I get the funding bill issues. I was referring to not knowing much about the powers trump would gain with a shutdown. I did see another post saying shutdown powers would be better but I still don't have a take on it. It sounds like they're bad either way.
StoneyPicton
joined 4 months ago
It's a good thing to have control of your border and it's a good thing to break up and deport criminal gangs. As always, his methods are moronic.
yeh, I should have added that disclaimer, lol.
I don't know the details of the powers trump would have under a shutdown so I'll have to reserve judgement on this one. Some of the dems are acting a little shell shocked since this chaos started though so you wonder if they can be useful again.
Smart thinking. All the best in your new life. Germany and europe should be booming for the next few years so hope you can take advantage. Cheers
Where are you heading, if I may ask. Is this something you've been thinking about for a while or just with recent developments? I'm very disappointed that Canada didn't immediately start publicly inviting STEM people north and spending lots to create openings and programs.
That covers some Chinese departures over a period prior to trumps policies but there are a lot more nationalities to cover and more recently I would expect the number to increase substantially. Thanks for the info though. I'm sure there's more movement to come.
Are they though? I haven't seen many stories about it but would entirely expect this to be the case. Especially because many are suddenly unemployed.
Decided to check after I posted this and found that it was non-comital and later retracted/disavowed. You're absolutely right though, it's always wait and see.
If the choice is having them help your "enemy" or subjecting them to personal trauma, which do you think they'll choose?
I've always leaned toward ranked ballots as I felt it would be an improvement over a constant over-representation of the conservative mentality in a majority progressive country. Recently there have been posts on Lemmy where people have made good points for proportional representation (PR) but I still have reservations. I agree with a post here about the fact the party ultimately chooses who to appoint to the earned positions and so also agree that it would need to be adjusted with an open list, details to be worked out. My main objection to the PR system though is the rise of many single issue and or myopic platforms for parties that would get representation. My fear would be a party coalition quagmire where issues that should never see the light of day are entertained in an effort to appease the dubious partners. Would we want a Muslim, Christian or Hindu party pushing a particular agenda? Would we want an NRA backed group pushing gun freedom? I feel I could only support PR if there were guardrails put in place to mitigate this type threat. I've had someone comment that if that's what people choose then shouldn't they have that right? I understand that point but still have reservations. Thanks for prompting this discussion.