Comments by "Ōkami-san" (@mweibleii) on "David Pakman Show" channel.

  1. 1
  2. 1
  3. 1
  4. 1
  5. 1
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. biscuithammer00 It's not complicated. I've worked in large governmental organizations, at the end of the day most of the 'professionals' running these institutions made their way up the public service ladder kissing arse, saying the right things, and making the right friends. If you think public 'servants' give two shits about the public - you are naive'. This narrative works for the CIA - that's why you think it's real. In reality though, it's not real. I know of someone right now, who spent 100s of millions 'curing' a disease, he's being given an award this year, he made everything up. And that was at a small public institution. While I've never worked in anything like the CIA, I have worked in institutions that spend billions each year (wasting most of it) - with little to nothing at all to show for it (like our war on terror, or war on drugs, or war on privacy, and etc....). Luckily for them, the public keeps paying their taxes - like the suckers we are. I imagine, a big scary WMD does wonders for bottom line of the people in the MIC (who made trillions over this lie) and with the supposed Russia Hack (that never happened) this both helps the CIA's bottom line (those $600 million dollar cloud servers don't come cheap - and cost a lot to maintain and upgrade) and probably is payback for some favors along the way. What better to get more money out of a stupid public, than to play on the public's fear of big scary Russians. A trick as old as time. Gaius Marius made good use of this trick to rule Rome as a Dictator for a time near the end of the Republic. Anyway, the fact is, there is no evidence of a Russian hack. Just the lies of known liars. AND ALL of the evidence that there is, all suggests it was not a Hack, but a DNC insider who took data from a server he had legal access to because of the way Sanders was being railroaded by the corrupt DNC. The blood- sperm spirit soup being an accidental discovery, and one you'd expect from these creeps. Anyway, I'm looking forward to leaving the USA, this ship and been sinking for years and is now taking on water like never before. Don't be surprized if you're not call upon to 'defend' the nation from Russians and sent to die in another phony war like the one's we waging today.
    1
  20. biscuithammer00 LOL I can see you have never worked in a large public institution and have little idea how things actually work. Your role in all of this, as far as your public servants are concerned, is to shut up, pull the magic voting lever right or left, and (importantly) keep paying your income taxes, state taxes, local taxes, etc... don't question the system itself, just play your part as tax chattel. And, if you don't think there's people who'd love nothing better than a war with Russia, think again. I've worked in both public and private and while both have good and bad people, I've only met true sociopaths in the public institutions. My guess is private corporations generally flush these types of people or restrict their movement simply because they cost money. A problem that governmental institutions don't have to worry as much about. As for Trump having dealing in Russia - and? You could say the same of Apple, Microsoft, Boeing, GM, GE, IBM, etc... etc... Lastly: One more time, there is ZERO evidence of Russian Hacks altering the election - let alone Putin himself. There's very good evidence of a DNC insider leaking emails. How do we know this? Because the person he/they/she leaked the emails to SAID THAT THE EMAILS CAME FROM A DNC INSIDER. Jesus H Christ. How much more do you need?!? You're going to take the work of the CIA - the same bullshitters who lied us into attacking Iraq? WMD ring any bells? On the one hand you have ZERO evidence of Russian hackers and on the other you have an actual person saying yes, we received the emails from a DNC staffer who was pissed over how the corrupt Clinton Campaign was railroading Bernie Sanders. You can choose which you want to believe. It's not going to change what actually happened.
    1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. Gene Starwind I don't disagree a 'strong' (whatever this means) middle class is good for society. This is achieved by having more freedoms, not less. More.  If we want the price of labor to be higher, then we need to drive up the demand for labor by reducing the supply of labor. Competition for the remaining labor will push up the price naturally. Artificially pushing up the price, will simply drive up inflation (which is what happens - leaving the poor that didn't get a job stuck with the inflation but no job). Of course, since we're talking about money, this is a huge part of the problem. We need a new way to generate money such that there's different types of money. To reduce the supply of labor we could (1) Eliminate Government Schools (and their 1 in 5 functional illiterate graduation rate) and bring in pedagogy competition. Oh, but so-called Progressive's like David here would demagogue this saying we don't care about the children.  (2) Eliminate regulations that act as barriers to entry into the markets. But, but so-called Progressive's like David here would demagogue this saying we don't care about the safety. (3) Eliminate licencing scams and rent-seeking, but so-called Progressive's like David here would demagogue this saying we don't care about the Government Unions et.al. (4) End Income Tax / the tax on labor. But so-called Progressive's like David here would demagogue this saying we don't care about the Good of Society.  There's plenty of things we could do to enlarge the middle class and make labor more valuable. But, Progressives will never, ever, in a million years, allow us the freedom to do so.  I've lived in countries where the minimum wage is $15/hr. A 200 gram bag of chips cost $4.99, a can of Coke $2, and value meal at McDonald's would run about $12 and get this, the poor are still poor, the middle class is trapped paying ungodly tax and it's nearly impossible to do anything because everyone is working 80 hrs a week (mother's a fathers - leaving children in day care all week) just to scrap by. But, don't worry, we're not going to become a freer society. We're going to become less free and more socialistic. We will lose more civil liberties, it will be harder to start a business, the poor will be poorer and we'll all get used to the NSA keeping an eye on the economy for us. Given this has already happened, it's just more of the same. So, expect more of the same for the next 3 - 4 decades. 
    1
  28. Hi eyelashes look strange to me. Is that normal? I don't think "Obama" has the time to worry about something so petty as a place card, he's too busy promising free stuff while paying for more drone attacks and spying on us via the NSA. Note: USDA "Organic" is a great example of Government Oligarchy. There used to be plenty of private companies (ex: American Heart Association) that would work towards certifying food as heart safe or organic. The thugs over at the USDA used their legal means in their attempts to steal and to monopolize this market. Currently, as we speak, the thugs that run the USDA are hard at work putting actual organic certification business OUT of business. It's kind of hard to compete against 'free' / tax payer funded.  One day there will ONLY be the USDA as the will have used their Government monopoly to put ALL of their competitors out of businesses - at that time, the USDA "organic" certification will be turned over to Monsanto et.al. and we as a nation will continue our march to our Socialistic Progressive Utopia where the Government takes care of everything for us. Enjoy the USDA "regulated" boiled in ammonia off cuts, snout, hooves, tail, hair, bone mixed with food coloring / Pink Slime that the USDA "regulates" is fit for human consumption. Only an IDIOT would think the USDA should be allowed to regulate what is classified as organic or all natural. Let the courts set a legal precedence as to how these terms are defined and then let private companies, people who actually care about organic foods, compete to apply their must more rigorous certifications. 
    1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. MindEFX wrote: "Regulation:  Milk must be removed after its expiration date. Law: Milk was not removed and the law was broke, people may get sick and you get sued by the sick people.   Can you give me any bad regulation, just name one?" Yes, THIS is an example of 'Bad' regulation. Or, to be more precise, an immoral regulation. Why? Well, you'd first have to study Ethics and learn what morality is and is not. I'll condense this 2500 year old field into a shortened version here. The Law is there to ensure a contract is upheld (unwritten and written). The Law also 'protects' your Property (your body). Therefor, if you bought milk and it was assumed to be for eating - you could go to a court if you bought some milk and it was off. If you got sick, you could sue for damages. If the milk had accidentally gone off, most shop owners will replace it. If they did not, you would use the Law to ensure you received compensation. If the shop owner was pretending to sell 'milk' but in reality it was white colored water - this is fraud. Again, no need of regulation as the Law makes this illegal. If the milk had a protein in it that made you sick. Again, no need of regulation as this is property damage (your body was damaged). The FACT when one lives in a country with sound Law there is NO NEED of regulation. So? You must be wondering why we have regulation. This is what is interesting. The Regulation is NOT there to protect YOU. It's there to protect the milk producer FROM YOU. You see, the Law protects YOU. But who protects the producer from YOU and your fraudulent claims? Regulation. See, when you claim the milk made you sick, the producer will say "I make milk according to regulation, I am inspected, the FSA approves my farm, etc... and I have papers to prove I have met every inspection satisfactory".  In this way, you will receive nothing in compensation EVEN IF YOU WERE SICK.  I'm pretty sure you haven't the slightest idea how any of this stuff works.  You're what is commonly referred to as a Statheist. Someone who blindly follows the State and believes it's media arm without really understanding much of anything. You 'think' you understand history, law, ethics, logic, etc... but, you are clueless as to all of these subjects.  Example, do you know how a logical argument is structured? Do you know what a major premise is? Do you know what a truth statement is?  Anyway, why is this regulation immoral? Because IF a farmer were to sell perfectly fine raw milk to a customer and that customer wanted to and bought it, it would be in violation of a 'regulation' and the State would initiate violence against innocent (implicit not explicit) people. The initiation of violence against innocent people is immoral.  
    1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1