News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
When the permanent unemployment rate starts to hit 25% or more, we are either going to have to have UBI, or reduce the population by the unemployment rate.
Which solution will be endorsed by which party, and how will they implement that solution?
Be reminded that Stephen "PeeWee Himmler" Miller has already told Trump that he wants to reduce the population of America from 350 million to 100 million. That's about a 70% reduction. What do you suppose his "solution" would be?
Vietnam and McNamara conveniently reduced the unemployment rate. Trump just bombed Nigeria and has eyes on Venezuela. History may not repeat but it often rhymes.
Unemployment during Vietnam was about as low as it is today.
The real human demand of Vietnam was with a very narrow subset of the population - young men between the ages of 17 and 45 (with a heavy bias towards the lower end) - for a comparatively limited term of service (average 1 year). By contrast, the Iraq War didn't employ youth conscription. It used the "backdoor draft" to deploy national guard reservists and to force existing enlisted troops back into repeated deployments for upwards of eight years. That also didn't have a meaningful impact on unemployment during the Bush Administration (notable for a comparatively high unemployment rate, particularly post 2006).
Trump doesn't fix a flood of unemployed people (particularly older people) with war. If anything, he just amplifies the domestic dissent against his administration, which will likely result in more economic pain and higher rates of joblessness.
Water wars, climate disaster, will lead to lives lost. Food scarcity, antivax, cutting the social safety net further, lack of education...
We need to retire that slogan. History is absolutely repeating.
I don't care how racist/fascist/terrible you are, how the fuck would the country run with so few people? Like, the population would have to be consolidated to one general area right?
Like say for instance it happens, there are now only 100 million Americans living in the US; where are they all living? Northeast close to New York and DC? Closer to California and Nevada? Or are they all just gonna be spread out across the country that everything is going to be small-town America again?
Only a few thousand will live privileged lives. The rest will serve them. If they don't like it, they can arrange to be unemployed, but since unemployment is now criminalized, with the punishment being the death penalty, it is unlikely there will be much conflict.