|
|
|
|
|
|
by pacnard
2920 days ago
|
|
|
Nytimes complains about suicides, but then it also promote policies and politicians that are causing the suicides and destroying our socities.
Some of the policies are: uncontrolled immigration from poor countries bringing crime and causing social distrust. Laws that close the market and give few companies a lot of bargaining power, forcing people to move around like cattle and also making almost impossible to create good economies in towns. Laws that give sociopaths the ability to bring functioning human being in courts for stupid reasons and win, making people not trusting their neighbors. Divorce laws that destroy families. Anti-family propaganda that pushes people to destroy their family at the first difficulties.
These things, and many others, make really difficult to create a well-connected society, and people eventually kill themselves because it's really bad out there where you get a little off the track set by thr State and its puppetters. So, nytimes should know very well that this is not an existential crisis, it's the result of something they supported for a very long time. |
|
|
This is not a thing that exists. First, immigration into the US, from poor countries or otherwise is not uncontrolled by any stretch of the imagination. Notably, immigration rates are far far from their historical heights. Second, bringing crime is a bold-face lie: immigrants commit crimes both petty and violent at lower rates than native born Americans. And, of course, crime rates are also at or near historical lows no matter what stat one looks at. Third, "social distrust" is pretty odd thing to try to pin on immigration: while there is some research that indicates that a non-assimilated minority undermines social trust, the US as a whole certainly doesn't have a migration rate of non-assimilated minorities at anywhere close to those rates, those migration rates have not increased, and the demographic "Bowling Alone" type studies indicate that the non-dynamic communities where immigrants aren't settling are the ones having issues.
As for "people moving around like cattle", internal migration rates (people moving out of state/county) have fallen steadily over the last thirty years or so. And since when is the movement of people towards opportunity a bad thing? What if towns in which it's "impossible to create good economies" have simply outlived their usefulness as going concerns?
Predictably, this comment rules out moving to opportunity or a social safety net or investment (collective action to solve problems such as "few companies [with] a lot of bargaining power" is spooky) and believes that a well-connected society can only happen when "good economies in towns" are first brought into being by magic as opposed to anything that can actually work.
And, of course, the NYTimes isn't doing all that much to promote policies or politicians aiming to "destroy socities [sic]". Come on now.