It doenst mention vitamin d, it is not my fault thet are bad at explaining. Vitamin d is important to the immune system. Formal citation : J Investig Med. 2011 Aug; 59(6): 881–886.
https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/jimcrow/struggle_president.html
Theres the infrastructure
The problem isn’t that the your cite doesn’t mention vitamin D; it’s that your cite says that we need to consider the possibility that drug use might increase COVID susceptibility, but we really don’t know. That does not support your assertion that drug use definitely increases COVID. “We don’t know” is in fact the exact opposite of “we know.” You are attempting to use a cite that says the opposite of what you claim.
Likewise, your cite about Jim Crow does not even mention subsidies (for infrastructure or anything else), and your cut-and-paste about Soviet trade does not support your argument about alleged Russian resource depletion as a cause for the breakup of Yugoslavia.
It has the words vitamin d in the title. maybe you didn’t see the cite.
Look for “infrastructure” on that page.
The CIA predicted the collapse of the eastern bloc due to oil
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000498607.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjos8GPwaXqAhWFvp4KHUDMAs8QFjAAegQIARAC&usg=AOvVaw3maUzpqKEBVDPsGsSEibrr
It’s ironic you ask for vast pages of cites on complex topics and read none of them. No problem though. I think i have already explained.
I was referring to your earlier cite to NIAD’s note on COVID-19, which doesn’t mention vitamin D. Your cite about vitamin D doesn’t mention COVID-19. Which one of these cites are you using to support your earlier statement that minority persons are at an enhanced risk of COVID-19 due to drug use?
What “subsidies” are mentioned on that page, and where does it say anything about subsidies continuing in the South for more than a century?
-
That cite says that Soviet oil production would peak no later than the early 1980s at between 11 and 12 million barrels/day, and would thereafter decline sharply. In this reality, however, Russia alone in 2019 produced 10.8 million barrels per day, while Kazakhstan added 1.8 million, Azerbaijan added 767,000 barrels, and other ex-Soviet republics added more. How does this reality comport with the CIA’s prediction?
-
Even accepting the CIA’s prediction as true, the cite merely says that the USSR “will find it extremely difficult to continue to simultaneously meet its own requirements and those of Eastern Europe while exporting to non-Communist countries on the present scale”; what in that necessarily leads to the collapse of the Eastern Bloc?
-
Even when the Eastern Bloc did collapse, none of the Soviet client states in eastern Europe (Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, East Germany, Romania, or Czechoslovakia) had a civil war, yet they were all tied much more tightly to the USSR than Yugoslavia, which broke apart in a whole series of civil wars. How do you explain that divergence?
I am reading your citations. They do not support your arguments, and no, you are not explaining anything.
Ethnicity. The rest of Eastern Europe haad been ethnically cleansed in the post war years. Ironically, Hitler won the war against multiculturalism. Almost all those states had very diverse populations prewar and were virtually mono-ethnic after the forced repatriations.
I forgot to also mention religion. Yugoslavia was essentially one peoples separated by three religions.
Like I said, there is not a citation for covid.
It wotn let me paste but it clearly mentions infrastructure. Perhaps I’ll drop that point because of the paste.
Obviously that is heavy oil and the conventional soviet oil has peaked. The cia predictions were almost perfect. I think there are other threads here, maybe they were deleted. If so fire the mods.
In general resources promote centralization, ie, it is easier to control a populace when resources are in one place. Communism happens in countries that are self sufficient in resources. It is not an ideology, it is the result if resource abundance combined with weak institutions. Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran have iron and oil. The communist countries which survived independent of Soviet aid were all the only countries with both iron and energy. The united states and canada are the only other country with iron and oil resources. The only other significant iron producers are Sweden, Mauritania, china, south africa, ukraine, india, Brazil, and Chile, none of which have consistent and significant oil exports. The other cause of communism is agricultural areas near trade centers eg kerala, possibly north Korea.
All ideologies have a geographic basis: Fascism happens in countries where the welfare state developed rapidly or unevenly with regional differences, like the med countries or the most urbanized state of Gemrany. The welfare state is urbanization; a high land to capital ratio removes agriculture and manufacturing in favor of services, which are insecure. Monarchism, feudalism are simply scaled down welfare states. Climate explains the rise and fall of empires, as do resources.
All wars happen when calories per capita fall below 2000, and no serious wars happen above that point.
It’s all pretty commonsense, geography determines what happens and the results are logical. Ideology just justifies the only possible physical reality that already exists in an area. If you dont have resources, you cant have Communism, and if you do they don’t matter.
Southern Democrats accepted Republican Rutherford B. Hayes’ election in exchange for the promise of more federal aid for rebuilding the Southern infrastructure and less federal intervention in Southern politics
Well, I’d argue the aftermath of World War I started the process of the breakup of multi-ethnic states, but yes, the Yugoslav wars were mostly about which group(s) were the “rightful” occupants and which ones weren’t, which has nothing to do with Obama’s argument that it was all about Russian oil.
You’ve said this before, but can you point to any federal aid for infrastructure actually implemented in 1877 (or, indeed, in any of the following fifty years or so) that you think acted to keep the ex-Confederate states in check?
Then do you have a reason or basis for making the claims you did about COVID and drug use, or were you just making it up?
The dominant grade of Russian oil today, accounting for 80% of their exports, is Urals blend, which is a blend of Urals-Volga heavy sour oil and lighter oil from West Siberia. Your CIA cite (p. 2) says most Soviet production came from the Urals and Volga region, followed by West Siberia. Urals Blend is a conventional oil obtained by conventional drilling techniques; Russia does very little fracking or other unconventional extraction, and Putin is fiercely critical of shale oil. (Hint; when crude oil is described as a “heavy sour oil,” that doesn’t necessarily make it “unconventional.” )
Russia wasn’t self-sufficient in 1917; neither was China in 1949. Cuba was propped up by Soviet subsidies for three decades; Venezuela has been teetering on the brink of economic catastrophe for years. (Iran isn’t communist.) Your statements are not supported by history.
Cite? German civilians were entitled to 2600-2700 calories daily even under late-1930s rationing (pregnant women, soldiers, and some other groups received higher allotments). That didn’t stop Germany from starting what I consider to be a very serious war indeed.
The United States and Germany both have iron and coal; do they therefore have identical histories or ideologies? Um, no. Your “commonsense” is nonsense.
Germany was always oil dependent. Soviet was not. Nor was china. Communism typically has high capital imports relative to exports. Although Russia was like that in the 19th century, it was Baku oil that caused communism and made it truly self sufficient after ww1. Although it continued importing capital it was fine in resources.
Cuba was propped by venezula in the 90s. It is growing its iron and oil. Iran is anti western and partially socialist. It describes itself as Islamic socialism because it happens to have more history there.
The red states get federal infrastructure to this day, it’s in the budget.
The us was agricultural. A quarter of its exports.
Screenshot_20200628-220441_Office Mobile|230x500
Screenshot_20200628-220534_Chrome|230x500
9b exports, 2.5b agriculture.
Germany was being agriculturally obliterated. It kept attacking to fund food imports.
Screenshot_20200628-221212_Chrome|230x500
The basis for the covid drug use claim is that government article.
Oil isn’t the only resource, and being self-sufficient in oil is not the same thing as being economically self-sufficient. Russia was not “fine in resources” after World War I, as it had to import non-ferrous metals, most kinds of machinery, cotton and other textiles, and even some coal (among other goods).
And it was propped up by the USSR before that. It became communist in 1959. If, as you say, “Communism happens in countries that are self sufficient in resources,” why did it need propping up from 1959 onward? You’re just making stuff up.
Okay, and what does that have to do with the history of communism? You’re just making stuff up.
I ask, AGAIN, for evidence of federal infrastructure subsidies in the aftermath of the Compromise of 1877. You’re just making stuff up.
The first of these shows the decline of US-government-financed agricultural exports as privately-financed exports take up the slack, 1955-1980 (mostly because the value of non-governmental exports increased greatly); the other shows the average value of US exports, 1950-2020. How do either of these relate to your argument?
Germany produced or imported enough food to provide 2600 calories per capita to its populace, and it started a war while doing so. How does that relate to your argument that wars don’t happen when calories per capita are above 2000?
Assuming “that government article” is the one that says we need to watch to see if substance abuse is related to COVID susceptibility, that does NOT provide support or basis for your claim that substance abuse is definitely related to COVID. If you do not have a basis for your claim, then you’re just making stuff up.
Like I said, you win by default incovid.
Without the exports from countries it kept attacking germany would be below 2000.
The us was an oil importer since 1943.
Screenshot_20200628-231608_Chrome|230x500
Before then it was agrarian
distoflaborforcebysector|640x435
https://www.google.com/amp/s/historycooperative.org/compromise-of-1877/amp/
Federal funding of the construction of another transcontinental railroad in the South. The North already had a transcontinental railroad that had been subsidized by the government, and the South wanted one too. Although support for federal railroad subsidies was unpopular among Northern Republicans because of the scandal surrounding railroad construction under Grant, the transcontinental railroad in the South would, in effect, become a literal “road to reunion.”
On January 12, 1883 the southern section of the second transcontinental railroad line was completed as the Southern Pacific tracks from Los Angeles meet the Galveston, Harrisburg and San Antonio Railway at a location three miles west of the Pecos River near Langtry, Texas.
Some more on the southern strategy and highways
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-platform-1956
have eliminated a host of needless controls. To meet the immense demands of our expanding economy, we have initiated the largest highway, air and maritime programs in history, each soundly financed.
the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South who had traditionally supported the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party. It also helped to push the Republican Party much more to the right.[4]
In other words, as infrastructure was expanding under Republicans, they were becoming more southern- the south wanted infrastructure.
“Many neighborhoods, predominantly black, were wiped out and turned into surface parking and highways,” Norton says, noting Black Bottom and Paradise Valley in Detroit, historical neighborhoods that were torn down to make way for I-375.
The highway system was part of the racial policy of the southern strategy it seems.
The disagreement between Republicans and Democrats is not about highway spending, it’s about local control that allows these things.
@Obama:
In post 1 you talked about incest and population growth. By your second post, you switched to peak oil production. Half a dozen posts later you started talking about the covid-19 pandemic. In the following dozens of posts you talked about various political systems, failing economies of the eastern block, geographic influences on socio-political outcomes, drug use and vitamins, reformation and reconstruction, and probably a number of other topics I can’t recall.
What is it that you hope to achieve with this gish-gallop debate strategy? Have you achieved it? How do you know?
Out of curiosity: Why did you pick that specific user name?
It’s all connected, man!