ieatcandlewax

When I did a quick search in brave it agreed with the statement: "Yes, during a televised debate on October 23, 2026, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva stated that his government would "end the police" if reelected. The comment occurred while he was discussing the approval of the PEC da Segurança (Security Public Amendment) and the creation of a new Ministry of Public Security. "

I tried google and he did in fact say it: "During the TV Globo presidential debate on October 23, 2026, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva stated: "Aprovada a PEC da Segurança eu vou criar o Ministério e ai você vai ver o que é um governo acabar, sabe, com a polícia e deixar o território livre""

Although google says that he might have been being sarcastic, and gave some additional defenses. I googled "Did Lula say he was going to end police recently?" and got these responses.

Im surprised that you got such a different result in such a short time frame, especially the "completely false" thing, as it's not far off the direct quote. What did you google?

You might as well be putting $50 on yesterday's weather

The cost of living in new mexico is more than just a price tag. Portugal is only dysfunctional and hopeless for people trying to start a career, it's a great place for tourists and retirees.

> For any electricians/plumbers/etc. out there? Go get yours. When the shoe was on the other foot you were mocked and told to switch careers, lowballed on horrible residential projects, told to skill up and get better if you wanted to get paid more, there was no future in the trades, etc. Make hay while the sun shines and ignore the bleating.

yeah instead they did the smart thing and they got together and passed protectionist policy to artificially inflate the value of their labor. Let's see how union tough you are when the administration changes and you have to compete with a global labor pool again.

> Did they do those DEI things in 2021 because they wanted to, or because they had to? And if they had to, what power compelled them?

These are rhetorical questions. I also don't think your description of an "incredible corporate culture" is widely shared, given how you described it in your comment.

My bad, I thought it was just an apt way of describing modern tech workers, didn't know it was an antisemitic slur.

I love Isreal and pledge my allegiance to the Zionist cause.

I'm guessing you live in the northern half if your using cute and Haight in the same sentence. Esp when Inner Sunset has effectively the same architecture.

You could feasibly quadruple the population if you wanted to, I guess my question is to why? It wouldn't decrease rent appreciably, and you would have to move out to daly city to raise your family in something other than an apartment.

You could do all this building and ruin the atmosphere of the lower half of the city just for Amazon, Salesforce and whatever other software companies are still downtown to move to some desert and have the rents drop back down to normal ranges.

I disagree with this, I've noticed that the countries rising to prominence are quite nationalistic and the ones fading into obscurity are very post-national.

> Europeans and people from other countries around the world are often fiercely in love with their countries.

I would also disagree with this, I think it's profoundly uncool to love your country in many parts of Europe—think the UK and especially Germany.

The Europeans that did actually fiercely love their country that I've met were all Poles or Serbs that were gaudily beating their own drum.

What problems do you think arise from nationalism in it's current form in the US?

I don't understand how people can see San Francisco and think "I wish this entire skyline was all 20 story apartment buildings so that rootless cosmopolitans can have marginally cheaper rent". If you want to live like that, new york is a great place and there is no need to sacrifice a beautiful and historic (by american standards) city for it.

This is all on the backdrop that the only reason people are complaining about this is because they want to pay Midwest prices for rent to go work at Amazon and make 250k.

These companies didn't build the city themselves, and they'll be gone as soon as you turn it into seoul with a higher corporate tax.

"You know who else reacted to foreign backed industrial sabotage campaigns? Hitler"

this is deep stuff dude. you should run for office

>Why should the police be accountable, indeed? That's honestly my whole point, my whole issue with police having drones. They're not accountable, and when they get caught, they lie or ignore. They have power over you and I, they're in a special position, and for that reason we should both be fighting them and holding them accountable wherever and whenever they step over the line (which, I'm sure you're aware, is constantly). Given the option and an inch, the police would establish a surveillance panopticon, all in the name of "safety."

The police are accountable, this is one of the big reasons they wear bodycams—so that there is a video record of if they were abusing their power. If they don't have the bodycam on, this would look very bad in front of a jury. If they're actually stalking you that's an abuse of power and you can sue the city/state.

The key difference is that they aren't accountable to you on the street because they need the special privilege to do their job.

Given the option (shown time and time again) police will sit on their ass and rack up overtime for their ridiculous pension. They aren't paid by crimes avoided so I don't think they would care to proactively fix it.

> The police do, literally, have special drone privileges. They get access to special, high-powered surveillance drones that the public does not get.

This is a real problem in America, where tools that could potentially be used for nefarious purposes become illegal for the general population "for their own good". If you're arguing we should have access to specialized surveillance drones and other police equipment on the market you have my complete support.

Also training for a drone, using a drone, recording video in public spaces, surveilling you in a public space are not privileges.

Surveilling you in your apartment needs a warrant, unless you have your window open, at which case it doesn't.

>Go fly a drone outside of a police officer's house and you'll end up dead or in jail.

Anyone can walk up to you and kill you, it doesn't mean there aren't legal consequences for it.

>people like some of the commenters in this thread will lay down their lives to defend them from public criticism.

This is because we've heard these arguments a million times and know it's a trojan for some harebrained ideology, which is unfortunate, because police oversight is an important topic—especially considering police unions wield a lot of political power.

Out of curiosity, where do you draw the line between what police can and can't do?