• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Serotoninluv

  • Rank
    - - -
  • Birthday 12/31/1969

Personal Information

  • Location
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

10,873 profile views
  1. @whoareyou I don't disagree with you. I also don't resonate with establishment/corporate dems and I'm highly critical of them. The same establishment dems that lost in 2016 want to go with Hilary 2.0 (Joe Biden). As you say, they haven't learned their mistake. . . Trump resonated with a lot of people and he did work hard. I live in Michigan and saw it first hand. This was a blue state for federal elections. Hilary took Michigan for granted and didn't even visit as we approached the election. Yet Trump did. He came here, worked hard and resonated with a lot of people sick of politics as usual - and Hilary represented politics as usual. Whenever I asked a Trump supporter why they liked Trump, they responded: "He speaks his mind", "He is the only one who says what people are thinking", "He isn't a politician". In their eyes, this gave him immunity to all his inappropriate behavior. I'm just pointing out that Trump does not have a large base of support. He has a very passionate base of minority support. He has never had majority support. He hasn't even had a plurality of support. I doubt he wins the popular vote in 2020. He will need to strategically work the electoral college to his advantage. That's how the current system is and part of the game.
  2. I'm not questioning the validity of the win. I am questioning the underlying assumption of popularity. Quite often people speak in terms of popularity as if Trump was the most popular candidate in the 2016 election. Trump was not the most popular candidate, he was the second most popular candidate. The electoral system is clearly biased. It is not a left vs. right thing or my narrative or your narrative. A voter in California is weighed less than a voter in Wyoming. That is a bias. We could have a discussion of whether the bias is justified, yet it is still a bias. There are times when biases have practical value. . . The electoral college has been biased since it's inception. People started getting upset with the inherent bias of the electoral college with Bush vs. Gore, when Gore won the popular vote and Bush won the electoral contest. Of course people weren't upset before then. If the electoral result is aligned with the popular vote, there is no issue. It is when the two are uncoupled that there is an issue.
  3. Have you considered not watching porn for 30-60 days to see what happens?
  4. @skywords Welcome to the forum. I love your avatar and all the bicycles in davis.
  5. There might be a subtle correlation in there. . .
  6. Is it possible that most humans cannot perceive of plant perceptions because humans are perceiving through a human filter? You also mention how humans perceive calculators. Is it possible that AI will develop perception that humans cannot currently conceive of? Because they are contracted to believe that human perception is perception. Perhaps human perception is one form of perceptual expression. I've had some experiences with trees that suggest there is something going on that the vast majority of humans are not currently in tune with. Yet maybe I'm just hallucinating.
  7. @Synchronicity When you say that there are 5D timelines to the "right" and "left" of ours, is there inter-relatedness between all the timelines? You mention that multiple timelines is an example of a 5D duality. In 3D/4D, all dualities have inter-relationships. So I'm curious if multiple 5D timelines would be distinct, or inter-related and able to influence each other and the standard 4D timeline. . . I think time is one of the most interesting phenomena.
  8. You are using right-wing talking points. Dems are not for "open borders". That is a hardcore republican frame.
  9. Of course. In terms of biology, high levels of testosterone promote male sex characteristics. Yet we can create a biological construct of male and female biological sex - as well as a construct of male and female gender. Of course these will be inter-related, yet you seem to be combining both constructs into one physical construct that biological sex = gender identity. There are distinctions we can draw.
  10. @Bodigger To me you appear to be offering frames from a perspective on the right. From that filter, the policies will appear as being far left. For example, the tax rate on the wealthy is now the lowest in U.S. history. The wealthy now have a lower tax rate than the middle-class. From the perspective of the uber wealthy and anti-tax republicans, the wealthy are paying their fair share of taxes and taxes are bad. Yet most American's support a progressive tax structure in which the top 1% pay a higher tax rate. Regarding M4A. . . M4A is a most likely a more efficient system than private. Even the strongly conservative Mercatus study (funded by the Koch brothers) intended to show M4A as being outrageously more expensive - concluded that M4A would save about 7% under an efficient scenario and cost about 7% more under an inefficient scenario. So the range is about the same cost. And that is from a conservative anti-M4A group. For the sake of argument, we could say that M4A is roughly the same cost as private. . . However, regarding quality and coverage - there is no comparison. Public health care is by far a more ethical, just system of health care that would raise the overall community health. . . Think about it: the health care industry profits off of human illness. There entire business model is to squeeze out as much profit out of human illness. Health care and pharmaceutical executives are making outrageous profits over sick people and denying people as much coverage as possible. Hundreds of billions in profits over people suffering. It has gotten so extreme that pharmaceutical executives intentionally got people addicted to opioids in the midwest to raise their profits. The records and courts have shown that they new exactly what they were doing. Intentionally getting people addicted and to opioids and experiencing suffering on a massive scale. This is private corporate health care. It is inhuman and barbaric. There is an extreme conflict of interest that is unethical and should be removed. It is why ever developed country (other than the U.S.) has switched to public health care. Once the U.S. goes public, we will never go back. . . Imagine private fire departments that had a business model of profiting off of people's houses burning down and denying as much coverage as possible. Imagine hundreds of thousands of people going bankrupt and homeless because they couldn't afford to pay the fire department. That would be demented and cruel. Overall, I think a nonprofit public health care system is far more ethical and superior than a for-profit private health care system. I haven't seen any argument against this foundation. One may argue that the government is corrupt and incompetent and would screw up health care, yet that is another argument that I would consider relatively weak.
  11. @Giulio Bevilacqua What is there to trust or distrust about a feeling? A feeling is a feeling. It is actual. It seems like you are asking whether to trust the thought story of meaning related to the feeling.
  12. Yes! A great series about self actualization and consciousness. One of my favorites. Season 3 coming soon!
  13. I think humans are much further away from that type of empathy. Humans relate closer to animals that look and behave similar to humans.
  14. If you say so, it is so for you. It looks like you’ve made up your mind.
  15. Trump lost the popular vote by a large margin: 3 million votes. To suggest he was more popular in the 2016 is inaccurate and misleading. He was an unpopular with the people and was able to win with a minority of votes through a biased electoral system.