2020 US Presidential Election

You have not answered the question as to what we should have done in response to the attacks of 9/11, to stop bin Laden from carrying out further attacks.
Search for terrorists, the same we did in Spain for decades. We did not bomb out the Basque Country to find them :ROFL:

We had to look for ETA terrorists hidden in the mountains, or in rural deserted areas in France, or in other European countries. And of course when carrying out this task civil population cannot be killed in the process, like the US did in Irak, Afghanistan and other wars the US started for pretty much no reason.
 
Yes, the war started in the Middle East was a mistake. I don't know how anyone could disagree with that (?)
It seems that @Luman is disagreeing with that, which I find shocking, as it is a position impossible to defend or stand for in a debate.
b) China is making large inroads in the Middle East through investment (especially in Pakistan), as a gateway to controlling and monopolising the mass of natural resources found in countries like Afghanistan. This is exactly the approach the US and it's allies should have taken; making peaceful trade and investment
So China took the right approach in the region...
Again, nefarious characters in top positions with a lot to gain, wanted to test out their new toy, developed for them (innocently I might add) by the genius mind of Robert Oppenheimer, who expressed deep regret at it's use.
I have read the biography of Robert Oppenheimer. It is shocking how the US establishment ousted the guys who created the bomb after it was dropped. Some physicists that worked at or were related to the Manhattan Project ended up working in a petrol station, or at railroad maintenance, like Rossi Lomanitz.
No offense, I like you @Juan, but I think you need a little perspective here:
About previous political decisions, my opinion is that those who proposed to start a war on fake evidence and to bomb foreign and sovereign countries on fake evidence should take the responsibility, and this was done by Republicans like Bush (both of them, father and son, at different moments) and Cheney. Then there was Trump, that inherited the mess created by his fellow Republicans and talked and talked... and talked a bit more... but did nothing.

And now people pretend to blame Biden for doing the right thing, which is calling the war on Afghanistan over. Why did Trump talk so much but did so little? Why didn't he withdraw the troops from Afghanistan? Because he did not want to take the responsibility. Trump did not have the guts to do it and chose to bury his head in the sand like an ostrich.
 
It seems that @Luman is disagreeing with that, which I find shocking, as it is a position impossible to defend or stand for in a debate.
Lol. Well I'll agree with @Luman on Biden and that you can't find a single sane or incorrupt politician within the Democratic Party, but he is after all a "pro-Trumper" who is also a pro-COVID-vaccine advocate o_O, which as you rightly pointed out, is an odd combination; so I'd expect some of his other views to be a little bizarre. :LOL:
So China took the right approach in the region...
Absolutely, China's war, is strategically, one of the smartest the world has ever not seen.

It's quiet and slow burn, and by the time China decides it wants to become hostile or imposing of it's world view, it'll be too late for anyone to do anything about it.

Basically, if China doesn't get stopped in it's tracks over the course of the next decade (which is unlikely considering the West's pre-occupation with COVID-X, all it's scariants, and poisoning it's entire population with unsafe pharmaceuticals), then our futures are going to be influenced heavily by the Chinese Communist Party.
About previous political decisions, my opinion is that those who proposed to start a war on fake evidence and to bomb foreign and sovereign countries on fake evidence should take the responsibility, and this was done by Republicans like Bush (both of them, father and son, at different moments) and Cheney. Then there was Trump, that inherited the mess created by his fellow Republicans and talked and talked... and talked a bit more... but did nothing.

And now people pretend to blame Biden for doing the right thing, which is calling the war on Afghanistan over. Why did Trump talk so much but did so little? Why didn't he withdraw the troops from Afghanistan? Because he did not want to take the responsibility. Trump did not have the guts to do it and chose to bury his head in the sand like an ostrich.
No, this is incorrect.

I'll start with Trump: he is, first and foremost, a business man. People like him because he's outspoken and he doesn't shove woke politics down the throats of the electorate. But, for this reason, he's very smart, and he knew whose toes to step on, and whose toes not to.

Absolutely, he was in bed with the same people who started these wars, because he knew going against them would levy no benefit, and instead earn him a very quick and disgraceful exit out of the White House. So yeah, he "talked", and focused mostly on domestic policy, because his concern was genuinely for the American people (another attribute that no US president has exhibited since JFK). Trump's foreign policy was quite simply: threaten countries that threaten the US, and try to extinguish China's economic expansion (which was the correct call, and one, unfortunately that the new administration are not addressing and will not address).

And besides (important point here): the damage in the Middle East had already been done; at the point you've inherited a war, it's too late to go backwards. It's like your mate kicking a bees nest you need the honey from, and running away. What can you do at this point? You can't abandon the honey, but you've still got a swarm of pissed off bees attacking you... So yes, the sh*t storm continued, but the US still, at least, were securing the resources they needed that China will now have under Biden (along with that billions of $ worth of US weaponry gifted to the Taliban).

Moving on to the Republican: the problem as I mentioned before, is that you are seeing this from a [Democrats=good/not so bad] [Republicans=bad] perspective, when it's not.
The people profiting from destabilisation in the Middle East can be found on both sides of the playing field. (My own personal bias, is that I happen to like a few Republican politicians, but for the most part, the Republican Party is full of as many swine as the other).

But you can't pin destabilisation on The Republican party and it's supporters, because it's simply not the case that this is a single political side's doing. Don't believe me? When Iraq Was Clinton's War (jacobinmag.com) People are very quick to forget Clinton's role in casting the first stone in Iraq, and headhunting Saddam (who was actually keeping a lid on a lot of the dreadful factions that have now formed).

Anyway TL;DR:

-I liked Trump, but he was no "hero".
-The terrible things the US government does domestically and overseas is perpetuated by people that control both the Republicans and the Democrats.
 
But we are against it, Spanish people are against it. Democracy is just hijacked here completely. Illegal immigration and the successive waves of refugees are a business ruled and run by bureaucrats and fake NGOs. Do you know how much those EU officials specialised in immigration and refugees make? They earn a ton of money out of creating problems for others.

It was the same about the Irak war. Spanish people did NOT support the war. We did NOT want to be part of the whole US nonsense going on in Irak. Spanish people demonstrated repeatedly against the Irak war.

It was that fool of Aznar who sold our country and sealed a deal at the Azores with Bush and Tony Blair to get Spain involved in the war.
But, Spanish people are not out on the streets protesting the COVID-19 lockdown tyranny. Are they? No. Show me a video in which there's thousands protesting that crap.
 
our futures are going to be influenced heavily by the Chinese Communist Party.
Our futures, whether we like it or not, are already influenced by China. To me, as an European, this is no concern at all. Why should I distrust Chinese technology companies more than American technology companies? To me it's all the same. Actually, the Chinese are regulating their tech companies, in which is a wise move in the long run.

Europe is missing an incredible opportunity by denying Huawei the deployment of their 5G network here.
I'll start with Trump: he is, first and foremost, a business man.
To be precise, he is a guy that was already born rich, that already came from money, inherited his businesses, which by the way he managed to get bankrupt a few times...
So yeah, he "talked", and focused mostly on domestic policy
He wasn't so wise, when trying to ignore Angela Merkel, or to make fun of her.

And of course all those things he used to say about China were just pure comedy that only fools could believe, as he knew he would not be able to do anything against his banker. The Chinese are after all financing the US, when they would be better off investing in China or in China satellite countries.
So yes, the sh*t storm continued, but the US still, at least, were securing the resources they needed
In the end someone recognised that the deep motives for American wars in the Middle East are stealing resources like petrol and rare minerals.
Moving on to the Republican: the problem as I mentioned before, is that you are seeing this from a [Democrats=good/not so bad] [Republicans=bad] perspective, when it's not.
To me there is a very important difference which lies on who starts things, and all these wars have been routinely started by Republicans. Then things evolve over time and it is harder to stop all the damage that rolls out and spills over to other countries like Spain, where now we have Afghan refugees that should be in the US, and not here.
 
Well, it seems you have managed to read my posts through the cracks of my block wall, my dear arch-nemesis @PeteJ
You're absolutely right @PeteJ. Nothing's too communist for me ;p

View attachment 46506
For f*ck's sake @Christiaan, you're such a commie Bond villain!
NLT.png
 
But, Spanish people are not out on the streets protesting the COVID-19 lockdown tyranny. Are they? No. Show me a video in which there's thousands protesting that crap.
There were people protesting during lockdown, specially those who owned bars and restaurants and other small businesses.

Lockdown lasted for 2 weeks (at two different moments - 2 lockdowns) and it has been over for more than a year... so old news anyway.
 
For f*ck's sake @Christiaan, you're such a commie Bond villain!

View attachment 46577
Shoot! You've finally connected the dots ;) Well, I already have a suit that fits my evil alter-ego. Track-suit specialist @Zugzug helped me greatly in creating the perfect costume that strikes fear into the hearts of every capitalist that crosses my path. And you can only seize the means of production if you do it in style. So, what do you think? Fetching, right?

Red_Scare_Watchmen_TV_Series_002.jpg
 
I think this is an interesting article for you folks about the role of the US (and other western countries) in the rise of popular support for the Taliban

How mass killings by US forces after 9/11 boosted support for the Taliban

The men of Zangabad village, Panjwai district lined up on the eve of 11 September to count and remember their dead, the dozens of relatives who they say were killed at the hands of the foreign forces that first appeared in their midst nearly 20 years ago.

Their cluster of mud houses, fields and pomegranate orchards was the site of perhaps the most notorious massacre of the war, when US SSgt Robert Bales walked out of a nearby base to slaughter local families in cold blood. He killed 16 people, nine of them children.

America's tragedy, thousands of families' terrible losses on that September morning in 2001, would indirectly unravel into similar grief for thousands of other families half a world away.

(...)

Those murders were perhaps the most high-profile civilian deaths of the war. But it was not the only time foreign forces killed large numbers of women, children and non-combatant men, in just this one corner of a single district of Afghanistan.

Five men from Zangabad who spoke to the Guardian said they lost 49 relatives between them in airstrikes and the massacre, bloodshed spanning nearly a decade. These terrible losses, repeated in many parts of Afghanistan, would prove powerful recruiting tools for the Taliban, as they slowly gathered their forces to retake the country.

(...)

The Taliban commander for Panjwai district, Faizani Mawlawi Sahab, said each mass killing drove more people into their arms, and the slaughter of 2012 provoked particular grief and horror. "Although some people were supporting us before, after this incident everyone joined or helped us in some way," he said.

The nearby city of Kandahar was the Taliban's capital when they first ruled Afghanistan, home to their first leader Mullah Muhammad Omar, and briefly to Osama bin Laden, architect of the attacks on America.

The Taliban's founding members came from the greater Kandahar region, and the fields and orchards of the farming districts surrounding the city became militant strongholds again when they started regrouping to fight the US-led forces.

The group had tried to negotiate a surrender in 2001, which the country's then-president Hamid Karzai was eager to accept. But America's leaders, still caught up in a hunt for Bin Laden that would last a decade, were more interested in vengeance than Afghanistan's future.

"The United States is not inclined to negotiate surrenders," secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld announced at the time, with a hubris that would be thrown into relief by the lives lost in Afghanistan over the next two decades and the money spent there.

(...)

US officials were apparently unable to recognise that the Taliban had a constituency of support in Afghanistan, as repulsive as their governing principles were, from their ban on women's education and most work, to their embrace of punishments like flogging and amputation and public executions.

"The insurgency was not inevitable. There was a good chance for peace in 2001. Everyone, including the Taliban accepted they had been defeated. But the US and their Afghan allies persecuted and marginalised those who'd lost the war, not just Taliban but tribal and factional rivals of those who had seized power," said Kate Clark, co-director of the Afghanistan Analysts Network.

(...)

The Taliban claim to have learned from the past, offering an amnesty to their former opponents, promising education to girls and even an inclusive government. But their hardline all-male, all-Taliban new cabinet, reports of reprisals, and harsh crackdown on protests has raised fears that the cycle of violence could soon start up again.

"In place after place, we saw that Afghans were long suffering in the face of such persecution, how they attempted to get corrupt and abusive officials changed, and only very eventually and reluctantly took up arms," said Clark.

"I fear the same could be again happening. The Taliban, heady with victory may well push the cycle of revenge forward once more, persecuting and marginalising those they have defeated."
 
With vaccine mandates @Lumen must be conflicted with Biden lol.
If Biden had not spread distrust of the vaccines and had addressed the COVID-19 situation honestly with intelligence and science, rather than fear and politics, we would not need mandates to force people to get vaccinated.
 
@PeteJ, are you going to submit to vaccinations/boosters once they restrict unvaccinated from grocery stores?

OK, you will still be able to use Instacart food delivery, but the next squeeze will be social assistance ban... at which point you will have no choice but to roll up your sleeve. Thoughts?
 
Biden treats the Taliban better and speaks of them in a more respectful tone than he does American citizens who have not been vaccinated for one reason or another.
 
The result of a Biden mandate to have all five-year-old children vaccinated for COVID-19.

Five Year Old Batboy vaccine.jpg
 
Senator Joe Manchin now says that he only supports the Democratic budget plan if it's reduced from 3.5 trillion to just 1 trillion dollars. A reduced budget plan may not be enough to considerably improve infrastructure, education, health care and tackle climate crisis.

Mehdi Hasan on MSNBC made an interesting point that the senator is not entirely sincere, and some of his Democratic colleagues think he's in the pocket of big business. What do you guys think?

Screenshot 2021-09-13 at 18.12.52.png
 
Senator Joe Manchin now says that he only supports the Democratic budget plan if it's reduced from 3.5 trillion to just 1 trillion dollars. A reduced budget plan may not be enough to considerably improve infrastructure, education, health care and tackle climate crisis.

Mehdi Hasan on MSNBC made an interesting point that the senator is not entirely sincere, and some of his Democratic colleagues think he's in the pocket of big business. What do you guys think?

View attachment 46656
I am glad that Manchin is standing up to Biden, and refusing to support this budget plan, which is at least 300% too large.

Impeach Biden, and then Harris.
 
I am glad that Manchin is standing up to Biden, and refusing to support this budget plan, which is at least 300% too large.

Impeach Biden, and then Harris.
is 300% really too large? Do you think that the current housing market crisis, climate crisis, state of infrastructure and education can fix itself by a more market friendly government? What has Trump's administration actually done to help fix those issues, aside from denying that some problems exist (e.g. global warming by human activity) or that Betsy DeVos' education programs has made public schools perform weaker than before, or that a smaller government doesn't instigate society & corporations to step in and finance infrastructure?
 
The result of a Biden mandate to have all five-year-old children vaccinated for COVID-19.

View attachment 46646
Let's not watch Fox News for a few days. The things they're saying are so unreal, it's like watching an over-the-top Michael Bay movie.

Just to give other people on this thread an idea about the sad, current state of affairs at Fox News, here's another ludicrous example. Note: Tucker Carlson presented this complete and utter crap during prime time.

Tucker Carlson praised Nicki Minaj after the rapper groundlessly linked COVID-19 vaccines to impotence and swollen testicles (Porter, 2021)

Capture d’écran 2021-09-14 à 19.43.45.png

Tucker Carlson reading aloud a tweet by the rapper Nicki Minaj on his September 13, 2021, show.
Fox News


  • The Fox host has long sought to stir doubts about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.
  • On Monday he praised Nicki Minaj for her tweet baselessly linking COVID-19 vaccines to impotence.
  • Medical experts say there is no evidence linking the vaccines to impotence.
Fox News' Tucker Carlson has found an unlikely ally Monday in the rapper Nicki Minaj, whom he praised for a tweet that groundlessly linked COVID-19 vaccines with impotence and swollen testicles.

Carlson has for months stirred doubts about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines on his show. On Monday night's edition, he seized on tweets by the rapper in which she said that she was skipping the 2021 Met Gala because of its requirement that guests show proof of vaccination and shared an anecdote about her cousin's friend.

"So Nicki Minaj is a huge rap artist. Not sure there's much overlap between her audience and this one, but our producers assure us she's one of the biggest in the world," Carlson said on Monday.

He then went on to read aloud the tweet, where Minaj claimed that after her cousin's friend had gotten vaccinated he "became impotent" and "his testicles became swollen," resulting in his fiancée canceling their wedding.

The tweet seemingly references misinformation linking the vaccines to infertility, which doctors and public health officials say is groundless, as there is no plausible biological mechanism whereby the vaccines could bring about this effect.

But Carlson, who routinely uses speculation and distorted data to undermine the vaccines, praised Minaj's tweets, remarking that her view "seems sensible."

Carlson has previously used rap stars as examples of moral decline, devoting a segment of his show last year to attack a performance of "WAP" by Cardi B and Megan Thee Stallion at the Grammys for its sexually explicit lyrics, and praising China earlier this month for clamping down on celebrity fandom.

Minaj's tweets have sparked widespread criticism on social media. But in follow-up tweets Minaj did go on to recommend that people who need proof of the shots, in order to keep their jobs, to get vaccinated.

"I'd def recommend they get the vaccine. They have to feed their families. I'm sure I'll b vaccinated as well cuz I have to go on tour, etc," she wrote to a fan. She then asked her followers which vaccine they would recommend.
 
is 300% really too large? Do you think that the current housing market crisis, climate crisis, state of infrastructure and education can fix itself by a more market friendly government? What has Trump's administration actually done to help fix those issues, aside from denying that some problems exist (e.g. global warming by human activity) or that Betsy DeVos' education programs has made public schools perform weaker than before, or that a smaller government doesn't instigate society & corporations to step in and finance infrastructure?
There is no major "housing market crisis" in the United States.

Whatever the Democrats are planning for education, is probably doomed to failure, if it passes.

Bring back Trump, or somebody similar, we need it. Biden has failed at everything. The world wanted this man, Biden, and now the truth about him is out. I was against him since last year, before he was elected. Where are those who were saying how wonderful he would be? They have nothing to say.

It's time to impeach Biden, and then get rid of the cackling hyena that he chose for VP, before she has a chance to do even more damage than he has.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/...e-peak-of-the-2000s-housing-bubble-what-gives
 
I think this is an interesting article for you folks about the role of the US (and other western countries) in the rise of popular support for the Taliban

How mass killings by US forces after 9/11 boosted support for the Taliban

The men of Zangabad village, Panjwai district lined up on the eve of 11 September to count and remember their dead, the dozens of relatives who they say were killed at the hands of the foreign forces that first appeared in their midst nearly 20 years ago.

Their cluster of mud houses, fields and pomegranate orchards was the site of perhaps the most notorious massacre of the war, when US SSgt Robert Bales walked out of a nearby base to slaughter local families in cold blood. He killed 16 people, nine of them children.

America's tragedy, thousands of families' terrible losses on that September morning in 2001, would indirectly unravel into similar grief for thousands of other families half a world away.

(...)

Those murders were perhaps the most high-profile civilian deaths of the war. But it was not the only time foreign forces killed large numbers of women, children and non-combatant men, in just this one corner of a single district of Afghanistan.

Five men from Zangabad who spoke to the Guardian said they lost 49 relatives between them in airstrikes and the massacre, bloodshed spanning nearly a decade. These terrible losses, repeated in many parts of Afghanistan, would prove powerful recruiting tools for the Taliban, as they slowly gathered their forces to retake the country.

(...)

The Taliban commander for Panjwai district, Faizani Mawlawi Sahab, said each mass killing drove more people into their arms, and the slaughter of 2012 provoked particular grief and horror. "Although some people were supporting us before, after this incident everyone joined or helped us in some way," he said.

The nearby city of Kandahar was the Taliban's capital when they first ruled Afghanistan, home to their first leader Mullah Muhammad Omar, and briefly to Osama bin Laden, architect of the attacks on America.

The Taliban's founding members came from the greater Kandahar region, and the fields and orchards of the farming districts surrounding the city became militant strongholds again when they started regrouping to fight the US-led forces.

The group had tried to negotiate a surrender in 2001, which the country's then-president Hamid Karzai was eager to accept. But America's leaders, still caught up in a hunt for Bin Laden that would last a decade, were more interested in vengeance than Afghanistan's future.

"The United States is not inclined to negotiate surrenders," secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld announced at the time, with a hubris that would be thrown into relief by the lives lost in Afghanistan over the next two decades and the money spent there.

(...)

US officials were apparently unable to recognise that the Taliban had a constituency of support in Afghanistan, as repulsive as their governing principles were, from their ban on women's education and most work, to their embrace of punishments like flogging and amputation and public executions.

"The insurgency was not inevitable. There was a good chance for peace in 2001. Everyone, including the Taliban accepted they had been defeated. But the US and their Afghan allies persecuted and marginalised those who'd lost the war, not just Taliban but tribal and factional rivals of those who had seized power," said Kate Clark, co-director of the Afghanistan Analysts Network.

(...)

The Taliban claim to have learned from the past, offering an amnesty to their former opponents, promising education to girls and even an inclusive government. But their hardline all-male, all-Taliban new cabinet, reports of reprisals, and harsh crackdown on protests has raised fears that the cycle of violence could soon start up again.

"In place after place, we saw that Afghans were long suffering in the face of such persecution, how they attempted to get corrupt and abusive officials changed, and only very eventually and reluctantly took up arms," said Clark.

"I fear the same could be again happening. The Taliban, heady with victory may well push the cycle of revenge forward once more, persecuting and marginalising those they have defeated."
All of Afghanistan, including many Taliban members, would flee the Taliban if they could, as we have seen in recent videos. There will be a lot of atrocities committed by the Taliban against the Afghans, in terms of executions, torture, rapes, etc. in the coming years. Expect a lot more Afghan migrants into Europe, Central Asia, etc. in coming years. So, the Afghans who support the Taliban now will change their minds very quickly. I don't see how any woman can support the Taliban.

Men join the Taliban for economic reasons (in part). The Taliban makes their money through ransoms and extortions.

Driven into the arms of the Taliban
 
Joe Biden has managed to accomplish the impossible: The United Federation of Teachers, in NYC - a large, very old and extremely Democratic-orientated union, is united against him for his vaccination mandate.

New York Teachers Turn On Joe Biden - They March Across The Brooklyn Bridge To Protest His Mandate

Biden approval rating slips to 42 percent in new poll

A Quinnipiac University poll of American adults released today showed 42 percent of participants approved of Biden's overall performance, while 50 percent disapproved.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/572235-biden-approval-rating-slips-to-42-percent-in-new-poll
 
What has Trump's administration actually done to help fix those issues, aside from denying that some problems exist (e.g. global warming by human activity) or that Betsy DeVos' education programs has made public schools perform weaker than before, or that a smaller government doesn't instigate society & corporations to step in and finance infrastructure?
Try to drill in polar bear habitat.
 
All of Afghanistan, including many Taliban members, would flee the Taliban if they could, as we have seen in recent videos. There will be a lot of atrocities committed by the Taliban against the Afghans, in terms of executions, torture, rapes, etc. in the coming years. Expect a lot more Afghan migrants into Europe, Central Asia, etc. in coming years. So, the Afghans who support the Taliban now will change their minds very quickly. I don't see how any woman can support the Taliban.

Men join the Taliban for economic reasons (in part). The Taliban makes their money through ransoms and extortions.

Driven into the arms of the Taliban
There's a chance that Afghanistan will turn into another Iran. Now that the Taliban has stepped into the power vacuum that is left by the democratic, pro-West government, the organisation can consolidate its influence in the country by indoctrination via education and use of force against opposing factions (indeed, even by means of extortions and the like).

This regime change could also lead to a brain drain of highly educated Afghans to the West, as you say. This is very bad news for hospitals, schools, industry and creative sectors in Afghanistan. Even if the Taliban doesn't manage to hold on to power in a year or two, it would take many years, maybe even decades, to undo the damage that they have inflicted on Afghan society & economy.
 
Joe Biden has managed to accomplish the impossible: The United Federation of Teachers, in NYC - a large, very old and extremely Democratic-orientated union, is united against him for his vaccination mandate.

New York Teachers Turn On Joe Biden - They March Across The Brooklyn Bridge To Protest His Mandate

Biden approval rating slips to 42 percent in new poll

A Quinnipiac University poll of American adults released today showed 42 percent of participants approved of Biden's overall performance, while 50 percent disapproved.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/572235-biden-approval-rating-slips-to-42-percent-in-new-poll
Concerning the housing market crisis, I was thinking about the eviction moratorium issue. It concerns more than 11 million people. A large group of this population are renters who pay more than half their income on rent.

Here's an article on this issue, in case you're interested:

The Coming Wave of Evictions Is More Than a Housing Crisis (Pinsker, 2021)

Evictions disrupt people's health, relationships, work, and education. Now all those struggles will be exacerbated by the pandemic.

Over the past year and a half, a series of local, state, and national eviction bans has prevented millions of Americans from losing their home in the middle of a pandemic. But last week, a national moratorium put in place by the CDC was rejected by the Supreme Court.

"Really concerning," "quite bad," and "a huge problem" are three ways that housing experts I spoke with characterized the wave of evictions that's now approaching. They told me that millions of American adults and children are at risk of getting evicted, and that Black renters, particularly Black women, are at the highest risk.

Evictions, which will likely rise between now and the end of the year, are known to disrupt many realms of people's lives—their health, their relationships, their job, their kids' education. Now all of those struggles will be exacerbated by the pandemic. For many Americans who lose their home, the end of the eviction moratorium won't just be a housing crisis. It'll be an everything crisis.

A Housing Crisis
Two important things to understand about evictions in America are what prompts them and where people go next.

First, pandemic or no pandemic, the majority of evictions are not a result of lease violations such as disruptive behavior but of simply not being able to afford rent, Eva Rosen, a professor at Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy, told me. Second, after people get evicted, some of them go to a shelter, but more commonly they "double up," moving in with friends or family for as long as they need to, and perhaps sleeping on a couch.

This can tax resources and relationships. "It means more strain on the food supply [in a home]. It means having to get along with many more people in a living environment," Diana Hernández, a professor at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, told me. Navigating these social dynamics might be especially fraught during the pandemic, when more occupants means more risk of exposure to the coronavirus.

Evictions also make it harder for renters to find their next home, because landlords can look up their history and turn them away—which limits their options and often steers them into rundown housing with leaks, mold, or pests. The experts I spoke with referred to a housing "spiral": "One eviction begets another," Peter Hepburn, a sociologist at Rutgers University at Newark and a research fellow at Princeton University's Eviction Lab, told me. "You see people who, once they face a first eviction, have a cycle of instability and insecurity in their housing."

A Health Crisis
Over the past couple of decades, researchers have linked getting evicted to a number of alarming physical- and mental-health outcomes. It's associated with stress, anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation, as well as with high blood pressure and worse self-reported health overall.

Losing your home makes leading a healthy life more difficult logistically. Hernández pointed out that eating well is harder without a kitchen of your own, and that if you have diabetes and, say, no longer have a fridge, managing your insulin is more complicated.

Eviction wears on people's mental health in normal times; during a pandemic, the stressors multiply. "People are already living with the challenges of potential wage loss and unemployment, academic stress, caretaking responsibilities, and social isolation," Hernández said. "And then on top of that, to be evicted … it's pressure upon pressure that eventually could make people fold."

(...)

A Work Crisis
Just as evictions disrupt school for kids, they disrupt work for adults. They can lead to poor sleep, which can affect people mentally and physically at work the next day. And lacking a shower while, say, living out of a vehicle can hurt people's confidence at work and their co-workers' perceptions of them.

And the disruption of an eviction (or even just the threat of one), Hernández said, can hinder people's ability to focus on their job, whatever it may be. "Being cognitively available for work is important, but eviction weighs on people's minds and spirits in ways that can be almost all-encompassing," she told me. "It's a constant worry, like, where are you going to sleep tonight? And if you're a parent, how are your kids doing?"

(...)

In theory, the upcoming crisis could be avoided if Congress passed its own version of the CDC moratorium, but it most likely isn't going to. Congress has, however, already set aside $46.5 billion to go to renters—Hepburn says it's plenty of money for people to pay the rent (and back rent) that they owe—but it's being distributed frustratingly slowly. Hepburn and other housing experts are hoping that more cities and states take steps to slow or halt eviction proceedings, allowing more time for the money to get distributed and prevent a significant number of impending evictions. Otherwise, millions of people stand to lose their home, and a lot more.
 
Concerning the housing market crisis, I was thinking about the eviction moratorium issue. It concerns more than 11 million people. A large group of this population are renters who pay more than half their income on rent.

Here's an article on this issue, in case you're interested:

The Coming Wave of Evictions Is More Than a Housing Crisis (Pinsker, 2021)

Evictions disrupt people's health, relationships, work, and education. Now all those struggles will be exacerbated by the pandemic.

Over the past year and a half, a series of local, state, and national eviction bans has prevented millions of Americans from losing their home in the middle of a pandemic. But last week, a national moratorium put in place by the CDC was rejected by the Supreme Court.

"Really concerning," "quite bad," and "a huge problem" are three ways that housing experts I spoke with characterized the wave of evictions that's now approaching. They told me that millions of American adults and children are at risk of getting evicted, and that Black renters, particularly Black women, are at the highest risk.

Evictions, which will likely rise between now and the end of the year, are known to disrupt many realms of people's lives—their health, their relationships, their job, their kids' education. Now all of those struggles will be exacerbated by the pandemic. For many Americans who lose their home, the end of the eviction moratorium won't just be a housing crisis. It'll be an everything crisis.

A Housing Crisis
Two important things to understand about evictions in America are what prompts them and where people go next.

First, pandemic or no pandemic, the majority of evictions are not a result of lease violations such as disruptive behavior but of simply not being able to afford rent, Eva Rosen, a professor at Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy, told me. Second, after people get evicted, some of them go to a shelter, but more commonly they "double up," moving in with friends or family for as long as they need to, and perhaps sleeping on a couch.

This can tax resources and relationships. "It means more strain on the food supply [in a home]. It means having to get along with many more people in a living environment," Diana Hernández, a professor at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, told me. Navigating these social dynamics might be especially fraught during the pandemic, when more occupants means more risk of exposure to the coronavirus.

Evictions also make it harder for renters to find their next home, because landlords can look up their history and turn them away—which limits their options and often steers them into rundown housing with leaks, mold, or pests. The experts I spoke with referred to a housing "spiral": "One eviction begets another," Peter Hepburn, a sociologist at Rutgers University at Newark and a research fellow at Princeton University's Eviction Lab, told me. "You see people who, once they face a first eviction, have a cycle of instability and insecurity in their housing."

A Health Crisis
Over the past couple of decades, researchers have linked getting evicted to a number of alarming physical- and mental-health outcomes. It's associated with stress, anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation, as well as with high blood pressure and worse self-reported health overall.

Losing your home makes leading a healthy life more difficult logistically. Hernández pointed out that eating well is harder without a kitchen of your own, and that if you have diabetes and, say, no longer have a fridge, managing your insulin is more complicated.

Eviction wears on people's mental health in normal times; during a pandemic, the stressors multiply. "People are already living with the challenges of potential wage loss and unemployment, academic stress, caretaking responsibilities, and social isolation," Hernández said. "And then on top of that, to be evicted … it's pressure upon pressure that eventually could make people fold."

(...)

A Work Crisis
Just as evictions disrupt school for kids, they disrupt work for adults. They can lead to poor sleep, which can affect people mentally and physically at work the next day. And lacking a shower while, say, living out of a vehicle can hurt people's confidence at work and their co-workers' perceptions of them.

And the disruption of an eviction (or even just the threat of one), Hernández said, can hinder people's ability to focus on their job, whatever it may be. "Being cognitively available for work is important, but eviction weighs on people's minds and spirits in ways that can be almost all-encompassing," she told me. "It's a constant worry, like, where are you going to sleep tonight? And if you're a parent, how are your kids doing?"

(...)

In theory, the upcoming crisis could be avoided if Congress passed its own version of the CDC moratorium, but it most likely isn't going to. Congress has, however, already set aside $46.5 billion to go to renters—Hepburn says it's plenty of money for people to pay the rent (and back rent) that they owe—but it's being distributed frustratingly slowly. Hepburn and other housing experts are hoping that more cities and states take steps to slow or halt eviction proceedings, allowing more time for the money to get distributed and prevent a significant number of impending evictions. Otherwise, millions of people stand to lose their home, and a lot more.
The problem with this article is that they do not differentiate between losing a home and being evicted for nonpayment of rent, by your landlord. The Atlantic is not a very well-thought-out magazine, at least not anymore.

First of all, if you have not paid for the house, it is not yours. You may live there and have invested in it, but if there is a substantial mortgage that you cannot or will not pay, it can be foreclosed. If this person who owned the house or apartment building was renting, and people did not pay their rent, as a landlord they would evict them. The person with the mortgage is sort of renting from the mortgage holder until the full amount is paid up. It's a serious undertaking, not for people with financial problems or those who are irresponsible.

When you rent, landlords usually make you pay a month or two in rent, as security. Virtually anybody who applies for an apartment through ads or with a real estate agency, and has this money, and a job, can get an apartment. If they do not pay their rent, the landlord can evict them. Many landlords will let a tenant break a lease and move out so that they can raise the rent for a new tenant. Some unscrupulous landlords will try to force a tenant out, so that they can rent to somebody else, usually for more money, but this is illegal.

If people cannot afford the rent that they pay, they need to get a roommate, find a cheaper apartment or work more to afford their rent.
 
Let's not watch Fox News for a few days. The things they're saying are so unreal, it's like watching an over-the-top Michael Bay movie.

Just to give other people on this thread an idea about the sad, current state of affairs at Fox News, here's another ludicrous example. Note: Tucker Carlson presented this complete and utter crap during prime time.

Tucker Carlson praised Nicki Minaj after the rapper groundlessly linked COVID-19 vaccines to impotence and swollen testicles (Porter, 2021)

View attachment 46666
Tucker Carlson reading aloud a tweet by the rapper Nicki Minaj on his September 13, 2021, show.
Fox News


  • The Fox host has long sought to stir doubts about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.
  • On Monday he praised Nicki Minaj for her tweet baselessly linking COVID-19 vaccines to impotence.
  • Medical experts say there is no evidence linking the vaccines to impotence.
Fox News' Tucker Carlson has found an unlikely ally Monday in the rapper Nicki Minaj, whom he praised for a tweet that groundlessly linked COVID-19 vaccines with impotence and swollen testicles.

Carlson has for months stirred doubts about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines on his show. On Monday night's edition, he seized on tweets by the rapper in which she said that she was skipping the 2021 Met Gala because of its requirement that guests show proof of vaccination and shared an anecdote about her cousin's friend.

"So Nicki Minaj is a huge rap artist. Not sure there's much overlap between her audience and this one, but our producers assure us she's one of the biggest in the world," Carlson said on Monday.

He then went on to read aloud the tweet, where Minaj claimed that after her cousin's friend had gotten vaccinated he "became impotent" and "his testicles became swollen," resulting in his fiancée canceling their wedding.

The tweet seemingly references misinformation linking the vaccines to infertility, which doctors and public health officials say is groundless, as there is no plausible biological mechanism whereby the vaccines could bring about this effect.

But Carlson, who routinely uses speculation and distorted data to undermine the vaccines, praised Minaj's tweets, remarking that her view "seems sensible."

Carlson has previously used rap stars as examples of moral decline, devoting a segment of his show last year to attack a performance of "WAP" by Cardi B and Megan Thee Stallion at the Grammys for its sexually explicit lyrics, and praising China earlier this month for clamping down on celebrity fandom.

Minaj's tweets have sparked widespread criticism on social media. But in follow-up tweets Minaj did go on to recommend that people who need proof of the shots, in order to keep their jobs, to get vaccinated.

"I'd def recommend they get the vaccine. They have to feed their families. I'm sure I'll b vaccinated as well cuz I have to go on tour, etc," she wrote to a fan. She then asked her followers which vaccine they would recommend.
I don't think Nicki Minaj lied. The COVID-19 vaccines affect people in a variety of (and random) ways, including an unfortunate few but sizeable number who experience bad side effects such as blood clots. Not a doctor, but based on the word "swollen", what she describes could be a blood clot in the testicles which could affect fertility depending on severity.
 

Log in or register to get the full forum benefits!

Register

Register on Tinnitus Talk for free!

Register Now