theultdev

there's other reasons for the vdom though.

vdom is necessary in react to abstract the view from the platform so it can be represented by react-dom and react-native[-x] bridges.

1/3 girls are sexually assaulted when traversing the illegal trip into the US across the mexican border according to doctors without borders study.

https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/sites/default/files/20...

> I am not diving into it because this thread is not about immigration laws.

You brought up immigration first. I only chose it as an example of your ignorance because you brought it up.

I don't see how anyone would think allowing children to be dragged and raped across the desert would be okay.

So trafficking comes from other places so no point in reducing it in places we can control?

We monitor ports of entry. It's easier if you don't have to monitor the entire border, you can focus more on ports of entry for other trafficking sources.

Please link the rigorous study that says human/drug trafficking won't change if you close the border.

Locking it down to legal point of entries only can do nothing but help.

It's easier to secure a few locations than many miles, you don't need a study for that.

I replied to answer the "unreasonable silence".

Not debating topics you throw out (like illegal immigration) is how you get that silence.

You marked it down as lies and now you refuse to dive into it.

Opinions like illegal immigration are well polled.

It was a main platform of Donald Trump's.

Millions voted for him for that reason.

Those opinions on the border closure are reasonable, ranging from wanting to stop fentanyl deaths, ending human trafficking, reducing gang violence, property security, ending labor exploitation, reduce economic costs and more.

Again, please pick a topic to proceed so we can find out whose opinion reflects reality more.

You'd be surprised how many lies and how much bad data you've fallen for.

Just know that millions have his same opinions. You don't think there's any truth in the middle between your perspective and theirs?

I probably share many of your father's opinions. Even though he cannot articulate his political feelings doesn't mean he's wrong.

If you would like to discuss and learn more from the other side, pick a single topic I'll oblige.

Now do before 2018 when the NCFSAC didn't exist...

It's simply returning to the status quo of 6 years ago.

The committee should be producing results.

We have data of incidents: https://uscgboating.org/statistics/accident_statistics.php

There's virtually no change since 2018 (various incidents go up and down but stay similar from 2018-2023).

I don't think those can be considered zoos from your description.

And maybe stop going to them (you went to a few?) and they will become even less common.

Never seen one of those, but there's plenty of private animal habitats I've seen that take injured and stray animals.

Usually just ran/funded by someone who loves animals.

I think we'll get by without their "expert suggestions" as we did in 2017 before they existed.

It boils down to whether or not this committee was beneficial or not.

I have not seen any data backing up that it helped at all since it's inception in 2018.

Yes it's commonly known when sailors takeoff, they sing praise of the NCFSAC saving them after a 1000 years of ocean deaths.

Other agencies may do the same thing, but the NCFSAC changed the sea game (when created in 2018)

Before 2018, sea blood bath.

You're assuming good faith of these committees. Comes down to who you trust.

I voted in Trump to do this and more, I trust the evaluations were made properly and I support the decision.

There's obvious bias in your tone (which is okay, which is why I stated my position) so it makes sense you don't like this move because you don't trust this administration.

We're similar in that regard in that I don't trust the government implicitly, which is why I support culling bloat.

What regulations of this committee do you think saved lives that other agencies did not?

The USCG, NMFS, NIOSH, and OSHA regulations are still there.

When you were growing up, was it earlier than 2018?

This committee didn't exist before then.

But yeah, maybe we should add 20 more agencies just to be safe...

Why did you leave all the important parts out of the quote?

I already noted that there are agencies that handle labor regulations. You left that out.

This committee had nothing to do with labor regulations...

That's false. The DHS didn't inherit any fishing responsibilities in it's creation.

The Coast Guard has and still does work with related agencies (NOAA/NMFS, Fish and Wildlife, EPA, etc.) in this regard.

This committee in question didn't even exist before 2018.

It just happened. You have no idea what the evaluations were, they haven't been released and you weren't in the discussions. I hope they will be though.

From an outsider perspective this committee in particular seems redundant as there are other agencies that handle this scope.

If you want to boil it down to "government bad" sure, but I view it more as "over-regulation is bad".

Or do you view the government as a well oiled machine that couldn't have any bloat and we should never evaluate and cull feature creep in it?

That's not what this committee handled, other government programs such as OSHA, NIOSH, and DOL handle that.

You don't need a special fishing committee to make sure workers have good working conditions and proper pay. That's universal to any job.

I look forward to the evaluation by the administration to see if it's needed or it's redundant red tape.

There's already OSHA, NIOSH, and NOAA that cover these things, so imo it's probably redundant at the least, harmful and wasteful at the worst.

I think fisherman know how to be safe without bureaucrats in DC that have never been in a fishing boat butting in.

You just need coast guard for emergencies.

They got along just fine before 2018 when this committee was created.

It's not an opinion. It was like that (Twitter), now it's not (X).

He's telling you your experience is outdated.

Ofc they hint towards it, it's climate.gov. But the actual data shown, shows no increase at all.

You won't find a "smoking gun" because it's not happening.

Your biases are in-fact showing that you don't realize you went from claiming it was true to "well we have no smoking gun".

That's false. Hurricanes are not getting bigger or more frequent due to climate change.

They aren't getting bigger or more frequent at all.

NOAA has stated this multiple times and you can read an article addressing it here:

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/beyond-data/can-...

It's well known that hurricanes go through multidecadal swings.

Why this keeps getting repeated when it's obviously false is beyond me.

So mob rule? Doesn't work.

You're terrible at this. Noone is defending the US, your whataboutism is just irrelevant.

I can be against Chinese spying and bad things the US does.

Israel is irrelevant in this thread...

Hopefully they aren't paying you the full 50c for these posts, get better.

Nice pivot. Don't want to talk about the Uyghur camps eh?

Respond to the prison labor vs concentration camps point, since you brought up prison labor in attempts to compare convicted criminals to an ethnic group being forced into labor.

What would your system be?

Yeah that's a good example.

Framing Gaza as the victims in this whole ordeal.

That's like the 3rd time you dropped Israel in this China topic.

Really trying to shoehorn that in eh?

Sure. Plenty of people to trade with who don't support terrorists like Hamas.