Trump admits separating families is a political stunt

[tarheel0910]

This whole notion of "tribalism" is retarded. The idea that I wouldn't prefer my fellow countryman to a foreigner is absurd. I like my kids better than your kids. I like my neighbors and feel closer with them than I do your neighbors who I've never met. I like the parents of the kids at my kids' school better than parents of kids at your kids' school. That's perfectly reasonable.

OF COURSE WE"RE TRIBALISTIC. AND THERE'S NOTHING AT ALL WRONG WITH IT. IT'S AN INNATE ANIMAL INSTINCT.

Furthermore, you're exactly right. Liberals kill me. They whine and complain that there are too many poor people in our country and that we're not doing enough to help them yet they want to allow scads of other poor people into the country. Do they not realize how inane that logic is?

I'm for closing the borders completely until I never have to hear another peep out of a liberal about wealth inequality and until every American has a roof over their head and food to eat. At that point, we can open the borders and allow more poor people to come in. Or I'm for immigrants buying their way in. If you want to come to America, pay the price. I think $25k for each individual coming in sounds about right. Then use that revenue to build a wall.

I just mentioned tribalism to beat @strummingram to the punch. Your idea sounds good in theory, but in reality something like that could never be passed in congress. There has to be some give and take. Saying no one should be allowed to come in isn't going to help anything.

 

[gunslingerdick]

I just mentioned tribalism to beat @strummingram to the punch. Your idea sounds good in theory, but in reality something like that could never be passed in congress. There has to be some give and take. Saying no one should be allowed to come in isn't going to help anything.

But I just want people to recognize - especially the self-proclaimed champions for logic and reason (I'm looking at you @uncboy10 )- that my proposal is completely logical and makes sense.

Of course it won't happen. But that doesn't mean it's not the best idea. In fact, because it wouldn't ever get approval by congress only strengthens the argument that it is the best idea.

 

[tarheel0910]

Of course it won't happen. But that doesn't mean it's not the best idea. In fact, because it wouldn't ever get approval by congress only strengthens the argument that it is the best idea.

The only problem is that things will stay the same and all of those illegals that you hate will continue to come in at the same pace. If the boat is sinking you don't let it go down because you can't get to harbor. You try to patch it up the best you can so it doesn't continue to sink.

 

[gunslingerdick]

The only problem is that things will stay the same and all of those illegals that you hate will continue to come in at the same pace. If the boat is sinking you don't let it go down because you can't get to harbor. You try to patch it up the best you can so it doesn't continue to sink.

First of all, I don't "hate" anyone (except for maybe duke fans). I don't hate immigrants. I mean, maybe I would hate some of them; I don't know. Maybe I'd really like some of them. But regardless, the point remains that we're incapable of taking care of our own people. Why would we want more of our own people to not be taken care of? Seriously, how much sense does that make?

As to your analogy, if the boat is sinking and you can't get it to harbor, what's the point in patching up? Just so it can be lost at sea?

 

[tarheel0910]

First of all, I don't "hate" anyone (except for maybe duke fans). I don't hate immigrants.

I meant that in the more general sense that you hate the idea of illegals as opposed to those who do it legally.

As to your analogy, if the boat is sinking and you can't get it to harbor, what's the point in patching up? Just so it can be lost at sea?

The point of patching it up is so it doesn't sink. Patching up a hole keeps water from getting in. Most boats won't sink if they are water tight. @JuleZ '02 HEEL could probably explain that better than me.

 

[gunslingerdick]

The point of patching it up is so it doesn't sink. Patching up a hole keeps water from getting in. Most boats won't sink if they are water tight. @JuleZ '02 HEEL could probably explain that better than me.

I understand that. So we patch it up. Then what? Drift around aimlessly and die a slow death. No thanks. I'll take the sinking ship. At least there's some dignity in that. But I suppose you're making the argument that we'd "patch it up" and then eventually still make it back to harbor. Fat chance.

 

[tarheel0910]

I understand that. So we patch it up. Then what? Drift around aimlessly and die a slow death. No thanks. I'll take the sinking ship. At least there's some dignity in that. But I suppose you're making the argument that we'd "patch it up" and then eventually still make it back to harbor. Fat chance.

Patching it up would actually keep you from sinking. There would be no need to go back to harbor and you wouldn't have to die. I know you know what I'm saying, you're just trying to troll me. You'd get more entertainment out of trolling your buddy.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Patching it up would actually keep you from sinking. There would be no need to go back to harbor and you wouldn't have to die. I know you know what I'm saying, you're just trying to troll me. You'd get more entertainment out of trolling your buddy.

No. I'm being serious. The ship would eventually need to dock at some point. So patching it up has simply prolonged the inevitable. That's what I'm saying.

You probably take band-aids off really slowly too.

 

[tarheel0910]

No. I'm being serious. The ship would eventually need to dock at some point. So patching it up has simply prolonged the inevitable. That's what I'm saying.

You probably take band-aids off really slowly too.

You'd get more entertainment out of trolling your buddy.

 

[uncboy10]

I'm not a big fan of the wall either, but in order to bring everyone to the table you've got to have something for everyone. I suspect that amount could be negotiated down to around $10 billion. Still a waste, but at least it's a compromise.


I think people born here should have more opportunity than someone from a different country. I know that sounds tribalistic, but that's just how I feel. You also have to consider sustainability. We don't have the resources to sustain a huge population increase. Hell, we don't have enough resources to sustain people who are born here.


I don't think illegal immigrants are a part of the free market. We all know that their pay and benefits are not close to what a legal person gets. That gives an unfair advantage to certain employers. In a free market system, everyone has the same opportunities (at least in theory).


That's the only way to get things like this done though. DACA will never be passed by itself and border security will never be passed by itself. The only chance for either thing to get passed is if everyone gets something out of it. The only way to do it is through a comprehensive bill.

We can easily sustain far more people than we currently have. We waste enough food every day to feed several smaller countries. This is a nation of excess. The idea that we can't sustain what we have is ludicrous. If we begin to approach a point where that is no longer the case, then people will no longer want to come here, and people will even emigrate from the US to other countries even. Obviously I believe that we should prioritize the highest skilled workers, and we can't just let everyone in. But the idea that a few million people immigrating here is going to upend our economy is simply not supported by the economic data.

I never said illegal immigrants are part of the free market. My point is that they wouldn't be illegal in the first place if they could freely move from one country to another for work or travel. They cannot be regulated because they are illegal immigrants, and there's little to no incentive to go through the right procedures. This is why the pathway to citizenship for people that are here has to be a crucial part of any immigrant reform. We can either let them keep working under the table, or legitimize them and let them pay taxes and enjoy the benefits of US citizenship. There is no option that allows to magically deport them and eliminate illegal labor. This is just like the war on drugs. We are never going to eliminate supply or demand. But we can legalize/regulate.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Your refusal to acknowledge the legitimate point I'm making doesn't make it any less legitimate.

 

[tarheel0910]

We can easily sustain far more people than we currently have. We waste enough food every day to feed several smaller countries. This is a nation of excess.

If we changes our ways we might be able too, but let's be honest. America isn't going to change. It's not just about food. You've got to have housing, infrastructure jobs, etc.

This is why the pathway to citizenship for people that are here has to be a crucial part of any immigrant reform.

I know that it gives DACA people that pathway. Not sure about the others. It may be in the final bill that they are working on. Even if it doesn't, don't you think there is enough in there to come to the table and negotiate in good faith? That's the problem right now. It's all or nothing. If they would get together they could put some things in there that aren't there now if everyone was willing to act rationally about this. Both sides won't do that though.

 

[uncboy10]

@gunslingerdick actually made some decent points about tribalism. Its a necessary animal impulse that helps keep us alive. Without a preference for the familiar, its unlikely that we would be able to build the trust that is at the foundation of our societies. The idea that its just some ignorant bias is a misrepresentation of what tribalism actually is.

However, its still helpful to recognize and challenge that bias. If you only eat at the local restaurant you know and love, only talk to your neighbors you know, and stick to the same bars you always go to, with the same crappy beer, then you're going to miss out on a lot of awesome stuff. You don't have to feel guilty about preferring whats familiar, but it doesn't hurt to recognize that as a shortcoming in some cases.

 

[tarheel0910]

Your refusal to acknowledge the legitimate point I'm making doesn't make it any less legitimate.

What point is that? That we'll die slow if we don't stop everyone from coming in? I've already said that it sounds good in theory, but it just can't be implemented in the real word. I don't agree that somehow the country is going to die just because a reasonable amount of people come here though.

 

[uncboy10]

If we changes our ways we might be able too, but let's be honest. America isn't going to change. It's not just about food. You've got to have housing, infrastructure jobs, etc.


I know that it gives DACA people that pathway. Not sure about the others. It may be in the final bill that they are working on. Even if it doesn't, don't you think there is enough in there to come to the table and negotiate in good faith? That's the problem right now. It's all or nothing. If they would get together they could put some things in there that aren't there now if everyone was willing to act rationally about this. Both sides won't do that though.

There's no chance that the democrats are going to come to the table to negotiate when we're coming up on the midterms. We've already established that.

This is unfortunately how the game is played. The republicans gave us an Ivy League level education on how that can work during Obama's second term. And before that I'm sure the democrats elevated the obstruction and partisanship to a new level. And back and forth it goes.

We also have an excess of housing in this country. With plenty of room to build more or develop new micro-economies. This is a geographically massive, resource rich country with the biggest economy the world has ever seen. We're nowhere near carrying capacity right now. We just have massive efficiency problems, and problematic externalities that aren't making it into corporate cost analyses.

 

[tarheel0910]

There's no chance that the democrats are going to come to the table to negotiate when we're coming up on the midterms. We've already established that.

I know that. What I'm asking is do you think there is enough in the bill to at least negotiate in good faith? Would Senator Uncboy show up?

This is a geographically massive, resource rich country with the biggest economy the world has ever seen.

Yeah, but who wants to live and work in Nebraska?

 

[gunslingerdick]

Yeah, but who wants to live and work in Nebraska?

Well, if we're going to let illegals run amok, then me. Hope @nctransplant has room.

 

[uncboy10]

I know that. What I'm asking is do you think there is enough in the bill to at least negotiate in good faith? Would Senator Uncboy show up?


Yeah, but who wants to live and work in Nebraska?

I think they should always show up to negotiate in good faith. I don't think Americans have nearly as many difference as Congress would love for us to continue believing. This makes their job easy. Negotiating and getting stuff done is the hard part. Posturing on the news is easy.

lol

 

[strummingram]

@gunslingerdick actually made some decent points about tribalism. Its a necessary animal impulse that helps keep us alive. Without a preference for the familiar, its unlikely that we would be able to build the trust that is at the foundation of our societies. The idea that its just some ignorant bias is a misrepresentation of what tribalism actually is.

However, its still helpful to recognize and challenge that bias. If you only eat at the local restaurant you know and love, only talk to your neighbors you know, and stick to the same bars you always go to, with the same crappy beer, then you're going to miss out on a lot of awesome stuff. You don't have to feel guilty about preferring whats familiar, but it doesn't hurt to recognize that as a shortcoming in some cases.

That's a nicer way of assessing it.

I would also maintain that "advanced tribalism" is more of an intellectual infection. It's when the tribe is convinced that their way, their actions, their beliefs, etc., etc. are superior to all others and then set about to prove it... with pretty unpleasant results.

 

[nctransplant]

I know that. What I'm asking is do you think there is enough in the bill to at least negotiate in good faith? Would Senator Uncboy show up?


Yeah, but who wants to live and work in Nebraska?

You could at least tag a guy! #VisitNebraska.......don't stay

 

[uncboy10]

That's a nicer way of assessing it.

I would also maintain that "advanced tribalism" is more of an intellectual infection. It's when the tribe is convinced that their way, their actions, their beliefs, etc., etc. are superior to all others and then set about to prove it... with pretty unpleasant results.

Its hard to draw the line between tribalism itself, as a base instinct, and the psychological and social phenomenon that arise as a consequence of it.

 

[strummingram]

Its hard to draw the line between tribalism itself, as a base instinct, and the psychological and social phenomenon that arise as a consequence of it.

No, it's not. I don't think it's difficult at all. I don't think YOU think it's hard to draw the line. In fact, you just made it perfectly clear in one sentence. That was easy!

 

[uncboy10]

No, it's not. I don't think it's difficult at all. I don't think YOU think it's hard to draw the line. In fact, you just made it perfectly clear in one sentence. That was easy!

Its a blurry line. At what point do other instincts come into play? Is it still tribalism if they do? Or is it a behavior that is rooted in tribalism, but has a myriad of other variables also influencing it? I'm pondering these questions myself right now.

Maybe that doesn't matter, and tribalism is still the best word for it. For example, tribalism is obviously the root cause of racism, but our disgust mechanism is also a big factor. This is why people can be racist against their own subgroup. Racism is tribalistic, but can't be entirely reduced to just tribalism is the point I'm trying to make.

Consequentially, I guess it doesn't matter. The results are the same. And this is pretty much a constant of human behavior, so its obviously rooted in our subconscious instincts.

 

[uncboy10]

 

[strummingram]

Its a blurry line. At what point do other instincts come into play? Is it still tribalism if they do? Or is it a behavior that is rooted in tribalism, but has a myriad of other variables also influencing it? I'm pondering these questions myself right now.

Maybe that doesn't matter, and tribalism is still the best word for it. For example, tribalism is obviously the root cause of racism, but our disgust mechanism is also a big factor. This is why people can be racist against their own subgroup. Racism is tribalistic, but can't be entirely reduced to just tribalism is the point I'm trying to make.

Consequentially, I guess it doesn't matter. The results are the same. And this is pretty much a constant of human behavior, so its obviously rooted in our subconscious instincts.

Well... don't muck-it-up with all that gibberish!

Can we improve our subconscious instincts?

 

[strummingram]

Yeah... WTH was the deal with that friggin' jacket??? I still haven't been able to get a handle on her motive there. I gave her credit for being smarter than her husband. That ambiguous, millennial-vibe message on her jacket was just another "as usual" page in Trump's administration.

 

[uncboy10]

Well... don't muck-it-up with all that gibberish!

Can we improve our subconscious instincts?

Now there's a real tough question. We can absolutely change the way they manifest themselves.

There are studies that indicate learning social psychology can lower various forms of bias. Mainly you just learn that you have them, then you develop the mental tools to compensate.

I think the biggest thing though is just shifting social norms. When I was a little kid, there was nothing wrong with judging people for being gay. That's no longer a morally respectable position to hold, and our society has improved as a consequence. But then you get internalized bias if people aren't also educated on the social psych.

There's no easy fix, that's for sure. Neuro-plasticity has a genetic component, so your brains ability to rewrite neural pathways and change the way you think plays a big role in how much you can adapt. Some people are more gifted than others.

 

[tarheel0910]

Yeah... WTH was the deal with that friggin' jacket??? I still haven't been able to get a handle on her motive there. I gave her credit for being smarter than her husband. That ambiguous, millennial-vibe message on her jacket was just another "as usual" page in Trump's administration.

She's been getting a lot of hate on twitter and in the media for some of her tweets lately. Maybe it has something to do with that. I'm not really sure.

 

[nctransplant]

She's been getting a lot of hate on twitter and in the media for some of her tweets lately. Maybe it has something to do with that. I'm not really sure.

She didn't wear it to see the kids. Many believe she wore as a big f you to the media during her recovery and Fonda for his tweet about her kid.

 

[uncboy10]

Yeah... WTH was the deal with that friggin' jacket??? I still haven't been able to get a handle on her motive there. I gave her credit for being smarter than her husband. That ambiguous, millennial-vibe message on her jacket was just another "as usual" page in Trump's administration.

Idk but it was definitely a statement of some type. Russian supermodels don't wear 40 dollar jackets from out of season. Also, it was supposedly 90 degrees when she was getting on that plane.

Part of me just wonders if she was used as a pawn to distract from the actual conversation at hand. They've already convinced the base that this was actually an Obama policy all along, so it won't be hard to pull of a little more sleight of hand.

Maybe we're all missing the point and this was a next level social critique. She could be calling all of us out for not doing more about it instead of just engaging in political arguments. She's a mother, maybe this bothered her so much she was willing to fall on the sword if it meant provoking actual action.

Flooding is part of the trump strategy. Even if its negative press, if you keep flooding people with new stories they get overwhelmed. That's probably the simplest explanation.

 

[strummingram]

She's been getting a lot of hate on twitter and in the media for some of her tweets lately. Maybe it has something to do with that. I'm not really sure.

That was something that I would never have expected from her. She seems to carry herself very well. She weathers the controversy of her husband's infidelity scandals well, which can't be easy. Given her background, and I highly doubt she ever conceived of having to fill this role, she's been doing it well. It seems like such a drastic shift. I just don't understand what she was dissenting against.

 

[nctransplant]

On a better note, I'm having a big fat #VisitNebraska ribeye tonight along with sautéed crimini mushrooms and smashed loaded cauliflower. You think illegals picked my mushrooms and cauliflower?

 

[strummingram]

She didn't wear it to see the kids. Many believe she wore as a big f you to the media during her recovery and Fonda for his tweet about her kid.

Fonda wasn't tweeting about her kid. He was using their child to put it into a context so they could empathize. He wasn't attacking Barron at all. Fonda chose a terrible way to try and make a point, but that's common these days.

 

[nctransplant]

Fonda wasn't tweeting about her kid. He was using their child to put it into a context so they could empathize. He wasn't attacking Barron at all. Fonda chose a terrible way to try and make a point, but that's common these days.

Ok

 

[uncboy10]

On a better note, I'm having a big fat #VisitNebraska ribeye tonight along with sautéed crimini mushrooms and smashed loaded cauliflower. You think illegals picked my mushrooms and cauliflower?

Sí

 

[tarheel0910]

That was something that I would never have expected from her. She seems to carry herself very well. She weathers the controversy of her husband's infidelity scandals well, which can't be easy. Given her background, and I highly doubt she ever conceived of having to fill this role, she's been doing it well. It seems like such a drastic shift. I just don't understand what she was dissenting against.

Maybe, but there seems to be a lot more heat aimed directly at her lately instead of her just being a bystander. Everyone has their breaking point. Maybe she hit hers.

 

[uncboy10]

I need to program a timer into my computer to limit the amount of time I spend on OOTB.

 

[strummingram]

Maybe, but there seems to be a lot more heat aimed directly at her lately instead of her just being a bystander. Everyone has their breaking point. Maybe she hit hers.

Oh, definitely. I feel for her, actually. I mean, I realize choices have consequences. But, she's not like most politician wives, obviously. You marry a guy who has politics in his family and you know that "maybe I will have to be Mrs. So-And-So" one day. Melania never saw this shit show coming. I still think she does a great job with the First Lady stuff. I cannot imagine having to deal with Donald Trump as a spouse.

 

[tarheel0910]

I need to program a timer into my computer to limit the amount of time I spend on OOTB.

That's a good idea. It's even worse for me because I can't sit around in my skinny jeans and fedora while petting my cat and smoking hash. I've got a real job.

 

[nctransplant]

Oh, definitely. I feel for her, actually. I mean, I realize choices have consequences. But, she's not like most politician wives, obviously. You marry a guy who has politics in his family and you know that "maybe I will have to be Mrs. So-And-So" one day. Melania never saw this shit show coming. I still think she does a great job with the First Lady stuff. I cannot imagine having to deal with Donald Trump as a spouse.

She's able to handle it because she and I are secret lovers.