idapitbwidiuatabip OP t1_j1qrgx0 wrote

You’re being obtuse lol - for all intents & purposes, a new Cold War has started. As in rising tensions without formal declarations of war.

And yes, our world leaders flirting with MAD is brinkmanship.

And the lyrics are about it. Read the lyrics maybe? It’s all about finally going past the brink.

I’m sorry that you never learned how to be wrong and you’re such an immature clown that you have to deny reality and objective fact to try to save face after embarrassing yourself online.

There’s nothing to agree on here. You simply don’t understand- or you do and you’re just too much of a coward to admit you misunderstood.

Sad you have no conviction.


idapitbwidiuatabip OP t1_j1nebtu wrote

The song lyrics are literally to do with brinkmanship. Which is the term used for when we’re close to nuclear war. (Ie the impact of nuclear war)

A new Cold War has started. Biden said he’d send aid as long as necessary and fund the war indefinitely - that’s the definition of a Cold War.

This isn’t something you agree with. It’s a fact of reality.

The song used to be relevant when it came out, faded in terms of relevance, but now has newfound relevance.

Kids listening to this in the 90s never feared nukes dropping. Kids listening to it now may well have that fear. Why don’t you get it lol


idapitbwidiuatabip OP t1_j1jzdvx wrote

I mean you’re the one having trouble understanding the term “newfound relevance.”

The song was relevant when it came out during the Cold War.

But an entire generation listened to this in the 90s and 00’s and the concept of nukes dropping was a relic from the past.

That’s no longer the case in 2022. Hence the ‘newfound relevance.’

I can’t believe you needed to have this explained to you.


idapitbwidiuatabip OP t1_j1jr2dc wrote

And it was relevant then.

It faded in terms of relevance after the Cold War ended.

But a new Cold War has begun and brinkmanship is back.

Therefore it’s relevant again. This was very clear from the title yet you didn’t understand and it made you angry.

Simmer down now.


idapitbwidiuatabip OP t1_it3fh4h wrote

> Like I said, not debating with a mental midget. Doubling down on your positions while offering nothing new is not the mark of a good debater. You still don't understand what median means. LOL

No, I do. But it's not proving what you think it is.

> LOL, you're a fool. Americans earn 2x as much, have cheaper equivalent housing, cheaper cars, cheaper gas and much less tax.

The data proves otherwise.

> It's simply not possible


Reality hurts

> However, it is possible for them to spend stupidly,

No, it's literally just wages having stagnated for 50+ years.

Here are some simple graphs that even someone as uneducated as you should be able to grasp


idapitbwidiuatabip OP t1_it39ysf wrote

> This means it includes lots of people who don't have health insurance, the homeless etc.

Which is a flaw in our healthcare system lol

> This skews the data pretty violently -

No, it proves my point that America's healthcare system is in shambles.

> if you take the subset that have jobs and decent health insurance, you'll find the numbers suddenly look a whole lot better.

That's called cherry picking. We're talking about public health. America ranks the lowest out of the three nations we've discussed.

> Wow. Just wow. Which of my data was "cherry-picked" exactly? National medians and averages? How exactly COULD I have cherry picked any of them?

All of it. You chose headline figures that obscure the truth. Just like the headline unemployment rate obscures the fact that our labor force participation rate hasn't ever recovered from 2008.

> Tell that to the guy I hired to bring his team to build fencing recently. He immigrated to the US just 15 years ago,

15 years ago, things were different.

Just like 30 years ago, he would've had even more opportunity.

The data doesn't lie. I've given you links to the hard data proving that the poorest in America work, but don't increase their wealth and can't reliably move from one quintile of wealth to the next.

> Just because lots of people are failing doesn't mean it's difficult.

The data proves that it's much harder today. It gets harder every year that wages continue to remain disconnected from the cost of living, and they detached quite some time ago.

> Oh. My. Lord. HOW DUMB ARE YOU? I gave you the MEDIAN figures.

And they include the highest earners.

> Do you know what median means?

Are you asking me because you don't know?

> Seriously, I'm not debating this with you. I gave you your sources you wanted, and you don't even have the reading/math comprehension of a 14 year old to understand it when the data is distilled down to the most simple presentation possible.

Says the guy ignoring all of the hard data and graphs.

You linked me to landing pages. You have no hard data and it's obvious.


And $67.5k isn't enough to live on. That's why most Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Over 2x as many Americans do compared to Brits.

Yet you try to feebly argue that America's economy is better off, that American workers have more stability. Even though twice as many of them live hand to mouth compared to Brits.

You have no logical argument. You're utterly limited by your lived experiences and seem incapable of looking at hard data and processing it.


idapitbwidiuatabip OP t1_it0fwmp wrote

> How much experience do I need? The healthcare and particularly dentistry that I get here in Northern California is light years ahead of what I got in the UK.

Cool beans. Doesn't change the fact that by objective measurements, the US healthcare system is more expensive and has less desirable outcomes.

Also, you know, millions falling into poverty because of medical costs. That alone puts America's healthcare system far below the UK's.

> Seriously?

I'm glad you found some sources, but your cherry picked bits of data don't refute the more comprehensive scope of my data.

I've proven that economic mobility in America has all but disappeared. The most recent CBO report proves that beyond a doubt.

The facts pertaining to the various healthcare systems also cannot be disputed. America's healthcare system costs more, but our healthcare outcomes are worse and the financial toll it takes on people is far and beyond anything else experienced by anyone else in the world.

Even developing nations have universal healthcare.

> What the fuck are you talking about? The median person in the US earns around double the median person in the UK.

Now calculate it without the top 10%. Even just the top 1% majorly skews things.

> There are literally tens and tens of millions of good jobs. Clearly, obviously, based on them all paying so well.

Then why do most Americans live paycheck to paycheck?

> You needed me to give you citations for headline figures that are readily available.

Because I was hoping you'd come to the realization that headline figures don't ever tell the whole story (which is typical of headlines).

You didn't come to that realization, sadly. A bit too thick, I guess.

> You appear to have no first-hand knowledge,

I've actually lived in Europe for over 10 years and in America for over 10 years so my lived experience is much more reliable than yours.

But I don't invoke it because the data proves my point, and outweighs both of our lived experiences.