[vonwoodson]

The difference between California, Texas, South Dakota, Maine, Ohio are as different as Turkey, France, Australia, Ireland, Japan... It's a really foolish opinion or disregard the immense diversity of 350,000,000 people, and (unfortunately) it's made all over the internet.

"Why don't you just do X", totally papers over the extent of what just needs to happen.

"Everyone should just do Y" is always bad policy. Just look at what happened with something as simple as wearing masks.

[p_j_w]

>The difference between California, Texas, South Dakota, Maine, Ohio are as different as Turkey, France, Australia, Ireland, Japan

This is just so obviously not true on the surface. We all speak the same language at the very least, which isn't true for a single one of those countries you listed.

[voltaireodactyl]

Australia and Ireland certainly speak the same language as much as Maine and Texas do.

[vonwoodson]

They speak French in Louisiana, German in Amish Country, Gullah in North Carolina... Your ignorance doesn't make you correct.

[snowpid]

while clearly the Amish language is related to German, it is not German spoken in Germany. Btw, all these people can speak English.

[wddkcs]

So can many of the people in Turkey, France, Japan, etc.

Tangentially related, but how long can languages really be considered a barrier when AI translations are ubiquitous.

[6510]

Each government in the world is for the most part presented with the same set of puzzles. Then they spend good money trying to solve it in isolation as if they are all unique and special.

Some countries are just 1000 years behind in some areas, or 1000 years ahead. The US is no exception in both.

If you never did leg day the gains will be easy.

[atoav]

I am aware that the US is not one monolithic block. To assume otherwise is a very US-thing to do. The rest of the world literally drowns in news about the US internal conflicts.

But maybe I sould give an example: guns. I grew up in an European region where the percentage of gun owners is close to US levels, yet our last school rampage was a decade ago. The rural town I grew up in is famous for it's traditional gunsmiths and home of a Glock factory, so not what some in the US would call big city liberals. The reason gun crime is low here is because we have commons sense gun laws of the type most gun owners in the US supporr as well. Yet you have US politicians claiming "it is a slippery slope" and it "can't possibly work".

Yeah, look at the numbers, it works, it also works in comparable regions to mine with totally different social and cultural circumstances. Of course if you'd like to you could also implement it in a way so it doesn't work, but that would be evil on a comic book villain level right?

The problem in the US is that corporations are really damn effective there to trick a sizable amount of the population into believing all kind of excuses that fall apart the second you look elsewhere.

E.g. given our gun laws many US citizens would say our freedom has been taken away, yet somehow 10 year old me managed to go shooting on empty cans with my hunter grandfather. We had a god damn shooting range in the cellar of our school. It is just that our guns are stored safely and people who shouldn't have guns don't have them. E.g. because they issue threats, have a history of violence, drug abuse, mental illness, or showed otherwise that they act irresponsible with the lives of their neighbours.

But maybe you know more about why the world I live in can't work and have a good explaination that for some reason keeps benefiting certain corporations, while it kills the kids of your population.

[vonwoodson]

You, sir, are an idiot. Keep playing victim, though; I'm sure that'll work out for you.

[atoav]

Spoken by a cretin disqualified by their own disability to add substantial points to a debate.

Pro-Tip: If you aim to critique the points someone made, a sure way to come across like a total fool is to call the person names instead of saying anything useful. This is one of the things that says more about you than the person you attacked ; )