He wasn't, but his dad was at the time. That's the point.
My criticism is not of Hunter, but of Joe Biden. The last D president. The most popular D (by votes) in history.
It's worse for people to entirely to benefit purely based on if their dad is in charge. That's nepotism.
However Kushner is in office, he does work on peace deals in the middle east. He has an official title and does work with many countries and many people. It makes sense for him to make connections over there.
It's not unreal to believe he met people in SA and they all wanted to make a business deal on their own. That's individuals making their own decisions at noone's expense. No demands (like firing a prosecutor). Not quid pro quo.
It's unreal to believe Hunter had any knowledge about Ukrainian oil and being paid in diamonds was legit, plus his business partner outed him. And all while his dad was handling relations with that country, and while he bragged about getting the prosecutor fired that was investigating the company. That's quid pro quo. That's nepotism. That's corruption.
He formed an investment group after leaving government. Hunter worked for an oil company (no experience) WHILE his father was overseeing the country relations. And the company he worked for was under investigation for corruption. Joe bragged about getting that prosecutor fired.
Meanwhile Jared got the Abraham Accords and is working on other peace deals.
Hunter was a crackhead being paid in diamonds by a corrupt oil company. Not the same is it?
then it's a terrible system to govern humans under.
your system should work with human nature or it will never work.
capitalism exploits greed to generate prosperity. socialism falls under greed.
and no there's not a better solution, or at least it hasn't been found yet. if it was it'd still be a form of capitalism, not the other side of the spectrum.
but we disagree on the effects of the current system. capitalism has not been at the expense of society, the opposite in fact. we've had so much prosperity due to it.
same with the environment really. communist countries don't really have better air quality, worse in fact! US has the money from capitalism to develop clean tech.
that's what I voted for and I'm happy about it. same for every single person in my circle.
you may not understand the other side because of biases but if you just say "oh 50% must be crazy / be stupid" then noone can have an honest debate. but I guess gone are those days.
so if it's socialism/communism destroying the environment it's a mistake. but if it's capitalism it's by design?
nothing other than the prosperity that capitalism generates is inherently bad for the environment. yeah if you pull people out of poverty their carbon footprint will probably increase. but the alternative is them living in poverty and starving under a communist system (like always)
the amount of goods and services capitalism has generated has saved so many lives. we have huge amounts of excess food we send across the world.
and work on things that would usually be out of my element.
if you aren't thinking more than ever, you're using ai wrong.