This is actually (spoilers for terrible movie Scales: Mermaids Are Real) the climax of the movie Scales. Mermaids can control water and their blood heals people in that movie, so hunters are trying to get their blood and then one guy tries a last ditch bad guy move and the main character pulls all the water out of his body and he horrifically melts.
Kind of made me side with the hunters at that point it’s a horrifying power.
We don’t know.
The US came back from a US president hiring private goons to spy on his political opponents.
The US came back from a US president illegally selling weapons to Iran to fund right wing militias in South America.
The US came back from a US cabinet member taking literal bribes from oil companies to give them oil drilling rights on federal land.
The US came back from a US president illegally firing a cabinet member and installing his own lackey.
But it didn’t HAVE to.
I don’t think there’s really such a thing as a ‘point of no return’ for a Democracy. But it is possible to get to a point after which you don’t return.
That sounds right to me but is both a little hopeless (I guess we’ll just flip flop the presidency term-to-term forever?) and disagreeing with the premise of “pro-corporatism” from the OP.
Weird question, were there any elections in between those years? If so, why did they get left out?
Either Joe Biden wasn’t “pro-corporate” or there was some other similarity to the 2016 and 2024 candidates that fits better…
A couple guys tried that during the campaign IIRC.
Text generation is Frozen Yogurt now.
Noticeably worse, but you can have so much more.
Ramanujan Aiyangar, Srinivasa, 1887-1920: (1927). Collected papers of Srinivasa Ramanujan. Cambridge [Eng.] :The University Press.
There are photos and a DNA test that were not shared publicly. It’ll be a good FOIA request in 50 years.
Jeb! is a hole in the theory, not every major states governor who is the son of a former president can become president themselves.
Overall kind of a lot of turnover actually…only one Clinton became president, and he was never VP. The other Clinton got beat out by the first black president for the nomination in 08, and then she lost to some guy who had zero political experience.
If anything, we learned that being black doesn’t exclude you from being president, being female doesn’t exclude you from being a major party nominee, and you can still become president even running for office for the first time at age 70. The promise of the statement is more true than ever.
My body can take the sugar from one energy drink a lot better than it can take 6 shots of espresso.
Reminds me of my time as an elephant mohel.
A Welshman about to traverse a steep-sided hollow at the head of a valley: “Oh baby I’m gonna cwm!”
The most charismatic man I know is my uncle, he worked right near the WTC on 9/11 and even though they closed his bridge home because it was 9/11 he sweet talked his way across.
MapsWithOnlyNewZealand
Why would it be more corrupt? Why do you believe Small Businesses are fine?
It’s more concentrated power. The opportunity for more corruption. Sure, they could be philosopher kings at first but having the control means someone can have the control corruptly.
I don’t necessarily believe all small businesses are fine, but their interests compete with each other, and they’re small, by definition. And we already have regulations that apply to all businesses, there is democratic control in some sense. So I’m not worried about how the corruption of one small business owner would warp society or national interest.
Markets themselves inevitably result in those unregulated behemoths,
I agree with this premise and then not the conclusion. Inevitably, all behemoths were once small businesses. But is the correct intervention to stop the small businesses from forming in the first place, or to prevent the ones that get big from utilizing that size in an asocial way? You could socialize businesses of a certain size, for example. You could set rules for worker-elected board members, or whatever.
What’s your issue with Central Planning, other than vibes?
I’m not a theorist obviously, but it seems like it’s inherently going to be a limited number of decision makers who can’t possibly know everything, and they become a bottleneck to business creation at best, a corruption machine at worst. I know I wouldn’t trust the government of half (or more but my point is, Republicans) the current US states to decide what business are allowed to exist.
I know the retort is of course that we have corruption now, but I’d think if we’re theorizing, there’s a better way to reduce extant corruption than introducing a new vector for even more corruption. And there’s a way to harness the power of people starting small businesses freely without letting those businesses become unregulated behemoths.
Like just set the criteria you would be telling the Central Planning Authority to prioritize, and do that with regulation. Set an ownership tax so that as a business gets bigger the ownership moves away from the founder and into the public trust.
The potential for regulatory capture and corruption, as well as the inherent inefficiency of having a limited number of decision makers. I wouldn’t trust the 2028 Trump Administration to thoughtfully determine which businesses are allowed to exist for 4 years.
It’s more democratic to let anyone start a business, rather than having a gatekeeper. But more importantly I think it makes more sense to let the capitalists take the losses if their business idea sucks, and then socializing the gains once we know it works.
“Fixing the boat” implies they are successfully doing anything other than complain. Leftists are sitting in the boat yelling at the Liberal for not fixing the boat.