, but there are some serious conversations being had about London being usurped by major EU cities in the next 10-20 years - to say otherwise just suggests a lack of reliable/unbiased information or someone burying their head in the sand...
worldnews	They would be insane to do that. The world economy is in a major boom phase, all the big economies suffer from a workforce shortage crisis. Unemployment in Germany will fall below 5% soon, companies hire people you wouldn't trust to eat with fork and knife without harming themselves, because there's no one else left. Meanwhile the Brits close their borders for skilled labour. Leaves more for the rest of us, I guess.
worldnews	This is because doing so would compromise about half of the income of the City of London. The UK is funded mostly by secret "financial services", which is overseas trusts and secret payments from those that want to stay outside financial regulation. It's not obvious what they will do given this fact. Perhaps a coordinated international set of sanctions would weaken the Putin regime further (recent sanctions have had major impact already).
worldnews	No we aren't. People were tricked into voting for something they didn't understand. Or are you saying 52% of the UK are racists or something? Also, the US is doing pretty much nothing to stop TRUMP. Clinton was impeached for having a girl blow him. Trump gets away with all the shit he has tho? Why? because he hasn't lied UNDER OATH. So he can lie all he wan't. Their political system is fucked.
worldnews	I wouldn't call them racist. I think the chance of them being a racist slightly increases but not to any large degree. Similar to if you are Muslim or far-right in the USA. The chance that you will be involved in terrorism has very, very slightly raised (more so if you are far-right than muslim, though, if stats are to be believed). If you thought that Brexit would help the economy of Britain, you were objectively wrong, according to the current result shown in the evidence. If you thought that Brexit would give you back 100% control over your borders, then you are most likely going to be wrong, because the EU and it's economic requirements, and Ireland, still exist. My point is that the evidence for both, and what all the experts who are more knowledgeable in this situation than you and me, said showed that this was very obvious. Similar to climate-change deniers. If you deny it, regardless of the evidence or what the scientists say, then I'm going to call you dumb. The people that supported Brexit love it when you 'say it like it is' and don't pull your punches and don't be PC. Fine. That's exactly what I'm doing. People that think Brexit was a good idea for Britain, like Climate-change deniers, are stupid.
worldnews	If half of the voters thought that climate-change was fake, I would still call them dumb. If half of the voters thought that Brexit was a good idea and would achieve their goals, economically or 'migrationally', regardless of the opinions of the experts and of common evidence and sense, then I call them dumb. I guess I'm the one sick of being PC now, and not calling voters who vote against their own interests stupid.
worldnews	Brexit would never 'give all law making powers to the British Government'. By your weird definition of power, even then the UK will need to keep to EU regulations in order to trade with it. And in order to get control of the borders, they would have to change the Ireland border as well. I would also argue that all historical evidence shows that Isolationism regresses your country in trade and science. Finally, arguing that Frankfurt doesn't come close to London's economic power is arguing that London is too big to fail. More importantly, it doesn't argue that Brexit is good economically, it just says that the bad things Brexit cause won't be bad enough to push it below Franktfurt. It's like scratching your Ferrari and then saying 'Look, it's still looks nicer than that car over there'.
worldnews	My sympathies. While my follow Kiwis and other well-of first world countries like Canada and Norway (all of which are True Democracies on the Democracy Index) have people laughing at the UK and US, and the nutjobs rising in Germany and France, I can't. I have a Cornish great-aunt and an American friend, both of which have to deal with all this trash, mentally and practically. I'm just glad to live in a truly free country, free of pay-to-win politics and undemocratic systems like FPTP and the electoral college. It's nice to live in a country with a population that is both educated (on average), politically motivated and willing to do shit if the system doesn't work.
worldnews	Well, that's why I'm going of the declared desires of the Leavers, through interviews and what I have heard them say and what groups like UKIP say. Mostly it's take back their country and more money for Britain. I'm saying that they are not going to get what they want from Brexit. I'm open to other ideas outside of that, like that the cost of Brexit economically is worth making 'Britain for British people' but I don't see how Brexit helps them achieve that, outside of being anti-globalist.
worldnews	* 1) What are the objective benefits of the UK having "full independence and deciding her own laws via elected politicians entirely voted for by British people"? * 2) MEP are still democratically elected, in part by UK citizens. * 3) How is being part of a shared government, partially elected by other countries any different than being part of a shared government partially elected by other constituencies? * 4) Your view is dismissed "so flippantly" because it's nonsensical, and is often used by people who don't understand how the EU functions, or what the ramifications of such a position are (e.g. some of the better laws we have are EU laws, rather than UK laws, such as the Human Rights act which the Conservative government wants to change (and given their track record, likely not for the betterment of the average person)).
worldnews	You might be getting downvoted but there is truth in your comment, and I say this as someone who supported the Remain campaign during the referendum. The sheer arrogance of hard core remainers is astounding, don't get me wrong hard core brexiteers aren't really any better but you'd think after the referendum defeat the hard core remainers would at least try to understand what pushed half of the voters to vote leave. Simply saying it was lies and racism isn't true.
worldnews	There is no such ban. The EU is a democratic machine. It voted against the proposed directive on 5 July and, following modifications to it, voted recently to advance it for further scrutiny. It will get another vote early next year, and people are noting that there has been an outcry against the likes of Articles 11 and 13, and these will almost certainly be modified well before the next vote.
worldnews	Trump isn't temporary. Trump is isolating America from the rest of the world just like Brexit for the UK. He's severing relationships left and right, because he wants to feel powerful and that's the only thing he can actually manage to accomplish. Backing out of the Iran nuclear deal alone will likely cause irreparable damages. It also doesn't end with trump. The russian influence and corruption is spread throughout the government down to the state and local levels. Though, from what I understand, this is also true for the UK...
worldnews	What other solution though would there be if you had their grievances? Could try and change the EU from inside but UK governments had already tried that and didn't get very far. The EU has been going down a path that was always going to rub people up the wrong way, particularly Brits who feel slightly detached from mainland Europe. I think for this reason some sort of split was always likely, it's just the split has been much earlier and much more dramatic.
worldnews	Easy to turn this around and call you remainers the mindless idiots who childishly believe that staying stuck in a low-growth wreck of a EU that is riven by a decade long economic crisis and can barely stop half its member states from lapsing into authoritarianism or political turmoil is a good idea. Hilarious that other successful nations don't need to be in giant antidemocratic customs unions in order to prosper. Yet, according to you sheep-like morons, the UK is uniquely unable to survive outside of a monolithic and deeply undemocratic EU. For reasons.
worldnews	>Substantiate any of your claims of "neo-nazism". This tells you all you need to know about a near 18-year old Farage. https://www.scribd.com/doc/169454715/Nigel-Farage-1981-school-letter He is a little fucking thug and anyone who would follow this creep should be viewed as suspect. >People like you cheapen the word and are belittling the real crimes of the real nazis. You know, I'm gonna just make a guess here, but I suspect that the people who were murdered by Nazis would have wanted future people to be very very fucking vigilant to people like Nazis, to people saying similar things to Nazis as they rose to power. They would want us to watch for those people who are ranting about patriotism, about protecting indigenous culture, about closing borders. I'm gonna guess that they'd rather we err on the side of being too cautious about stopping the rise of neo-fascists than too complacent.
worldnews	I'm familiar with that letter, I'd say just about anyone who follows British politics is. By the sound of it, Nigel was always a cunt through and through. What a guy. So, have we reached the point where we can agree he's not a literal neo-Nazi (or that you're just using the term incorrectly)? An awful man with some detestable views, sure. A neo-Nazi, not quite. edited to add, for clarity: > neo-Nazi > noun > a person, or member of a group, espousing the programs and policies of Hitler's Nazis It's a very particular thing, to be a neo-Nazi. There are many different shades of awful, but that term refers to a very specific one. It's a real pet peeve of mine, people who use such terms inappropriately. I'm the same with people on the right who label every left winger they don't like a Marxist. Made worse when the term "literally" is thrown in, of course.
worldnews	Oh yes. Open doors or restricted access. I wonder where other EU skilled labour would choose to go. Or even other international labour. Access to the whole EU, or the UK who just shut doors to its neighbours and risked an economic crisis. Very sensible indeed. Seems to be working very well so far and I'm sure the future is bright because their brilliant plans so far show so. I mean, you talk like Brexit had any plans to begin with, which is hilarious.
worldnews	I'm not taking sides, but the EU contributes about half of our immigration. We could, in theory (though almost definitely won't), block EU immigrants to the UK once we leave the EU. At the moment we can't do that. A lot of blue collar workers rightly or wrongly believe immigrants are costing them their jobs. Like I said don't bite my head off, I am not taking sides here. I am just explaining the rationale of other leave voters from what I gather. https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/
worldnews	It's arguably better than the status quo. Iran isn't much better than North Korea or Palestine/Israel making deals. They will give you enough to get what they want and then it falls back apart. It has become more obvious to most Americans that when we become involved in these places it's not long before the 'Death to America' chants start. Trump is being very pragmatic about foreign relations and development of a quid pro quo strategy to put America first. The US and UK are in no danger of becoming Bhutan. The Russia paranoia is a bit much. After the cold war we learned how impotent Russia can be once the facade crumbles.
worldnews	Not just protest, even the PM insulted half the country leading up to it calling everyone ‘little englanders’ or people being called racist and fascist or snowflakes or whatever. None of that is a discussion to change people’s minds and encourage them to see your side, it just made people more aggressive and determined in their path. Similar happened on the lead up to the US election as well. ... similar is still happening in this post too, it’s disheartening.
worldnews	So your entire basis for believing that the UK is two minutes away from Kristalnacht and the concentration camps is... a thirty seven year old school letter about a politician who doesn't hold any UK elected office and hasn't got a single member of his former party in parliament? I'm not completely sure that's a rational basis for assuming that the Reichstag fire is just around the corner and we'll be marching into Poland any minute now.
worldnews	Wow you are delusional. What threat is Iran? They want left alone and haven’t gone to war in some time, which is a lot more than can be said about America! Russia is impotent? The carried out a chemical attack on British soil, brought down an airliner while successfully annexing part of Ukraine and if that doesn’t tell you they aren’t impotent then there is always the elephant in the room, they installed Trump as president of the United States to divide your country. That is Russia’s main goal, divide and conquer. It’s working as the US is more alienated on a global stage than ever before
worldnews	Why did we just have farms throwing away produce due to lack of labour? How about how the local fast food joints are always hiring or how unemployment is really low? What are you on about mate? Clearly you appear to have some facts that haven't been revealed to the public or are you just talking out of your ass, like pretty much every Brexit supporter so far? Why not share this genius post Brexit plan? Because so far most other economies have only warned the UK: this not just includes the EU of course, but also the US and Japan.
worldnews	I think to some degree, the internet itself is a polarizing medium. With the internet between us, people are more willing to say aggressive or nasty things they would never say to your face, and there are a lot of extreme, loud people; it seems like the reasonable people have decided it is more reasonable to leave the room, than to shout. It is also much easier to streamline your news feeds to see only information that you are likely to agree with, so people may be less accustomed to seeing different points of view? but that is speculation on my part &#x200B; We need more reasonable people to speak up,
worldnews	What the actual fuck. Unemployment is low because there's over supply? What fucking universe are you from? You're bloody insane buddy. Let's look at it this way. Even if your little loony ideas were right, you actually think it's a good idea to cut off the biggest supply of skilled labour just so Jane may decide to get her ass off benefits and get a job at the local farm / McDonald's? Holy fuck. No wonder people like you believed the bus Brexit ads.
worldnews	>So your entire basis for believing that the UK is two minutes away from Kristalnacht and the concentration camps is... Keep building that strawman if it makes you happy. Nazis don't get to power talking about genocides. They first talk about palatable things like patriotism and borders. It can take a while for a population to be led down a neo-fascist path. >a politician who doesn't hold any UK elected office Beginning to assume bad faith based on a comment like that. Farage is an MEP representative and has been UKIP leader for a long while now. He is all over media. Your pretence that he has no power is transparent. >hasn't got a single member of his former party in parliament? Just as the members scurried from the burning BNP to UKIP, so they are now crawled into the Conservatives. >a thirty seven year old school letter Again that whiff of bad faith. The age of the evidence doesn't matter. What matters is that Farage approaching 18 was a Neo-Nazi.
worldnews	Lol, you’re really reaching there. Firstly, I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that putting qualifications on people who can come to the U.K. is ‘cutting off the biggest supply of skilled labour’. The U.K. has literally been denying visas to Indian doctors while having no control over the number of Eastern-European bricklayers. It was an absolute fucking shambles and a scandal. How do you plan a national infrastructure when you don’t know what your population will be next year? Hint: you can’t. What was wrong with the Brexit bus ad? What’s stopping a future government from putting the savings made in EU contributions into the NHS? Come on, you lot think that’s such a ‘gotcha’ point, explain why.
worldnews	This is such a simplistic view of a complicated economic system that is so often parroted, yet the studies supporting this view have been shown to be flawed. >Check every single example of protectionism ever for evidence. Ok here is an example: Australia is the wealthiest country in terms of wealth per adult. It also has very strict border controls when it comes to mass unskilled immigration. This idea that the only way to grow GDP is by flooding the country with millions of uneducated and unskilled workers is batshit crazy.
worldnews	I'm sorry if calling your stupid decision stupid upsets you, but let's get real here. Outside of the 'lot going on' reason which could be legit (as mentioned in the 'unluckily restricted' cause), you decided that, because of polls and your impression that 'it couldn't possibly happen', that it was a sure thing and therefore the Brexit vote wasn't worth your time. And then thousands of other voters thought the same thing and oopps! It's suddenly not a sure thing! I'm not trying to insult you here, but that mistake IS a mistake.
worldnews	Well, it's not so much who great we are, just that we weren't total morons. I mean, how's that healthcare going for you? And those university degrees? I'm thinking of walking in an alley of detroit, sound like a good idea? Nah, probally not safe. I should go to a school or a gaming bar. Slightly less odds of getting shot there. Also, outside of the half-jests there ... New Zealand's the same size as England mate. And good that we are not included on some World maps, we always like to joke that it stops Americans from improving their geography and finding their way here. Also, 'relevant on the world stage' ... No one asked the USA to overspend on military and start going into other counties. You also kinda have more people than us. For a fair comparison, you should ask if Kentucky has more relevance than New Zealand. Regardless, the 'problems' that come when you are bigger didn't seem to affect the UK or France or Norway as badly as it affected the USA. Kinda missed the problems that I brought up. Those that don't happen because of size, like the Electoral College or money in politics.
worldnews	> I'm not taking sides, but the EU contributes about half of our immigration. * Legal or Illegal? * Skilled or Unskilled? * Are these immigrants recruited, or are they moving here in search of employment? > At the moment we can't do that Depending on the answers to the above questions, that's not strictly true. > A lot of blue collar workers rightly or wrongly believe immigrants are costing them their jobs. Like I said don't bite my head off, I am not taking sides here. I am just explaining the rationale of other leave voters from what I gather. This is the point I was making. Being a member of the EU isn't the absolute cause of these issues (perceived or real), and leaving won't fix them.
worldnews	A strong and transparent political process is more important than almost anything else, and I voted as such in the referendum. I will accept a shrinking economy to remove the UKs ties to the EU parliament. Although I'd rather have had EU reform, I don't think it would ever have happened. I think your tune would change if an economic treaty with Australia morphed into their deciding NZ import/export tarriffs, etc etc. Although maybe it wouldn't, which is fair enough, I just disagree.
worldnews	Healthcare is free here, education too. I'm not an American, woops. But among the things I have learned while being here: you just can not compare your own country to a country with a population exponentially bigger than yours. New Zealand isn't where it is today because your people are somehow wiser or smarter or inheritly less greedy. They are not. You are relatively well off because it has a manageable population, is not the target of mass immigration, is not bordering hostile countries (Australia doesnt count, they aren't hostile, thats just how they are) and not exactly a target for terrorist attacks or drug smuggling. If the hobbit shire was a real place, you'd be it. Enjoy it, but maybe don't go "nananananana" to countries that actually have to deal with shit and make the world turn.
worldnews	> I think your tune would change if an economic treaty with Australia morphed into their deciding NZ import/export tarriffs, etc etc That is not the same scenario. Also, we are already in many talks for a Pacific trade agreement. At least you are respectful about it, but I still think you are drastically wrong and will not get what you want through Brexit. I mean, the country didn't even know what Brexit meant till it was voted on.
worldnews	Where exactly are you from, then? > you just can not compare your own country to a country with a population exponentially bigger than yours. Yes I can. If one country has a flawed democracy, I can critique that regardless of the size. The USA democracy does not represent the people as accurately as they think. Electoral college, special interests using money as 'free speech'. The shocking is that even when errors results from it, like the fact that they can only vote between 2 parties for President, or that Trump won without the popular vote (which means its not 1 person - 1 vote and therefore not equal), they will not do anything about it or even play the apologetic for it. > You are relatively well off because it has a manageable population Australia is much bigger, they are well off. UK is bigger, the UK is relatively well off. Having a large population does not mean your population starts making stupid mistakes. > is not the target of mass immigration 1. That doesn't cause issues like you think it does. 2. If you knew about New Zealand you know that we did have large immigration, including refugees, into here. Not as much as Australia but. > is not bordering hostile countries Yeah man, Mexico is just rearing to invade the USA. Or maybe the Canadians will get fed up with ya? > not exactly a target for terrorist attacks or drug smuggling Terrorist attack, no. But then again, we didn't invade Afghanistan or Iraq or fund Isreal so the middle-east doesn't exactly have it out for us. Also, the highest threat of terrorism in the USA (which going by what you said is where you are, but not from) is far-right libertarian extremists (Sovereign Citizens and far-right conspiratorial crazies that think the government is out for them or has been corrupted) We have a big drug problem of meth, or 'Pee' as our variant is called. >(Australia doesnt count, they aren't hostile, thats just how they are) Not sure if a joke, but if it is its not really funny. The Australia Kiwi thing is mostly a brother sibling thing, mostly around sports. South Africa sort of acts the same way. >If the hobbit shire was a real place, you'd be it. Enjoy it, but maybe don't go "nananananana" to countries that actually have to deal with shit and make the world turn. I mean ... we do have the Shire. It's a good tourist location with feast and hobbit holes and an Inn. I'm not teasing other countries for not getting their shit together. I laid that out in the very first question. I think it is tragic, this slip back to Isolationism, deliberate ignorance and conspiratorial crazies being considered legit. Countries that used to function now look stupid, like the US, or make tragic mistakes, like the UK. Other countries, like France and Germany, are having a rising hatred-based far right organizing and convincing everyone that it's the immigrants fault, or the muslims or enter scapegoat here. But I have to say, if you want to live the delusion that counties like New Zealand are being lazy and piggy-backing off countries like the USA that 'do the real work and make the world turn' and suffer the consequences and that's totally not down to mistake made by those countries, go right ahead. I will laugh though, over our large animal farming industry which is our main purpose for the world. NZ is great because NZ operates logically. USA is not great because it does not. I mean, it's fine, but not comparable. I mean, to argue that populations are all the same everywhere means I could argue that Saudia Arabia operates just like the USA. Cultural differences do exists. NZ people are not smarter, but they are generally more educated, politically and otherwise. NZ people are generally less greedy, we are less focused on wealth and Capitalism and more on doing good.
worldnews	I agree, it's not the same, the EU is much more complicated than boiling it down to that one example, but it's a decent example in my mind. And honestly, I also think this entire situation has been handled in the most drastically terrible manner of any political decision ever. I don't entirely agree that the country didn't know what it was voting for. It was to leave or stay in the EU, which is pretty clear with the arguements both sides made. It was a surprise that Cameron dropped out with no contingency in place, and then the conservatives imploding through personal greed. Throwing the entire country under the bus.
worldnews	There was a transition period after the EU Eastern expansions where freedom of movement from the new member states could be restricted. Germany, for example, implemented this to avoid its labour market being disrupted, while simultaneously Poland closed off its real estate market so German capital wouldn’t suddenly buy out Polish housing. The UK opted out of this transition period to attract the cheap labour from Poland, Romania etc. that you‘re now complaining about. This crisis, to the extent that it even exists, is entirely homemade and has little to do with the EU itself.
worldnews	The UK did use those rules, much to the outrage of many at the time who now seem to have forgotten all about it, however they only aloud you could deport someone after a very expensive and lengthy legal process, and only if they fit a very specific set of circumstances if they know how to beat the system by doing abit of unpaid volunteering once every few months for example they couldn't be deported. The UK was able to deport perhaps 1000 a year, under EU rules at great expense. It was never a realistic option. You absolutely couldn't use it to discriminate between skilled and unskilled labor that was totally against EU rules.
worldnews	>Which is not true, because Farage is basically an outcast now and his party is now irrelevant. Yup. The maniac Neo-Nazi left and all the little Neo-Nazis scurried out of it probably into the Tories, just as they scurried from the BNP to UKIP previously. >And now you make the claim that the Tories are some Neo-Nazis That smell. What is it? It's like the dry shitty smell of BAD FAITH ARGUMENT! The Tories are not generally Neo-Nazis. I said that the Neo-Nazis of UKIP are joining the Conservatives. This is simply the case. Right now, though, the goal of isolationism happens to be something the Tories and the Neo-Nazis have in common; the Tories want the UK to be a tax haven and the Neo-Nazis don't like brown people. >So are you going to retract that claim or nah? What claim? I said "Signing up to a party run by a literal Neo-Nazi is neo-fascism". That is pretty much by definition true.
worldnews	> That population revolts and gets rid of the thing denying them jobs. Good luck with that against technology. The rich and powerful do not need the common folk anymore once automation catches on, which is a stark difference from any other revolt in history. Human labor will be obsolete, and with that, the power of the masses, slowly. Our current generations are also way too complacent and mellow to do anything like a revolt unless the powers that be seriously rock the boat, maybe not even then. Not that those powers would be dumb enough to let it get to that point. Every country has a perfect case study nowadays of how to erode people's values and rights slowly over time, with them even voluntarily giving those up.
worldnews	Absolutely true. It's why Democracies tend towards immorality over time, as there is a natural pressure towards the self interest of the strongest voting bloc, often at the expense of the totality. Very strong controls need to exist in the opposite direction, such as from other parties (in the parliamentary style, not the two-party system) or a supreme court. Of course those controls can be vulnerable to moral decay as well (or better, moral lag as society moves on to a different moral code faster than the government), such as has occurred in the United States and to a limited extent in parts of Europe.
worldnews	Hence automation. We simply do not need as many people to do the same amount of work 50 years ago. What used to be an auto plant with dozens of people on an assembly line is a couple people overseeing an assembling line of robots. Now just we need to tax each robot as if it's a worker. Also more and more young people aren't paying income tax since many are either in school or in low paying jobs until their mid 20's.
worldnews	What I said was a statement of fact not opinion. I will admit I am not all that knowledgeable on the Japanese tax system but I can assume it is the same as the rest of the developed world where income tax is responsible for a sizable amount of the governments public spending funds. I agree the world will have to deal with it. We are very clearly growing at an unsustainable rate. Climate change is going to make matters worse for a planet that has it's natural resources stretched too far. We need to stop growing and think further into our future. We know this isn't gonna happen though. Shit doesn't get sorted out quick in a democracy.
worldnews	That's a gross exaggeration. We could 2x the earth's population within half the United States with the density of Manila or Hong Kong. The earth's population is estimated to plateau somewhere around 12billion people, we can easily sustain that. I'm not some sort of conspiracy theorist or whatever, and I'm not "anti climate change" or sustainability, but to say that the earth is over-populated, strictly by the meaning of the word, is an exaggeration.
worldnews	Not necessarily. From my point of view, people lack perspective because the world is too big and there are too many variables to account for. In a tribal situation, it's easy to compute how much food, land, and other resources are available to the group, and thus easy to ascertain if having more (or less) children is desirable. But because of the vastness of our current enterprise, there is no way for individual people to calculate these things. Most people are completely removed from things like food production, land and resource management, and so on. Thus, they base the decision to or not to have kids on other factors that are often merely tangentially related to these important considerations, like the earning power of their job or their amount of free time. Therefore, I hold that some sort of authority is necessary to both keep track of these complicated factors and to proscribe guidelines for reproduction based on these factors. That controlling authority might deem that Eugenics is desirable; then again it might not. In any case, if the goal is simply a responsible and informed control of human reproduction and population, then Eugenics is more of an option than an inevitability. &#x200B;
worldnews	Yes but with the current level of tech the world literraly cannot sustain 7.5 billion of us. Without change i'd wager in 20 30 years enough of the ecosystems will be damaged beyond any hope of repair to trigger a mass extinction event or global war which will reduce the population significantly. Remember, we are only feeling the effects of global warming from what we have done in the 90s. More shit will come.
worldnews	No it‘s not. Automation = production = taxation In fact due to automation more wealth will be created, which can be spread out over fewer people, which increases individual wealth. You tax the company instead of the incomes, which is then relocated to the citizens. It‘s literally the only solution for ever growing automation and every country will have to do this sooner or later, it likely will go hand in hand with universal basic income. And the EU and countries like Japan are likely the first to implement it and have a smooth transition into automated economies, while countries like the US will fight it tooth and nail, while large part of the population will be jobless and the companies make all the profits. Japan is looking into the future and are searching for real long term solutions of an aging population and ever increasing automation, while many other countries have their head in the sand.
worldnews	It could have CBD (Cannabidiol), a component of marijuana that doesn't get you high but still is said to have relaxing and potentially medical effects. You can buy legal weed (no THC, CBD only) and smoke it in Switzerland. Which also conveniently means that "I smelled weed" is no longer probable cause, although I'm not sure if the courts already managed to drill that into the polices' thick heads. Edit: the drink in question doesn't contain even CBD - it legally could, but doesn't. Lame.
worldnews	Not really, no. Acute nerve agent poisoning would generally start with pin-point pupils, sweating and heavy salivation, then loss of voluntary muscle control, coupled with seizures, and finally death by paralysis of the diaphragm or heart. If he was poisoned with a nerve agent to the point that he couldn't walk, he wouldn't be recovering without the prompt administration of an antidote like atropine. There are many, many poisons that have the effects you listed, and most of them are far less nasty to be around (for the attacker) than organophosphate nerve agents
worldnews	The doctor is entirely correct that the symptoms do appear to match poisoning. The doctor is not able to assign blame. It could be food poisoning such as botulism. There are many ways to be poisoned accidentally. Accidental cases of poisoning especially of such severity are nevertheless rare even for a country with lower standards such as Russia which makes it suspect. It'll be interesting if he is later able to give an account of what happened before the poisoning. Such poisonings can be very difficult to track down. It doesn't require a specialised production plant. You can take some shavings from your garden and slip it in someone's tea. The term poisoned doesn't mean poisoned by someone. It literally just means poisoned.
worldnews	Well, think of it about this. UK is a services economy, a huge portion of it came from financial services based in London, and access to european markets with special privileges by foreign companies, investors and so forth, which is why so many companies had EU headquarters in London. From the CIA UK factbook, UK Economy breakdown: agriculture: 1.3% industry: 15.2% services: 83.5% Exports vs Imports currently: E: $436.5 billion (2017 est.) I: $602.5 billion (2017 est.) With leaving the EU, especially with a no deal, a huge portion of finance, and foreign headquarters is moving away from London (already happening) to Europe, Frankfurt for example. With them, they are taking a very sizeable chunk of the UK's economy. Its likely going to be bad, in a way that will make the 2008 recession look like a a hiccup. I am personally converting my savings into other currencies, i have little faith the exchange rate will remain favourable. As an EU citizen at least I have a fall back and can leave without much regret or worry. But i am concerned about the people who cannot. And that is another thing, a good portion of specialised workers which EU supplied in IT, medicine, finance, and so forth, will likely leave. If anything, I think the articles about the effects of leaving are being quite conservative in order to avoid panic, which only makes things worse.
worldnews	Personally am not worried. Like this article there is a presumption in their stats that migration would stop. Of course it won't. There will/ may be a reduction but not enough to influence gov. Income from taxes I would bet. Same with large financial services companies. Am sure some business would be lost to Europe but not wiping out huge swathes of the economy. Banks made huge profits across Europe before the financial passporting rules came in. They will continue to do so if passporting rules were removed.

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.