ติดตั้ง Steam
เข้าสู่ระบบ
|
ภาษา
简体中文 (จีนตัวย่อ)
繁體中文 (จีนตัวเต็ม)
日本語 (ญี่ปุ่น)
한국어 (เกาหลี)
български (บัลแกเรีย)
Čeština (เช็ก)
Dansk (เดนมาร์ก)
Deutsch (เยอรมัน)
English (อังกฤษ)
Español - España (สเปน)
Español - Latinoamérica (สเปน - ลาตินอเมริกา)
Ελληνικά (กรีก)
Français (ฝรั่งเศส)
Italiano (อิตาลี)
Bahasa Indonesia (อินโดนีเซีย)
Magyar (ฮังการี)
Nederlands (ดัตช์)
Norsk (นอร์เวย์)
Polski (โปแลนด์)
Português (โปรตุเกส - โปรตุเกส)
Português - Brasil (โปรตุเกส - บราซิล)
Română (โรมาเนีย)
Русский (รัสเซีย)
Suomi (ฟินแลนด์)
Svenska (สวีเดน)
Türkçe (ตุรกี)
Tiếng Việt (เวียดนาม)
Українська (ยูเครน)
รายงานปัญหาเกี่ยวกับการแปลภาษา
กฎและแนวทางปฏิบัติในกระดานสนทนา
รายงานโพสต์นี้
The markets were being hammered by other factors long before Brexit. [/quote]
I literally LOL.
you clearly do not watch the market on a daily basis. last week was a HUGE hit
When not towing a line or agenda, the pragmatic every day man sees through both parties. But a biased media is more lucrative than an impartial one, so the propaganda isn't going anywhere.
Come on now:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/01/ftse-100-to-open-higher-after-rollercoaster-day-for-markets/
Threads like this get locked because people like you try to take cheap shots at others.
in less than 12 hours the pound to the dollar fell to the lowest it had been since 1985 I think it was.
The crash that happen in stocks last week is only comparable to last year. I watch the market daily.
I don't really put much stock into one sided outlets. Really, any outlets, but one sided outlets are worse.
When you cry about the opposite side doing something but then love your side for doing the exact same ♥♥♥♥, from then on I write off almost everything you say.
daily show (and then colbert report) have always done that.
They sometimes tell funny jokes.
New guy daily show laughs at his own jokes waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much (I don't remember jon doing that very much, if at all).
willmore is just "waaaah white people = evil, black people = god!!!!!!!!!!!" (left out the extra "o" to better align with the show's message).
Truth be told, trump is a democrat. He's best buds with hillary.
He got all "republican", or what he thinks is a stereotypical republican (racist, xenophobic, derpy), right after hillary's loss to obama in '08.
He was hired to do what he's doing.
Kind of hard to shoot bullets when you don't have any (like the last eight years, other than maybe sarah palin?).
And now they're stocked with comically-stereotypical-to-the-point-where-I-don't-understand-why-there-aren't-more-people-questioning-it's-validity-as-a-"republican" ammunition.
Coupled with "winner-takes-all" this is true. Wherever one side takes a stance, the other must adopt the exact opposite stance or risk splitting their constituency and losing everything. Part of media bias is a product of that. The media is still human, it still picks sides, and it has never been objective despite constantly claiming to be.
Of course, part of the media equation is also money, and dramatic, opinionated stories about people and power DO attract more attention than just a bland statement of facts. You are correct in this. Nobody watches shows where actual court evidence is presented, in fact some go to great lengths to get out of that. But they watch shows where lawyers argue.
Despite all this, I don't see the two-party system as being a problem, and I don't really care what it does. In my view, it's a one-party system, both parties are federalists at best, which to me just makes them socialists.
Sure, they'll say they aren't, and they may not mean to be, but that's what they are. Once government starts assuming universal responsibility for things, it only ever grows larger, and requires more resources. The only place it can get them is from the people, and so it takes from the people to fuel its own distribution mechanism. Socialism no matter how you slice it.
This isn't their fault, it's just the natural result of centralized power. There is no way to effectively prune it or limit it by using people making laws, so it grows just as anything else would. People come to depend on it for paychecks or products and services. Eventually it grows into other sectors and becomes intertwined, since the first thing you have to do in order to do anything is get state approval. Again, socialism. The state directs wealth.
In the face of that, one party or the other is not a concern. My only concern is for the preservation of the Constitution, the supposed supreme law of the land which tells the federal state what it can do, and forbids it from doing anything else.
Not that the Constitution has been successful in this, but at least in the US it took over a hundred years and a civil war to really go around it. That's already better than what most governments get before they implode, and over a century after that it's still the most powerful nation in the world because of limitations on power.
All that needs be done is re-write it to be stronger. It still won't last forever, but then that's what the right to bear arms is for. To ensure that the concept of "government by consent" actually requires a good deal of consent.
This is the only place where partisanship really factors in at all, because it's much easier to pit a popualtion against one another than it is to gain everyone's consent. External threats are always the best unifiers. It's just unfortunate that so many people are busier fighting each other thatn what they should be doing, fighting the government itself, the natural enemy of all ideologies and people because it is a source of control.
Not saying anyone needs to launch a revolt or anything, but we do have fifty states, and that's plenty of room for everyone to practice their particular brand of government. The Constitution allows much more freedom for states and people, to whom all other powers are reserved. Might be worth considering whenever the nation tires of arguing over who will decide everything for everyone.
the modern era is a hard place for some to live in I suppose
how much you want to bet Hillary convinced him to run knowing full well she would slaughter him?