I can’t imagine the kind of force it took to break SIX ribs badly enough to cause internal bleeding.

Unfortunately not that much force is really required when you’re dealing with someone who is 67. The elderly are a lot more fragile, even if they are in great shape for their age. Which is why anyone without a brain disease knows to be gentle when assisting the elderly.

There is no reason to use this much force against an unarmed senior citizen other than to physically harm them.

Realistically Russia has put itself into an economic situation where it cannot pull out of the war unless they gain control over economic resources that allow it to transition from a war time economy.

There’s a reason most countries do everything they can to avoid having to go into a wartime economy. The immediate benefits are great, but it quickly becomes a sunk cost fallacy due to the guns vs butter model of opportunity detriment.

Military spending just has terrible opportunity cost ratios, and can only really be recouped as an investment if you are actively conquering new territory rich in resources. Even then, the cost eventually becomes greater than the opportunity it affords, eventually no matter how much you spend you aren’t able to control what you take over.

The only way the US was able to transition from the war time economy from WW2 without imploding was because it became the new banking capital of the world, and it got to keep it’s production capacity while their allies did not. This is almost a direct inverse of Russia’s current scenario.

In short, Russia will most likely have to extend its war against Ukraine, or start a new conflict as soon as it makes peace with Ukraine just in the hopes that they can maintain their current economic situation.

Putin’s interpreter was recorded saying in Chinese to Xi. “Human organs can be continuously transplanted. The longer you live, the younger you become, and [you can] even achieve immortality.”

Always a reminder that intelligent people capable of running some of the largest economies on earth can still be complete idiots in fields outside their expertise.

This is not how organ transplants work, nor is it how the body declines in health. Organ transplants do not positively affect your overall health, they fix the symptoms caused by a failure of a specific organ. You still have to take anti-rejection drugs that are severely detrimental to your overall health, and leave you susceptible to severe infections.

The damage done to organs by aging is systemic. Yes, one organ may be the first domino in a systemic collapse, but even if you replace it the next will just fail soon after. Plus, older people are a lot less likely to survive a organ transplant, let alone an older person who’s already received one.

I guess it’s good to know that dubious scientists grifting leaders and rich people for funding is universal regardless of culture and nationality?

Always come out on top…

Generally a handful does not mean a significant amount…

Lol, and how is commiting minor property damage fighting fascism?

I volunteer as a first responder for protest, and volunteer as a healthcare provider for an organization that helps house refuge and asylum seekers…but I guess random property damage is probably more helpful.

Ahh yes, minor amounts of property damage…the true sign of a revolutionary.

Unfortunately organized violence is likely the only answer to fascism, and history shows that anyone part of the first waves of organized violence are most likely won’t be around to see the conclusion.

It’s completely understandable to be hesitant to throw your life away for a cause that the vast majority do not believe in.

I mean, I’m pretty sure most people who agree that fascism is taking over the country know the consequences…

Most people just also understand what usually happens to the first wave of resistance while fascist still hold the reigns of power. What are you doing to stop this?

Yeah… Wonder if he’s already got a carve out written up specifically for him when they overturn the civil rights act or interracial marriage?

Yeap… I can barely listen to npr anymore. Their interviewing process is basically just a platform for fascist to make wild claims without any sort of actual pushback. At most at the end of the segment the host will make a mild rebuttal about one aspect of their interview. But most of the time it’s just “well that’s all the time we have”.

There’s no pushback or fact checking, or even giving equal time to an opposing view. They should be hammering every inaccurate claim made by these assholes. If there isn’t enough time in your programming to do so, then you shouldn’t have these liars on your show to begin with.

Journalism is dead, and it’s because the whole field is a walled garden where the only people who can afford to get their foot in the door or take the unpaid internships are nepo babies and trust fund kids, and those people don’t have backbones.

Ah, so not only do you resort to childish insults but you’re incapable to actually

Accurately accusing you of using logical fallacies = childish insults? Maybe try not using a logical fallacy as a rebuttal for once?

answer a simple yes or no question. I wonder why you’re afraid to answer, but that’s your business.

Because I disagree with the inherent premise of the question, and the reasoning that answering it would bring any substance to the dispute.

Since you obviously don’t respect me, as evident from the above points, I don’t really see a point in trying to defend my position.

Lol, convenient timing… You obviously don’t respect me either, I just don’t try to virtue signal my way out of an argument.

You wouldn’t listen to anything I had to say, any facts or studies you’d dismiss as a scam

You haven’t given any facts or studies, or even logical explanations that support your opinion. You have just made the same easily disputed claims over and over again without addressing my rebuttals to them.

You’ve already decided that, because I had even a slightly different position than you, not even against you just different, that you’re smarter, more hard working, and better than me and therefore I deserve, earned even, insults and dismissal.

And now we’re pityfishing… You know, this might have an iota of weight behind it if you didn’t accuse me of wanting to murder homeless people because I have a slightly different position than yours.

I would’ve actually enjoyed having a discussion on the validity of a ubi in a socialist society with someone

I have been asking you to justify your position on this the whole time…

The worst part I feel is how much damage you’re doing to the position of universal healthcare, housing, education and food, by being so venomous.

Trying to explain basic economic realities to a moron…so venomous!

You know I didn’t actually start insulting you until you accused me of being an asshole for trying to explain the flaws in your claim.

giving everyone on our side a bad name.

I don’t think for a second you actually care about anyone but yourself. No one who seriously wants to enact socialism cares about UBI. It is literally a ploy billionaires have been lobbying for about a decade.

You’ve mistaken my disinterest for ignorance.

Just because we are arguing about the validity of a hypothetical scenario, does not mean you can introduce the fantastical to aid your argument. Socialism is achievable in the foreseeable future, post scarcity dream world where productivity doesn’t matter does not.

Yes or no please.

Are you incapable of making a rebuttal without the use of a logical fallacy? Why would I agree to debate within the framework of a false dicotomy?

No sneaky sci-fi bullshit where it’s the matrix or aliens or whatever, it’s genuinely a society like that on a global scale.

You are dreaming of a post scarcity society when in reality we are entering an era that is going to be dictated by climate change, mass migration, and dwindling natural resources. Of course everyone would love to live in a post scarcity society… but that’s not a possibility in the foreseeable future outside of alien intervention nor some sci-fi scenario.

You do realize that mentality just automatically cedes ground to whatever party is willing to be more radical?

If the right is willing to be more and more radical and the left fails to respond in equal proportion, then the center moves further and further right.

This is literally what has caused all the issues we’ve had in America since the Democrats adopted Thirdway politics in the 90’s. If your only political goal is compromise, then you don’t actually control your own political agenda.

Heh, figured you wouldn’t get it.

Heh, figured you couldn’t even begin to explain your assertions. All you have done is reassert a claim that’s already been disputed without responding to the dispute itself. It’s obvious you are just avoiding engaging in any kind of dialogue because you don’t know enough about the topic to respond.

That’s fine though, you work towards that society you want

A functional sustainable society that provides all basic needs for every citizen? How awful of me…

Again, an obvious attempt of constructing a strawman argument that portrays me as advocating for the current status quo.

You’re only a stepping stone after all.

Again… Where is the production that allows for funding for UBI coming from in this scenario? If basic needs are already met, and providing for some of those basic needs is how UBI traditionally claims to improve production… How does UBI “pay for itself”?

You were so wrapped up in the current situation that your very limited imagination couldn’t comprehend changing it, and you’re myopically focused on the world as it is instead of what it could be.

Do you have reading comprehension issues? We are already imagining a world where all basic needs are being subsidized by the government… Which is not the curt status quo the last time I checked.

introduce a hypothetical that was so over your head that you clearly got frustrated with the situation.

We were already talking about the likelihood of a hypothetical when you further proposed ubi on top of it.

thinking from a “how could we work this ass things are” situation because of your mental limitations,

Again… We were already talking about a hypothetical That is different from the current status quo. Just because I don’t think UBI is compatible with that hypothetical doesn’t mean anything but your inability to understand economics.

wouldn’t work in the economic system we have now, and since you’re not really able to look outside of that, you, like a frustrated child, see it as an impossibility and lashed out

Again…can you not retain what you read? We were already talking about an economic system that is not our current system. UBI is only compatible with our current system, because it’s a ploy from billionaires to stop paying for things like social security and Medicare.

small stipend on top of that,

For what reason…? You haven’t validated your reasoning other than falsely claiming that it drives the economy. Which I already explained why it would not happen in this hypothetical economic scenario.

puritanical thought of life without work is sinful and should be avoided, especially with your repeated accusations of laziness directed at me

I honestly don’t care if you wanted to work or not in this scenario, you aren’t going to starve, you will have the right to higher education, and will have a roof over your head. What I don’t want is for the system to further incentive people like you to do nothing but goon all day and take from the system without ever giving anything back to society.

If that is possible the system will not be productive enough to provide for everyone. Socialism just doesn’t mean you can be a lazy ass and get a free check, quite the opposite. It means we’re all responsible for providing enough to insure the people who lack the ability to contribute don’t go without.

I only assume you never plan on retirement and view retired people with contempt for their lack of toil. It’s why I assume you wish to stab homeless people, for their sloth.

Lol, I plan on retiring early and am on track to do so… We don’t currently live in a socialized economy, so I really do not care if you aren’t being productive, it’s no skin off my back. Though I would advocate that you still deserve food, healthcare, and a roof over your head.

but honestly I don’t think your heart is in it if one of your big arguments against ubi is the same one being used against all those things, the horrible idea that some people might not work when they could.

Again, you really need to take a course at the community college or something for reading. In our current economy, I wouldn’t mind UBI so long as it wasn’t a veiled attempt to lower social security or Medicare funding. However, in the hypothetical scenario new were talking about, UBI would be unnecessary and would likely increase the funding requirements while simultaneously lowering productivity…which is why no socialist government has done any sort of UBI in the past.

Ah well, have fun working towards humanity having to do perpetual labor forever, I’m sure that’s a great idea. Wouldn’t want too many idle hands and all.

This is the reason I call you out for being a lazy fuck. Because that seems to be the only thing you really care about. You seem to be in hysterics over the thought that you might have to be a productive member of a socialized society, even though it would mean having universal housing, education, food security, and healthcare. Again providing for all society is not free, I’m sorry to burst your little imagination land bubble. Please learn to read, it might help some of these ideas seep through your thick lazy skull.

Considering how the government spends money on so much other shit

Again… You have no idea what you are talking about, and have no clue how much healthcare cost.

The federal government’s largest expense is social security (22%), Medicare (14%), and Medicaid(10%). That’s nearly half of the entire federal budget to cover some of the cost of living and healthcare for a minority of the country.

Granted our system is wasteful and inefficient, but not to the point where we wouldn’t have to vastly increase revenue to cover the entire populations healthcare, food, housing and education. We would have to reshape the entire economy to do so, and I think there is a moral imperative to do so. However, once that is accomplished, I do not see a reason to implement UBI, a plan that would just further increase the need for revenue that’s already being spent for better purposes.

I already explained why UBI would not stimulate the economy under a the economic conditions we were discussing. There’s a reason no communist country has implemented a UBI. You are just too dense to actually understand anything we’re talking about. You don’t even understand the reason UBI is a scam in our current economic system let alone a hypothetical one.

not last, I’m just gonna take advice from someone who probably stabs homeless people.

Lol, I advocate for universal housing, education, nutrition, and healthcare… But because you don’t understand basic economics, it means I want to murder homeless people?

Also I imagine you meant to say "I’m not lazy, I’m just not gonna take advice…?

It’s almost like you’re too lazy to even read your own responses…

Like I said before, amazing how people will argue against their better interests.

Lol, arguing something will not work because it disregards very simple economic principles is not “arguing against my own interests”.

Really bold of you to assume I’m just lazy, too.

I mean, you’re obviously too lazy to apply yourself to learn basic concepts…so yeah, lazy asshole.

It’s really funny that you got this bent out of shape when someone just asks “why not both”

My dude, dunking on lazy idiots online is fun…

Ah well can’t help everyone, especially when they won’t bother trying, right?

The irony… Coming from the idiot who thinks we could provide housing, medical care, education, food and give everyone $500 a month by just by changing taxes…

I’m not sure where you live, but you underestimate the amount of people who can shoot a rifle.

I think you’d be surprised… I live in Oklahoma, one of the highest gun per person populations in the US. However, this is not the norm when considering the entire US population. Only 20% of Americans live in rural areas, and not all of them regularly go out to the range. With a population nearing 350 million, only around 12 million people participate in rifle target shooting and less than that on a regular basis.

Also, while you can zero a hunting rifle at 100 yards, most bullets haven’t apexed yet at 100, so the bullet will continue to raise up a bit before starting to drop

Again, have you ever taken a novice out to shoot with a hunting rifle? Most people barely understand how to zero a scope. There are only around 10 million people in the US that even hunt with rifles.

if you put the cross hairs directly over the target that’s 200 yards out you’re going to be within 3" of your mark.

That is a huge “if” for most people…I think you are underestimating how terrible of a shot the vast majority of people are.

I could get a complete novice to hit a melon at 200 yards in less than 10 minutes time so long as they don’t flinch while pulling the trigger.

Right, but could you get a complete novice to cleanly take down a buck at 200 yards? Now imagine shooting at a person, and in a scenario that is likely to lead to your death or imprisonment immediately after.

Also “so long as they don’t flinch while pulling the trigger” that takes a while for people to learn, and it gets a lot worse when aiming at something that’s alive.

Nah, you pretty much always aim for center mass. With modern rounds you’re just as likely to get a clean kill shot with center mass as you are with a head shot. Unless someone is obviously wearing a heavy plate carrier anything faster/heavier than a .223 is going to do the trick.

It’s not like shooting at the range, even at 200 yards hunting deer, your nerves wreck accuracy. I can consistently group 2.5" at 200-300 yards at the range, but that doesn’t transfer over even to hunting deer on family property. Most people haven’t ever shot at a living animal, it makes a difference.