Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Jimmy Carter: U.S. Is An 'Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery'" video.

cheesefrommysoul He is only going to compound our problems with more federal government. After he is gone then what?
4
GameDirectorHD Ok, because that has worked out so well in the past.........good luck :)!
2
GameDirectorHD Yes, and everyone is different. When you start mixing more and more people together you get so much diversity it is hard to develop policies that can work. With smaller more local government you can develop policies that work. But with more people it is hard.
2
***** Sorry you can't accept facts.
2
PandemoniumVice "But not only is nothing in religion factual," I agree, it is faith based. " it's also detrimental" Nope, mankind is. "Science is beneficial with proven results." Yes and know. Science also created the atom bomb. Science also leads to chemical warfare. But science isn't to blame, people are. Same with religion. Religion isn't to blame, people are. "Dealing with what is real," No, dealing with what can be predicted with supporting evidence. " Just because you live without doubt," You should always live with doubt. There is no shame in not knowing. Richard Feynman was big on this, which is why he is my favorite scientist. " You can be completely without doubt that the earth is the center of the universe and all the stars are fireflies stuck up there in that big blueish black thing. " You have degrees of certainty, but you are never 100% sure on anything. " Science is about dealing with, and understanding the reality we experience." Science is about predictions. Also, never compare science to religion, they are completely different fields with different goals.
2
Plebeian Who makes the rules and enforces them?
1
matt w You can't compare the min. wage to inflation.
1
Money in politics would not be an issue if the federal government had limited power. I find it amazing how people don't realize this. So say we elect Bernie. After his 4 or 8 years what is going to stop the next president from misusing the power that Bernie has now gave the federal government? You want the people to have influence in the government? Go to state rights and smaller more local government. Do you have a louder voice compared to 300 million people or at you small town or even city of a few million? Think about it. I really don't see how this isn't so hard to understand. Why should a politician like Nancy Pelosi listen to me? I don't vote for her. Or Mitch McConnell, I don't vote for him? But yet those on the political left continue to push to give those people more power. This isn't hard to understand but yet people can't seem to figure it out.
1
GameDirectorHD And those countries have populations that are smaller than most of our states.
1
GameDirectorHD Nothing wrong with a social security net, but we have to keep government in check. We do that by keeping it local. People want to have the federal government do this and thus they do. Meanwhile they are becoming corrupt with their new power. Sure they have social safety nets, but they take donations from their rich buddies and they end up with more power. You have to keep government under control as well and you do that by keeping it as local as possible. Thus state rights and limited federal government.
1
GameDirectorHD You need a federal government to deal with foreign affairs and enforce the constitution. Domestic policies are up to the states. Not every area needs a social safety net, and what kind and how much is hard to answer as well. That is why states take care of it. Bernie Sanders can't control the 535 members of congress.
1
kevin jones Yes he does. He wants the US government to control healthcare and education.
1
kevin jones The US government not allowed to be involved in healthcare and education. Even at that, with education at least the involvement is small. Most funding for K-12 education is from the state. But Sanders wants a program where the fed. pays for 3/4 of college education. That is massive expansion. " Mr. Obama has been laboring to make this involvement more efficient and affordable. " But yet Obamacare has done the opposite. Also the main reason why healthcare is so expensive is because of the federal government. Adding more federal government is going to make it worse.
1
kevin jones Educate our own in what way? Graduating more liberal arts majors isn't going to cut it. Also do you want to give the federal government that much power to control education?
1
***** Most of the poor voted for Obama.
1
***** Define a "red" state. Also I don't consider SF, NY or LA to be educated. But Obama did win the vote of those without a high school diploma.
1
***** What facts did you list? Obama won the votes who are the poorest and least educated. Obama won the votes of those with no high school diploma. Obama won 5 of the top 10 states with the highest poverty rates, including the top 3. What is a sign of an educated and skill population? A strong economy. Just looking at college degrees doesn't show the whole picture. Just because a state has a lot of individuals who possess a college degree doesn't mean they are "educated". Obama won 6 of the top 10 states with lowest graduation rates.
1
***** I accepted them, but you are refusing to look at my facts. As in the top three states in drop out rates voted for Obama. Typical left winger behavior.
1
***** No, it comes down to what is you definition of education? Take 2 groups of 50 people. Group 1 has 40 with college degrees that consents of gender studies and business, and 10 who are high school dropouts. Group 2 has 10 high school dropouts, 10 with only a high school education, and 30 with a college degree consisting of 10 engineers, 10 chemists, 5 business, and 5 music majors. Now which group is more "educated". Group 1 has more college graduates, but of what value? As I showed you there are other ways to determine education. A strong economy is one as I showed you with poverty rates. Or simply finishing high school. You are just cherry picking college degree attainment which is deceptive all around. Who is more educated, someone with a master's degree in art or a bachelor's physics? You blame me for cherry picking when you did it yourself. That is one trait of a liberal. Another is giving deceptive data out. As I just showed you giving college degree attainment is deceptive. If a state like New York has such high education then why are they so high in unemployment and poverty rates? An intelligent person looks beyond what a liberal does. Because you know that requires work, another trait of liberals is refusing to work.
1
Twilight Sparkle You criticize me for lack of a source (even though they are facts someone can easily look up) but not TheSnoopy1750? Really? I see where you alliance lies. You don't have to go to college to be an artist. For engineering you don't have to as well but good luck getting a job or and good luck learning the subject on your own. That is the overall point in that.
1
Twilight Sparkle " but your comment really needed a reality check." Not really, you never called out the other guy for listing "facts" (which to his credit are true in a way, depending on where you look), but you call out me. "Ben Carson: he's a brain surgeon who understands zilch on political matters, to the point of embarrassment." He actually understands a lot about politics. You can look at a lot of fields and see them being experts on that field and ignorant in something else. But what field requires more skill, work and overall intelligence? Art or engineering? Gender studies or physics? History or mathematics? Anyone can read a history book. Anyone can become an artist. But it takes a lot of work to study other fields such as engineering and the physical sciences. Actual intelligence is creativity and problem solving. Just because someone can run off a lot of facts doesn't mean they are intelligent, they are knowledgeable. But saying things that has been said before isn't intelligence.
1
Twilight Sparkle Obama was not appealing to moderates, he was open about his his left wing agenda. You really need to go back and look at what he was saying during his first campaign. "Now tell me, how can there be an answer to a question with infinite variables? What fields are we comparing? Computer science and Musicians? Mechanical Engineers and Sculptures? You cannot put a number on the intelligence of any of these individuals " There as some degrees that require college and some that don't. I am pursuing a PhD in physical chemistry. But I am teaching myself guitar on the side. I don't need a college degree in music to learn how to read music and play guitar. That is my overall point. Some degrees are actually worth something and require work, problem solving skills, and creativity. Others are pointless in in that you obtain the knowledge you need without college. ""Anyone can become an artist" so why don't they?" Several reasons. Why don't I grow a garden? Well time and lack of a yard are reasons. I don't become an artist because it doesn't interest me. If you want to become an artist you don't need to go to college to do so. You don't need college to be develop creativity. "Do you really mean to say that your head is shoved so far and thoroughly up your an ass that only engineers and the like are worth being called "actually intelligent"?" No, but in the end numbers don't lie. Look at the earnings of those with an engineering degree. Consider how the most common degree for CEOs is engineering. They are outside of the box thinkers. I have met some engineers that are not intelligent. I have met some artists who are intelligent, but as a whole those with an engineering degree are more intelligent than an artist. One of the best artists I have ever met has zero college experience. I have yet to meet an engineer who has zero college experience. I work in the physical sciences for a living so I know a lot of engineers too. As a whole you have to look at the big picture. You can point out individual cases, but as a whole engineers are more intelligent than artists.
1
Twilight Sparkle " Oh really? So athletes are some of the smartest people on the planet then? " Athletes are the rare case. Same as looking at individuals you may find the artist who is incredibly intelligent, but as a whole engineers are more intelligent than artists. "So what you're saying is, and do correct me if I'm wrong, but...if you're subject doesn't require college, it obviously means that the person is less intelligent, regardless if they have a PhD of the subject and engineer just barely got their bachelors. " Yes, that is correct. Getting a PhD in art or gender studies doesn't require much skill compare to getting an engineering degree. Getting a PhD is not as hard as what it seems. It is mainly annoying with the politics involved and not worth it a times, but still getting a PhD, especially something like the social sciences isn't hard. "to elect someone into power who would make sure our lives were better." Elect them where? At the federal level or local level? My problem with liberals its that they want to force their beliefs down people's throats at the federal level and end up creating a fascist government. Abortion is a state issue. Gays have the same rights as straights (gay marriage could have easily been solved through the constitution and not through emotions), drugs are a state issue. My problem with liberals is that they feel they are better than others and they know what is right for other people thus they want to use the federal government to force it on others. That is how fascism happens, plus that is how we get a corrupt government. It becomes too powerful for us to control, but liberals lack so much intelligence that they can't realize that. I actually agree with a lot of liberal policies, I am just smart enough to know the proper way to put such policies in place. Liberals instead vote for someone like Obama who expands the power of the federal government. And when another politician gets in power they get bought out by corporations and wonder why. Well, if the federal government had no power to begin with then they can't be bought. There is a reason whey the founding fathers wanted state rights.
1
Beaver Ones Nothing in science is factual, including evolution. What makes science so great is the doubt it contains, thus people like me can do a lot of research to progress us. Saying saying is factual is an actual slap in the face of science.
1
Beaver Ones Nothing in science is factual because in science you have doubt to allow for change. We have certain degrees of certainty and some theories (which are nothing more than predictions) have more supporting evidence than others, but nothing in science is factual. And nothing in science is proven. There are several questions in evolution. All the theory of evolution does is give predictions. Like how gravity predicts that a ball will fall if I let it go. Yes there is a lot of supporting evidence for gravity, but what is gravity? Is it really what we think it is? Evolution has far more many questions. But in the end nothing in science is factual. Science is driven off of doubt.
1
Beaver Ones Well you can say that, but in the late 1800s people though aether and Newtonian Mechanics were factual, but after technology grew new theories developed. Science is mysterious which is why it is interesting.
1
captain mirrorboots Define poor. Those four states you listed are near the top in home ownership rate. To me that is not being poor. Having a lot of money in one state but not being able to purchase anything is not being rich. So saying those states are "poor" is not true. Also, states that are "rich" that typically vote democrats are states like NY and CA, states who are driven economically by trade (Wallstreet) and skilled labor. Doesn't mean they are better, just means they have a different economy. "Poor" states that typically vote republican are more agriculture driven which means lower cost of living. CA is number one in poverty rates if you factor in cost of living. It is also last in literacy rate. NY, Connecticut and Massachusetts are in the top three of highest Gini coefficient. In all there are several factors for all of these stats. But to say that typically the poor and uneducated vote republican is simply not true. I just showed you how areas that are "poor" and have large income inequality vote democrat. Obama won the vote of those without a high school diploma.
1
captain mirrorboots " The paradox is that rich Democrat states with highly educated productive workers pay taxes to subsidise low educated, low productivity Republican states such as Mississipi and Alabama." That is not true. If you want to look at it MS and AL have a large population of black people who statistically are not as educated or have much money.. That plays a role. Also in all of this what is a "democrat state" and what is a "republican state"? The idea that "democrat states" spend tax money on "republican states" has been debunked.
1
captain mirrorboots You call them religious bigots when I view democrats as bigots themselves. They do a great job in calling anyone that disagrees with them names. They attack religious freedoms and use the false idea of "equality" to support it. They call anyone who waves the confederate flag a racist without understanding the symbolism of it. When I view the democrat party I see a lot of fascists that will take great measures to push their ideas on others. For example, a bakery wants to deny a wedding cake for a gay wedding. Not deny service to a gay person but didn't want their cake to be a part of a gay wedding. Democrats then get all mad in that person exercises their rights and uses threat of incarceration to force them to do what democrats feel is "right". Or Planned Parenthood. Defunding it means taking away "women's rights" according to democrats. One, men use planned parenthood as well. Two, women still have the exact same rights as men and equality is them not getting special services. But democrats end up playing the sex card there as well. I am not a republican, but democrats have several problems as well and to me, from my moderate view point, they are far worse than republicans.
1
+peonyfrills Go read the exit polls.
1
+peonyfrills I know. Those with college degrees voted for Romney. As far as post grad is concern that is an area of remaining in academics where you are more or less a government worker as opposed to working in industry, thus they will tend to vote left. With earnings, there is typically a correlation between intelligence and higher earnings. So it is no wonder that those with higher earnings voted for Romney. Also, it is not incorrect to consider some of those earning over $100,000 the middle class depending on where you live. I can see those earning less as the "poor". Minorities usually vote democrats for whatever reason, I still haven't figured out why. When Obama ran we did see a record turnout of the black votes.......I wonder why.
1
Illuminati_watching After he is gone then what?
1
+sally smolich And after her? And what about all of congress?
1
+sally smolich The majority of the people don't even know what goes on outside of their own backyard. Is that their fault? No. Most people just want to mind their own business. That one of the reasons why the founding fathers created state rights and a limited federal government, it was to create a checks and balance system to where we had government and control over it. You can't expect people to know what is going on all the time, zero progress will get done. That is why we need to push for smaller more local government.
1