It was a lot of things, a real witches brew. The derivatives were a major issue, but it was the entire structure of the US housing and lending market that led to the explosion of derivatives in the first place. You can add in the rating agencies too. But part of the reason that the ratings agencies, pension funds, etc. didn't worry as much as they should have is the idea of the implicit state backing for loans made by the parastatals. — Count Timothy von Icarus

That makes sense. I didn't think about that. I had read that there had never been a significant downturn in housing prices, so people just didn't factor in the possibility of a crash.

I am surprised by the number here who support monarchy. — Paine

There's a scene in the Bible where the people of Israel are asking their judge to name a king. Samuel tells them that in the day they have a king, they will all have become slaves. They insist though, and the Kingdom of Israel is born. They supposedly wanted a king for the sake of warfare.

In this is a recognition that monarchy has a dark side, but the desire for it is coming from the people. King-making is a deep seated drive and this has played out in American history and the presidency has evolved from a minor federal figurehead to something like a king in the sense that the whole political tone changes due to presidential agenda. This is not the result of a nefarious plot. It's because over and over, we found that an integrated, centralized authority can solve problems that the competing states simply can't.

Since the US government is widely considered by Americans to be dysfunctional, it shouldn't be too surprising that monarchy is on some people's minds.

Ah. I don't think Fannie and Freddie caused the 2008 crisis, though. It was derivatives, right?

But at least part of the 2008 financial crisis was due to the perverse incentives faced by massive government run banks, — Count Timothy von Icarus

What massive government run banks? The only government run bank is the Fed.

Let’s see what comes of it. — NOS4A2

They could build a golf course through the graveyards where 70% of the dead are women and children.

Out of all his pie-in-the-skies this is Trump’s worst idea ever, sure to set the region on fire and send all involved into a spiral of evil. The only way he can redeem himself is if this turns out to be some negotiating tactic. — NOS4A2

That is the craziest shit I have ever heard. Let's do it!!

When you're cost cutting, that's also a good time to eliminate entities that may have harassed you in the past, and those who might one day. They have a list of good guys to put in slots. Just sayin.

Canada is a fine place, and may it continue as a sovereign nation forever. Even so, I don't quite see Canada as the escape hatch for anyone's existential threat. Even less so Greenland. Besides, Trump and his allies will be dead long before much more ice melts off of Greenland's chilly shores. — BC

What's your theory on why he wants Canada and Greenland? I just assumed somebody told him that both those areas will be prime real estate in the future.

Perverse visionaries! — BC

He didn't have any ideology the first time around. He does now. That was my point. But you know the European aristocracy said the same thing about the founders of the Enlightenment. Perverse! History is written by the...

I'd suggest rather that Davidson would say reference has a function only within broader theories of truth (or meaning), and there can be no coherent theory of reference per se. Reference is not free-standing. — Banno

I'll have to think about that.

I was thinking along these lines (imagine Quine and Davidson discussing reference):

Quine: Because differing conceptual schemes could be in play, reference is inscrutable.

Davidson: But if there were really differing conceptual schemes, they would have to be incommensurate, because otherwise they would be translatable. And if they were truly incommensurate, you wouldn't be able to detect that.

Quine. I don't disagree with that. I didn't say anything about detecting differing conceptual schemes, I was saying that they could exist. It's the mere possibility of it that makes reference inscrutable.

Davidson: Oh. But you have to assume that reference is fixable in order to communicate at all.

Quine. That may be, but it doesn't change the fact that you don't really know. The appearance of knowing is coming from familiarity with behavioral cues.

Davidson: And this convinces you of behaviorism?

Quine. Sort of, not exactly?

The notion of god is inconsistent.

Anything follows from an inconsistency.

Therefore Jesus is God. — Banno

:lol: He's also not God.

This and other examples of “humanitarian aid” has proven a wasteful and corrupt system. — NOS4A2

:up:

When you said that your old world had disappeared, you sounded excited by the prospect of a new one. — Paine

I loved what I thought the USA stood for. I'm broken hearted. This isn't really the place for that kind of expression though. It would be like crying into a pool of fucking sharks.

Does this dream of Manifest Destiny promise to bring the old USA back? — Paine

Step back and try to understand what's happening as if you're reading a history book. Be the psychologist, the anthropologist, the philosopher, etc...

Issues in Philosophy of Religion and issues in theology are not mutually exclusive, at least not necessarily. Can you prove that they are? — Arcane Sandwich

I'm not inclined to debate the issue.

It's Philosophy of Religion. — Arcane Sandwich

No, it isn't. It's a theological issue.

It's Philosophy of Religion. — Arcane Sandwich

No, it isn't. It's a theological issue related to fact that some early Christians were Neoplatonists.

It is therefore in the interest of Christian philosophers to argue that God and Jesus are indeed identical. — Arcane Sandwich

There were Christian sects that didn't believe that Jesus was God, the Arians, for instance. Those groups died out and the Catholic view became standard. There are Christians today who don't think Jesus is divine, like the Jehovah's Witnesses. So it's a sectarian issue, not a philosophical one.

You guys are still not convinced climate change is an existential threat? Well I guess we'll find out the hard way if there are limits or not. — unenlightened

Why do you think he wants Greenland and Canada?

I think the more serious problem with democracy is that it mandates short-termism in policy. Any problem that can be kicked down the road by 5 years isn't worth the cost of solving, any investment that won't show a profit within 5 years is not worth making. Either is liable to be an expensive free gift to one's opponents. — unenlightened

As long as the Soviet Union appeared to be an existential threat, the US government could be consistent over time. As a lone superpower, there are no limits on anything.

Always happy to help. — unenlightened

:smile: Cutting costs is a veil for eliminating opposition.

Thank you

And Trump's approval rating is at an all time high. This is what Americans want.

Wow. There's a lot of strong emotions about this.

Have a nice life — Wayfarer

Thanks for the blessing. I am having a nice life.

You sound remarkably sanguine about it. — Wayfarer

I feel like the USA I grew up in is gone. It seems alien to me, but I think Trump's vision of securing Canada and Greenland is genius. I know how weird that sounds, but it is, partly because of climate change and partly because the Yellowstone caldera is due to blow up.

The presence of Musk, Vance, and Vought signals that visionaries are gathering around Trump. Musk wants the US government to help SpaceX. Both Vought and Vance want dictatorship. A dictatorial USA will be stronger and more flexible than the old version. That's why all democracies eventually becomes monarchies, historically.

So let’s get rid of it. — Wayfarer

I believe we're watching the emergence of an authoritarian state spanning North America and Greenland. This kind of thing happens all the time in history books. I've never seen it in real life though.

There's a bunch of those. They're all pretty funny.

No good trying to kick into the long grass of ruminations about democracy. — Wayfarer

No, it's true. The US has struggled with the problem for decades. There is no solution within the framework of democracy.

It’s your breakfast they’re going to be eating — Wayfarer

I doubt it.

In a democracy there is no way to limit government spending. Only an entity who does not answer to the people can do that. It's kind of bizarre that it's Elon Musk doing it, but there you have it.

This fault in democracy is something the human race has yet to resolve.

But in the end, it's the Americans themselves that have to pay the price. — ssu

Most of the wood Americans use comes from Canada. Canada doesn't require the sustainability rules for harvesting wood that Americans do. It would benefit the planet if the US stops buying Canadian wood altogether. I'd like to see that happen, actually.

I think the point is to convince these governments to help tackle the problem, which is apparent in all countries involved. — NOS4A2

Right. Maybe have the countries that are dependent on us stop fucking us over.

The US was an oddity. Countries don't usually behave magnanimously the way it used to, giving out aid, supporting the UN, fostering democracy in the world, etc. I think that was just a leftover from the Cold War when some sort of ideological war was supposed to be playing out. It's time for the US to revert to the way countries usually are: selfish, ruthless, aiming to literally destroy competitors rather than creating a level playing field for all.

Plus, it's pretty well established that the US government used to accept drug imports in order to crush noisy sections of the population, so it's significant that fentanyl abuse was highlighted. I wonder if that came from Vance.

I approve of that. Nicely done.

Apathy about Zionism. — BitconnectCarlos

Alright. :up:

Judeo-apathy would be a good descriptor. — BitconnectCarlos

For what?

What about being apathetic about Zionism? Is that Judeo-apathy?

Specifically, Trump wants to make Canada a state. 90% of the Canadian population lives on the border, and from what numerous Canadians have told me, a lot of Canadians want to cross over and live in the US. So Canada might depopulate when Trump gets his way.

Anything is better than being tethered to the British crown. — NOS4A2

You can say that again!

You guys will probably be annexed after Greenland.