DominikR

My parents came from Yugoslavia but I certainly wouldn't have been offended. I could give you information if I find that yours is wrong in some aspect but trying to guilt trip you for some offence that you certainly didn't intend to give seems wrong to me.

I believe Estonia and Latvia didn't even exist as a countries before the fall of the Soviet Union. Not even before the Russian Empire conquered these lands.

American culture is in many aspects very homogenous. Take for example the fact that there's 50% of the population that wants to cut down on government even if it means that social services are to be cut.

Or the business culture which is very unique, at least I've seen nothing similar anywhere in the world.

Then there's a degree of freedom of speech that nowhere else exists, and rights like being allowed to carry a gun in public which is vigorously defended by large parts of the population.

And yes, there is an American brand of Christianity. Even if you don't see it in population centres it's still there everywhere else and it is more important than Christianity in most other Christian cultures.

There's a kind of attitude among US citizens leaning towards some Classical Liberal or Libertarian principles that can't be found anywhere else in the world. Where ever else you go the majority expects the government to take care of every member of the society from cradle to grave.

He is highlighting the difference between these regions within the Soviet Union so what's the point of you comment other than signalling political correctness?

I believe that this election signals if anything, a popular rejection of political correctness to the point where discussions can't be had anymore.

That's why I cite Reuters below which reports identical data. Profit fell by 95,7% down to about $400k.

Profit fell to $400k, there are many people that actually make this kind of money as employees.

The same NYT whose profit shrank by 95,7% in the last quarter because of the extremely biased reporting?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3897406/New-York-Tim...

And the exactly same numbers by Reuters but with completely misleading headline as if everything was fine:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-newyorktimes-results-idUSK...

Funny how the NYT now makes about as much profit as I do as a contractor. Maybe I should buy them and put their journalists to more profitable use, like for example letting them clean toilets or work the streets.

Edit: Why the downvotes? Does somebody dispute the fact that the NYT's profits are down by 95,7%? Or would somebody dispute that this company wouldn't be making more profit if it sent its employees to clean toilets or sell their bodies?

I believe I made here a sensible business case for saving the NYT.

Oh so the central banks come into being from nothing, their existence and their powers have nothing to do with the government itself.

It's just a group of independent people who decided: We'd like to print some money. And Hyperinflation has nothing to do with government failure.

Only delusional people or people with an agenda would argue against there being any connection between inflation and the government.

It'd make the difference between life and death for many Venezuelans right now.

Government wouldn't inflate money supply if it didn't matter much.

> Would you feel absolutely the same way about all banned substances?

Yes, absolutely. If people want to ruin their lives it's not my responsibility to keep them from doing it. It's their own decision and all consequences are their own problem.

Tell you or order you? I wrote "nobody gets the right to decide for someone else".

I know that you don't. And I'm not moved in the slightest by your appeal to pathos.

You just "point it out" to convince me to casually accept regulating other peoples or other companies freedom to advertise away because you suppose that people are just sheep who can't help being controlled by it.

On top of that you probably do not even realise that you are arguing here for limiting freedom of speech.

> Where you see people shouting "freedom" the loudest, I see fear, distrust, and anger.

Am I supposed to feel bad now? I don't, I still want to keep freedom of speech.

> I'm just pointing out that no one is as free as you think you are because you always have influences.

Ominous and sometimes invisible influencers everywhere. Best way to deal with it: Censorship.

Then move to North Korea, I already wrote this before.

If you want to live here you either accept that you are in a society of free people who actually have a free will or you move somewhere else where you'll find like minded drones serving their dear leader who in turn takes care of them like a father figure.

We are not going to give up our freedom and turn into weak minded persons just to accommodate you.

It is not your business to decide what other people should do with their lives.

Go live in North Korea or Venezuela if you desire having a dear leader who tells you what you should do with your life and leave us alone.

Hm, so it's a Russian-Republican FBI-CIA conspiracy against Hillary? Even though 2 weeks ago Comey was praised by the Democrats for not indicting HRC.

They sure are all out to get her it seems.

And the FBI Twitter account is also leaking information about the Clintons. If you ask me the FBI and other government agencies want to bring HRC down, probably for her reckless handling of classified information.

Either this or these agencies are secretly controlled by Putin.

There is nothing impossible about leaving the EU. It's not like the Referendum demanded the UK to colonise Pluto.

And its the government itself that initiated this on its terms so it should follow through on it. Not a fringe party but the ruling government parties.

Yeah this is the kind of legalese bs that leads to violent overthrows of governments. If you believe that this will stop Brexit you are living in phantasy land.

What does a "clear majority" even mean? A majority that you personally would accept? Like a majority of your favourite TV celebs and comedians like John Oliver agreeing that Brexit is a good thing?

The rules for the referendum have been set by the government therefore it has committed to follow these rules regardless of outcome. And the outcome has been clear for anyone who understands basic arithmetic.

This whole debate about how to best screw the voters reminds me of Stalin's attitude towards democratic elections.

The right wing in Europe is calling the EU the EUSSR for a very good reason!

Yes they were in the wrong, they did ethnically cleanse 300k Russians from Chechnya before the Russian military even took steps against them.

And they proclaimed the Islamic Emirate of the Caucasus that was very similar to ISIS.

Also they didn't stop aggression after Russia lost the first Chechen war and they got their independence. They instead started attacking other non-Chechen territories in Russia that were peaceful until then.

The Russians were right to bomb the hell out of them. And we should do the same if these people don't stop attacking us.

Yes, Putin awards me with one loaf of bred per day for my patriotic deeds. Hillary is btw right, Putin and his evil empire even controls the FBI, the CIA, the US Air Force and Seaworld. (he just likes Orcas)

Edit: It is hilarious to me how the leftist are trembling about Putin, Trump, Le Pen and so on. What you guys don't get is that you are witnessing a massive, popular shift to the right throughout the West with a right wing ideology that is indeed partly influenced by Putin. Why? Because it is successful. This doesn't mean that they are controlled by Putin, they just share some ideas. You will by the way also experience this political shift in the Netherlands pretty soon.

Your "correct response" to terrorism has been tried now for 8 years and it doesn't work, instead everything got worse.

The only way is to try to insulate oneself from these radicals by not letting them immigrate, or if it doesn't help pick an area controlled by the most vicious of these radicals (ISIS territory comes to mind) and give them a taste of what armageddon could look like so they'll learn an important lesson.

This has worked very well in the Chechen wars. The Russians tried negotiating, then they tried having a series of smaller military operations in order to take out their leaders. Then the Russians even conceded and gave them defacto independence, but It all didn't work. They instead went on to attack neighbouring Russian states and then even killed hundreds of Russian children in the Beslan terror attacks.

What did help though was Putins response completely levelling the Chechen capital Grozny. And I mean that literally because that's what they did. After that 99.99% of them became cooperative, in fact today most Chechens in Chechnya consider themselves fierce Russian patriots. I wonder why!

What does this even mean? Should we just roll over and let them kill us whenever they feel like we hurt their feelings in some way?

Anytime someone disrespects their religious teachings in a public way many of them feel the urge to slaughter dozens of people just to show how upset they are about us.

And it just never stops, there's just too many radical people in these countries.

As I see it the only way to stop this is to show them militarily who's boss until they learn the lesson to back off and mind their own business.

The mere fact that they can't resist killing people when they hear some Westener say something bad about them shows that they really just want to submit us to follow their ways.

If that wasn't the case they'd just stop listening like any normal person would do.

Well I disagree, it did work amazingly well for almost a thousand years when Muslim pirates and raiders constantly attacked ships and cities in the Mediterranean sea which effectively suppressed most sea based trade and economic development in Europe for a very long time.

There were even cases where English and Irish cities were plundered and all inhabitants forcefully taken as slaves.

People from this culture always used these kind of guerrilla tactics to slowly bring their enemies down.

As far as I see it still works today just as well as it did back in the old days.

Getting the job - not necessarily harder, but keeping it - definitely.

The thing is that these companies need their remote employees to be persons with exceptionally strong discipline who are also self driven.

So you can be a very good engineer that also performs given tasks within a reasonable timeframe, but if the person managing the team has to constantly hold your hand (which is harder remote) or you are too passive you'll be fired quickly.

Regarding the skill level (at least what I've seen until now): Yes, generally these people have more experience than the average engineer (of course I'm not talking about the average Google or Facebook engineer here), but it's nothing insurmountable, almost anyone could do it provided the will to improve.

President Anthony Weiner will ditch Twitter and instead use Snapchat to connect with his underage followers.

Everyone who wants to be on TV has to be an entertainer, otherwise he/she has no business being on television and should instead write papers and books.

The rest is just your opinion, which you are obviously entitled to. I happen to disagree and I think most would too, otherwise he wouldn't have that kind of viewership.

Your comment is a great example for the kind of insulting attitude that he was talking about.