| ▲ | dgellow a day ago |
| DOGE will be seen by historians as the cause of so many crisis… |
|
| ▲ | RunSet a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| It is the government equivalent of El Muskito buying Twitter and then wantonly disabling components with the assumption they do nothing. |
| |
| ▲ | davidw a day ago | parent [-] | | Except no one died because Twitter malfunctions here and there. | | |
| ▲ | dzhiurgis a day ago | parent [-] | | TBF the companies that failed to contain the disease are at fault, not the agency. You can't reasonably expect government to protect everyone from everything. | | |
| ▲ | ssl-3 a day ago | parent | next [-] | | How would we know which companies to blame without organizations like the CDC? What would they even be blamed for in the first place if there were no regulatory expectations for them to adhere to? | | |
| ▲ | lymbo 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | Exactly, and profit is too great a drug for 99% of companies. Consumers just aren’t going to be willing or able to collectively buy up research and regulatory bodies themselves or we would already have a replacement. |
| |
| ▲ | SR2Z 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You can reasonably expect the government to measure the scale and scope of an outbreak after it's occurred and force companies to appropriately recall any damaged produce. You know, what they've been doing for decades before Musk gutted them. I don't know what to tell you, man. It's not normal for thousands of people to be sickened by foodborne illness AFTER the government knows where it's from. | |
| ▲ | Gud 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Only in some libertarian fever dream. Functional societies has central functions to ensure that safety of its people. | |
| ▲ | sixothree a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | To be fair to whom exactly? The organization tasked with disease protection and which claims they exist for "saving lives"? |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | shimman a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You don't need historians to see the crisis as it was happening and as it's ongoing, the only question we need to ask is how long should the people held accountable be in prison for? For abusing democratic offices the penalty should be at least one decade in keeping up with ancient Athenian democratic traditions. |
| |
| ▲ | dgellow a day ago | parent [-] | | Well, I said historians because I don’t think that will happen anytime soon. The US is almost completely captured. The time to send people to prison was during the previous administration. I still cannot believe that Americans re-elected a literal failed insurrectionist | | |
| ▲ | bamboozled a day ago | parent [-] | | I agree, if people voted for this I wouldn’t expect any ramifications at all. People have to be so far gone to have actually wanted this that they’re not just going to change their mind. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | bamboozled a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Imagine how frustrated the laid off staff must be, especially if they end up either the illness themselves. |
|
| ▲ | cyanydeez a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| optimistic, this requires the arc of history to bend towards non-fascism. |
| |
| ▲ | ryandvm a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah, as Norm Macdonald put it: > “It says here in this history book that luckily, the good guys have won every single time. What are the odds?” | |
| ▲ | epistasis a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Well, there will at least be historians in other countries covering the downfall in detail, if there is indeed a bigger downfall than has already happened. Democracies are pretty good at studying the failures of other countries and learning about them. | | |
| ▲ | lostlogin a day ago | parent [-] | | ‘and learning about them’ I’m not at all convinced about this part. | | |
| ▲ | EdwardDiego a day ago | parent [-] | | To be fair, they said learning _about_ them, not learning _from_ them. |
|
| |
| ▲ | ElProlactin a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Optimistic, this requires a civilization to have a history. | |
| ▲ | gruez a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >the arc of history to bend towards non-fascism. From wikipedia: "Fascism [...] rose to prominence primarily in Europe of the interwar period" So what were humans doing for all the thousands of years after the advent of recorded history but before that? | | | |
| ▲ | solid_fuel a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Fascism always collapses, the question is only how much will remain by the time that occurs. | | |
| ▲ | z3c0 a day ago | parent | next [-] | | And whether or not what replaces it is any better. Historically speaking, widespread democracy is still a recent development. | | |
| ▲ | solid_fuel a day ago | parent [-] | | That's always an open question. Fascism does frequently collapse into other authoritarian regimes, too. But fascism itself will always fail. It is a movement motivated by the petty grievances of cowards and fools, and the same hate and violence they project outward always turns inward at the end. | | |
| |
| ▲ | criddell a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | What definition of fascism are you using? Is China fascist? | | |
| ▲ | solid_fuel a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > What definition of fascism are you using? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism > Is China fascist? What a strange and completely irrelevant question. | |
| ▲ | ndsipa_pomu 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | China is also fascist by the usual four measures (cult-like worship, hyper-nationalism, a merciless surveillance apparatus and the glorification of military strength), but that has nothing to do with fascism in the USA. | | |
| ▲ | criddell 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | I was more interested in the claim that fascism always collapses because China feels like a durable counter-example. But if you don't classify China as fascist, it is irrelevant. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | dgellow a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Fair. Though based on previous experiments fascist regimes aren’t that stable and competent, they have a tendency to self-destruct once they are in power. It’s a sad state of affairs that is considered optimistic |
|
|
| ▲ | thrance a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| DOGE is simply a tool of global capital, and shouldn't be singled out as the root cause of anything. Its purpose was to cut money from being redistributed through government programs, so it could go to the financial markets instead via tax cuts for the wealthiests and inefficient defense contracts. It achieved its goal wonderfully. |
| |
| ▲ | smegger001 a day ago | parent [-] | | More than that it was an enabling tool. Republicans for decades have claimed that the government cant do anythingright/good and that we must deregulate and let the free market do everything. Problem is the government is actually pretty good at doing somethings, so Republicans break things until they can use them as examples of government inefficiency then privatize it for there own profit. Doge was made to break the government so Republicans could point at what was left and say "see government is broken" But Musk ran it and he's and idiot that had no idea what he doing so istead of it slowly all going to shit so no one would remember it all working as intended it started to fall apart to soon. So we still have people that will point to the real cause. | | |
| ▲ | pbnjeh 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | In explanations I believe, over the decades government programs have been difficult to deal with in good part because Republicans and their like (sorry if this seems political, but they’re the ones doing it) while they can’t stop all the legislation, they have enough influence even then to make the administration structure and requirements deliberately horrible and underfunded. One of the first big bullets they put into the Affordable Care Act after it became effective, was to zero out funding of its provisions that were/are mandated by law. The “government can’t do shit” people should spend some time looking at the reasons why. Government isn’t perfect — it’s made up of the same humans that compose the rest of society — but it often isn’t half bad, and many people going into it have good-hearted and honorable intentions. Some turn bitter or disengaged at the experience — as designed — but many fight such negativity to the bitter end. Oh, and regarding the ACA, many don’t know or have forgotten that businesses were clamoring for it or some/any solution, facing 25% year over year premium increases for their insured employees. And the ACA has and continues to provide many substantial improvements and benefits to group policy insurance holders that have no ready optics and hype like the healthcare marketplace. Have insurance through your employer and think the ACA does nothing for you? You’re wrong. So, thanks, gub’mint! |
|
|
