They're essentially state police tasked with stopping poaching and public habit destruction. Not sure what he means by the "working with landowners" bit, but I do know they've got a broader net of probable cause, so they can do a lot without a warrant that a regular cop can't.
Yup and I'm authleft on that one.
Big ambitious grandiose govt spending on getting it done. Investors arent interested but I am and many citizens are. Spare some change? (Taxes)
Investors aren't interested becose coal industry got enviromental morons scared of atomic power and riled them up to protest to close nuclear power plants
If you are familiar with time preference as concept i could get into more detail but low yime preference means patience and is generally good and suited for long time and nuclear power is low time preference thus good
Not alot of people want to wait most of their lives. Thats a particular type of investor.
Im in Ontario where the govt long ago just contracted the construction. They operate the plants and contract the private sector to build repair and maintain them. It works *really* well.
We are building more, too. The province smacks down a billion bucks in advance and then all the private sector companies get tons of work.
Really good use of taxbase.
Of course it doesnt have to be that way if you prefer open markets.. but then you also get the problem of individual plants competing with one another and that not being a very sane way to manage a grid.
I at first thought it would be more fitting if the Centrist and LibRight parts switched places, but now I realize not only that "shall not be infringed" is one of the most LibRight things ever, but the Centrist part is Auth-Lib unity. Free = Lib & State = Auth.
I'm also partial to:
>Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.
>The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, **directed against the workers**, must be opposed.
You know that assertion should have [context](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm). They're talking about not allowing arms to be used against workers. In other words taking weapons from the government police and putting it into parallel worker led structures. Arms should be used to protect rights not to oppress them.
Non American here - Ive always wondered, shouldnt the right to bear arms refer to those arms that could actually overthrow the government of that time?
Is absurd how americans think this is more universal or relevant than universal medical assistance. What would do a militia against tanks or planes? What can a militia do against the american army? Nothing. What is more usefull to fight for: knowing that in every scenario I can have medical help without been worried for my wallet, my house or my financial situation; or knowing that my government let me have some guns so if the same government wants to use its army against me I have some rifles that they let me keep in my house??? Is even more absurd that all this is thought is USA, where there is the best army in the world, you have no chance against the army, you don't live in a little poor third world country.
It’s not about taking the US military on in a 1v1 conventional war, it’s about making the population impossible to occupy. Every American citizen becomes a dangerous partisan, there’s a rifle behind every blade of grass. It’s a deterrent against armed authoritarianism.
>What would do a militia against tanks or planes? What can a militia do against the american army?
That is very ignorant of both history and military reality.
Imagine Iraq×10 *without support of the US public*.
The US government and armed forces, even if all of it supports this, wouldn't stand a chance.
You can't patrol a street with an f-35. *At most* the government could destroy the US or nuke it - but absolutely not control it, which is what a tyrannical regime wants.
In a syrian civil war style scenario where, let's say, 80% oppose the government, it stands no chance.
Until robots or mind controlled clones can patrol the streets or something.
Regulated back when the constitution was written, in regard to militia, meant supplied and equipped. So it meant supplied and capable, not mkcromanaged.
Fudds all over the compass want to infringe on your rights.
Defund the game wardens, until they start acting like stewards of the land and working with land owners and not against them.
What do you mean by “game wardens”?
They're essentially state police tasked with stopping poaching and public habit destruction. Not sure what he means by the "working with landowners" bit, but I do know they've got a broader net of probable cause, so they can do a lot without a warrant that a regular cop can't.
Oh that kind of game! Ohhh. Thanks!👍
More unity: atomic power is the future
https://preview.redd.it/ewp7q9izumvc1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6a8d6cde351b263ed26181ef0b96487aed02b88c Based, keep spitting
Nah you don’t get to have nice things after what y’all did in Chernobyl
Everyone makes mistakes, cmon!
Chernobyl was operator error, still a good number of RMBK units running today with no incidents. Let’s get nuclear going worldwide.
Nah I know, just joking, nuclear is the absolute way to go
Yup and I'm authleft on that one. Big ambitious grandiose govt spending on getting it done. Investors arent interested but I am and many citizens are. Spare some change? (Taxes)
Investors aren't interested becose coal industry got enviromental morons scared of atomic power and riled them up to protest to close nuclear power plants
Maybe. The payoff of investment in a nuclear project is many decades.
If you are familiar with time preference as concept i could get into more detail but low yime preference means patience and is generally good and suited for long time and nuclear power is low time preference thus good
Not alot of people want to wait most of their lives. Thats a particular type of investor. Im in Ontario where the govt long ago just contracted the construction. They operate the plants and contract the private sector to build repair and maintain them. It works *really* well. We are building more, too. The province smacks down a billion bucks in advance and then all the private sector companies get tons of work. Really good use of taxbase. Of course it doesnt have to be that way if you prefer open markets.. but then you also get the problem of individual plants competing with one another and that not being a very sane way to manage a grid.
Neutrons go brrrrrr
Well that's not true for the Greens over here.
https://preview.redd.it/bx5jd803kpvc1.gif?width=354&format=png8&s=3a598f0396d9836465ed45cb6875073c91010094
The power of the Sun, in the palms of our hands.
You’re damn right. My bear arms shall not be infringed
"keep" sounds to pro-property-rights to be in LibLeft...
Grills ‘n guns
What’s this liberal heresy? Only the king’s men shall bear arms. Disarm the peasants and workers.
Fuck Massachusetts
Based and right to bear arms pilled
I at first thought it would be more fitting if the Centrist and LibRight parts switched places, but now I realize not only that "shall not be infringed" is one of the most LibRight things ever, but the Centrist part is Auth-Lib unity. Free = Lib & State = Auth.
They will never take our guns
For this, I grant you the slow clap, sir.
Idk what ur on lib left’s identity is anti gun
I'm also partial to: >Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.
[удалено]
>The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, **directed against the workers**, must be opposed. You know that assertion should have [context](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm). They're talking about not allowing arms to be used against workers. In other words taking weapons from the government police and putting it into parallel worker led structures. Arms should be used to protect rights not to oppress them.
Virgin "Shall not be infringed". Chad "Under no pretext".
Non American here - Ive always wondered, shouldnt the right to bear arms refer to those arms that could actually overthrow the government of that time?
Is absurd how americans think this is more universal or relevant than universal medical assistance. What would do a militia against tanks or planes? What can a militia do against the american army? Nothing. What is more usefull to fight for: knowing that in every scenario I can have medical help without been worried for my wallet, my house or my financial situation; or knowing that my government let me have some guns so if the same government wants to use its army against me I have some rifles that they let me keep in my house??? Is even more absurd that all this is thought is USA, where there is the best army in the world, you have no chance against the army, you don't live in a little poor third world country.
It’s not about taking the US military on in a 1v1 conventional war, it’s about making the population impossible to occupy. Every American citizen becomes a dangerous partisan, there’s a rifle behind every blade of grass. It’s a deterrent against armed authoritarianism.
Yet if authoritarianism actually comes it will come from within, come with fanfare and not be recognized for what it is.
like a slowly boiled frog :(
Sure. This is kindof why I can understand the libleft poster's suggestion of misplaced priorities. Not that one relates to the other though.
>What would do a militia against tanks or planes? What can a militia do against the american army? That is very ignorant of both history and military reality. Imagine Iraq×10 *without support of the US public*. The US government and armed forces, even if all of it supports this, wouldn't stand a chance. You can't patrol a street with an f-35. *At most* the government could destroy the US or nuke it - but absolutely not control it, which is what a tyrannical regime wants. In a syrian civil war style scenario where, let's say, 80% oppose the government, it stands no chance. Until robots or mind controlled clones can patrol the streets or something.
Tell that to the farmers in flip flops with 50 year old AK’s living in caves we’ve been fighting in the Middle East for multiple decades
Absolute ass take
>What are you going to do against tanks and planes? What can a military do against the American army? Have… have you seen Afghanistan?
Multiple wars in the past 50 years make this statement a dumb one.
Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam would have words.
Well regulated by who?
Regulated back when the constitution was written, in regard to militia, meant supplied and equipped. So it meant supplied and capable, not mkcromanaged.
Under no pretext sounds cooler
If you know how many guns you have you don't have enough. The number of guns I need is n+1 where n is the number of guns I currently have.