hogFeast

It is hard to find an explanation for this other than Germany has been co-opted by Russia. Ukraine has been separated from the herd and will surely fall. Putin will be on Germany's border by the end of the decade.

No, the page was created for "freedom day" (and the consistent predictions that it would unleash an apocalypse).

The principle of requiring healthcare staff to get the vaccine is already established. Most countries in Europe already do this. This is not the same thing as requiring all employees to be fired if they fail to have a medical procedure that the President deems necessary. Your point, however, is totally anti-science: 500 years ago, would you ask for someone to be fired because they didn't use the appropriate amount of leeches? It is amazing that the people who go on about this kind of thing don't understand basic elements of what science is.

So your employer is allowed to sterilise employees with disabilities? Perhaps only those employees with mental illness? If you question whether this is realistic, this happened in the US 70 years ago, and the very same principle was used to sterilise disabled people en masse. The ends do not justify the means, this is ubermensch ideology (only those who can rise above morality and do things that others are unwilling to do will possess the future...it is madness, it is something that hasn't existed in politics since the 30s...and, to be clear, it existed in the US too).

The ruling that you mention was also used to sterilize disabled people. It is funny that you mention Nazi Germany...they did that there too. But, of course, everyone else is just overreacting, the ends justify the means, only people of true vision can break free of the rules that limit others, the ubermensch has appeared, hail.

And yes, there are medical exemptions, there are religious exemptions, there are lots of exemptions because, again, it is fairly obvious that the state forcing people to have medical procedures is not a good idea. Trying to say that you have suffered so much already (please, pathetic) so the vaccine is fine is one of the weakest arguments. That can be used to justify anything if you just tell people how hard your life is. You have no moral compass. Something is a good idea or not.

Okay, so you don't understand what social policy is either. Wow.

It always seemed very tiring to me: work out who the person is, work out what political allegiance they have, and then decide to agree or disagree with them/potentially having to reorder or reinterpret X or Y to make it all fit.

Regardless of that: if I am someone who believes that vaccines do not work (and btw, in the context of American politics...this does not seem a wild conspiracy, you see the same level of nonsense distributed by people on the left too) then am I likely to be convinced by the govt attempting to rescind support from me? No. If anything, that suggests to me that I am probably correct.

In other words, the point of removing unemployment insurance is to hurt people who disagree with me...this is not smart (and again, an ironic position to take from people who view themselves as very liberal and open...next-level stuff).

No, I am not. People are paying for the medical resources they use. Nice try though (I would learn more about social policy, the point of social policy is that it is for everyone, not people who agree to a medical procedure, not people who have political views you agree with...this is why the US doesn't have a welfare state, because people believe money will go to people "who aren't like them").

Economic policy has had a huge role in that. If you are wealthy, you can borrow money for free, you can pay no taxes, and you can invest your free money at 10%+...oh, and the govt will bail you out if it goes wrong.

I worked in equity research at a financial adviser, I am not anti-markets at all (although am probably towards the left of things, for economics more than anything...substantial inequality is not sustainable economically) but the reason why the US doesn't have downward mobility is because rich people do not need skills. You need money to get rich, not skills.

If you look at other countries with similar economic models, for example the UK, you see much higher downward mobility. Again, the simple reason for that is less buoyant financial markets (and btw, UK property has gone through the roof and wealthier individuals in the UK own proportionally more property...the US is really, really out there). The only place that is really comparable are explicitly corporatist states like Germany and China...and the former has (tbf, fairly weak) mechanisms to guarantee a certain living standard.

I don't really understand the US system at all. The welfare state is Bezos and Musk's space projects. And people wonder why their fellow citizens are struggling? You are rich, but you live in a society where many other people are suffering...that isn't wealth.