Comments by "Newbie Prepper" (@newbieprepper8451) on "The Rational National" channel.

  1. 52
  2. 37
  3. 34
  4. 32
  5. 29
  6. 25
  7. 23
  8. 23
  9. 22
  10. 19
  11. 17
  12. maybe they look funny at you because you are part of the neighborhood watch and they are up to no good and dont want to get caught, ever think of that? in all that time living in the neighborhood, have you reached out to your neighbors? im not saying this to be mean, but here is an example. i live in Chicago, and there was a neighborhood that i lived in for about 7 years, all single family homes, i knew the people in the house on each side of me and the house across the street from me and 1 of the houses on the other end of the block. i didnt know anyone else on my block. im white, and the rest of the block was mostly white except for 1 spanish family that no one liked for various reasons and one family that was black that mostly kept to themselves. there was one summer where we decided to throw a block party, i went around and put up flyers on every door of every house on both sides of the street, less than half actually contributed, the rest were skitish, i made it a point to invite the black family in person by knocking on their door. the father was some teacher and the mother was a nurse and they had 2 preteen kids. i convinced them to come out to the block party, we blocked off the street and everyone was sociable. even the people that didnt contribute came out of their shell to at least look around and investigate. sometimes people want to keep to themselves for various reasons, one of those reasons being the misconception that they dont fit in or its not really their neighborhood. maybe, sometimes, people need to be reached out to. just because people live in a neighborhood does not mean that people automatically reach out and are friendly, some people are skitish or weary.
    16
  13. 14
  14. 13
  15. 12
  16. 12
  17. 11
  18. 11
  19. 11
  20. 11
  21. 11
  22. 10
  23. 10
  24. 10
  25. 9
  26. 9
  27. 9
  28. 9
  29. 8
  30. 8
  31. 8
  32. 8
  33. 8
  34. 8
  35. 8
  36. 8
  37. 7
  38. 7
  39. 7
  40. 7
  41. 7
  42. 7
  43. 7
  44. 7
  45. 7
  46. 7
  47. 7
  48. 7
  49. 7
  50. 6
  51. 6
  52. 6
  53. 6
  54. 6
  55. 6
  56. 6
  57. 6
  58. 6
  59. 6
  60. 6
  61. 6
  62. 6
  63. 6
  64. 6
  65. 6
  66. 6
  67. 6
  68. 6
  69. 6
  70. 6
  71. 6
  72. 5
  73. 5
  74. 5
  75. 5
  76. 5
  77. 5
  78. 5
  79. 5
  80. 5
  81. 5
  82. 5
  83. 5
  84. 5
  85. 5
  86. 5
  87. 5
  88. 5
  89. 5
  90. 5
  91.  @randyrederson4860  most of the 1st world nations are in Europe, and they were put into the position of giving free healthcare to their citizens because of 2 massive wars that damaged their populations. there are a few countries that are not in that position, one of them being Canada, but there are several differences that separate Canada and the US. 1. population size, its easier to provide a service to the whole population if that population is 1/10 the size? looking at google, Canadas population is 37.5 million people, it is efectively cheaper. 2. prices. everyone knows that drug prices and most medical apparatus prices are cheaper in Canada than the US, and that is a failing on the politicians not bringing big pharma to task. 3 level of service. i did a simple google search on "waiting time for doctors in Canada vs US" and this is what i found on the 1st page, second result, from wikipedia.org. so not some obscure refference. In the U.S. the average wait time for a first-time appointment is 24 days (≈3 times faster than in Canada); wait times for Emergency Room (ER) services averaged 24 minutes (more than 4x faster than in Canada); wait times for specialists averaged between 3–6.4 weeks (over 6x faster than in Canada). so while yes, your health system covers everyone, im wondering if its worth the wait, i mean, 3-6 weeks wait time for a specialist is rough enough, now imagine waiting 6 times as long for that. not to bash on Canada, i like our neighbors up north, but im keen on anyone claiming their system is better asside from the extremely long wait times for something as critical as healthcare. 4. spending on wars. unfortunately, our government spends a lot on the military, most of that is due to the military industrial complex, while a large part of it is due to a lot of our "allies" in NATO not footing thier bill and leaving the slack for the US to pick up. and if we dare challenge our "allies" to foot their proper bill then most of the time they balk and claim we are bad friends. that just one thing i nitpick out of a myriad of problems. now with all that said, can i come to Canada and get free heart surgery without being a citizen or am i going to get treated like one of those people living under the bridge? a quick google search pointed me to the first listing on the search page from internations.org that states that Canadas healthcare system is not so generous to ex-pats and non-residents. and a slew of other hits state that there is private health insurance and about 90% of canadians are covered by private health insurance from their employers. so if there is free healthcare in Canada, why do Canadians feel the need to get private health insurance? its not something that im willing to dig deeper into. funny thing is, there are laws in the US that forbid a hospital or a medical facility from turning away a patient based on their ability to pay, so one of those 500,000 Americans living under a bridge can walk into a hospital ER with a broken arm and they will get taken care of. i cant say if Canada has a similar law, but im pretty sure and positive that they do.
    5
  92. 5
  93. 5
  94. 5
  95. 5
  96. 5
  97. 5
  98. 5
  99. 5
  100. 5
  101. 4
  102. 4
  103. 4
  104. 4
  105. 4
  106. 4
  107. 4
  108. 4
  109. 4
  110. 4
  111. 4
  112. 4
  113. 4
  114. 4
  115. 4
  116. 4
  117. 4
  118. 4
  119. 4
  120. 4
  121. 4
  122. 4
  123. 4
  124. 4
  125. 4
  126. 4
  127. 4
  128. 4
  129. 4
  130. 4
  131.  @nrf91  valid point, and i tend to agree, Rittenhouse should not have been there. but given that Rittenhouse worked there, and had friends there, and there are some reports claiming he had family there, that creates a connection to the community in the same way that Trevon had a connection to the community he was walking through. in either case, it is wrong simply to attack someone for believing that person does not belong there, and it is disgustingly wrong to actually stalk someone because that shows intent to attack. what did Rittenhouse do to deserve being attacked? its all in the eye of the beholder, people say he was a threat because he had a gun, even though he never used his gun or even pointed it at anyone that was not directly attacking him. same question about Trevon, what did he do to deserve being stalked and attacked? he simply walked through a neighborhood where someone else perceived him as a threat. as for you trying to say that "If anything, Zimmerman, another cop wannabe with a gun who used it to kill innocent people, is the better analogy." shows that you think Rosenbaun was innocent, even though you admit in your first sentence that Rosenbaum was acting as the agressor. you cant have it both ways, either Rosenbaum was the aggressor or he was innocent, and if you think he was innocent then him stalking and attacking what he perceived as a threat was justified. and if stalking and attacking someone you perceive as a threat is justified then please go tell Trevons parents that Zimmerman was justified in stalking and attacking Trevon. the whole event boils down to this. Rosenbaum had several interactions with Rittenhouse that night before being shot, and at no point during those interactions did Rosenbaum try to attack Rittenhouse because he perceived him as a threat since Rittenhouse was open carrying the whole entire time. you cant argue that that someone who sees a man with a gun doesnt think of him as a threat and doesnt disarm him but then later decides that he is a threat when that "threat" has done nothing threatening the whole time. its like me sitting in a park and you walk by with a gun and i dont try to disarm you but later i try to disarm you even though you have done nothing to become a threat, i didnt perceive you as a threat the first or the second time i saw you with a gun, and you didnt use the gun in a threatening manner, so how can i argue that i seen you as a threat the 3rd time around?
    4
  132. 4
  133. 4
  134. 4
  135. 4
  136. 4
  137. 4
  138. 4
  139. 4
  140. 4
  141. 4
  142. 4
  143. 4
  144. 4
  145. 4
  146. 4
  147. 4
  148. 4
  149. 4
  150. 4
  151. 4
  152. 4
  153. 4
  154. 4
  155. 4
  156. 4
  157. 4
  158. 4
  159. 4
  160. 4
  161. 3
  162. 3
  163. 3
  164. 3
  165. 3
  166. 3
  167. 3
  168. 3
  169. 3
  170. 3
  171. 3
  172. 3
  173. 3
  174. 3
  175. 3
  176.  @f3tsch906  ok, so lets see, all the points made at 2:25 1. refused to punish Kyle for violating terms of his bail - judges perrogative, plenty of judges do that plenty of times. 2. excluded evidence of rittenhouses behaviour before and after the shooting, same way the judge excluded evidence of Rosenbaums behaviour before and skateboard mans behaviour before, which would have characterized them both as having a pattern of abusive and violent behaviour spanning years. you should be happy the judge did not allow the defense to characterize the 2 people shot as violend wife beaters and PEDOPHILES, because that would make the jury hate them and clear Rittenhouse on day 1. 3. allowed the defense to charecterize the people Rittenhouse killed as rioters - BECAUSE THEY WERE, even the prosecution in its closing argument characterized them as rioters by listing all the things they did, such as tip over portapotties and set things on fire and flip over trucks and such. 4. yelled at prosecutors in front of the jury - judges tend to do that, especially when prosecutors break the rules set by the judge, or even worse, when prosecutors VIOLATE a defendants constitutional rights, or even more worse, when prosecutors TAMPER with evidence. he is lucky that all he got was yelled at, if i was the judge i would immediately slam the gavel down and declare a mistrial with prejudice, no matter who the defendant was, because you can not have a fair trial if the state violates your rights and then makes up evidence. 5. dismissed a gun charge - plenty of times judges dismiss charges in a case, sometimes judges even dismiss entire cases. if there is doubt to the intent of a law, then perhaps the law is flawed and the charges should be dismissed.
    3
  177. 3
  178. 3
  179. 3
  180. 3
  181. 3
  182. 3
  183. 3
  184. 3
  185. 3
  186. 3
  187. 3
  188. 3
  189. 3
  190. 3
  191. 3
  192. 3
  193. 3
  194. 3
  195. 3
  196. 3
  197. 3
  198. 3
  199. 3
  200. 3
  201. 3
  202. 3
  203. 3
  204. 3
  205. 3
  206. 3
  207. 3
  208. 3
  209. 3
  210. 3
  211. 3
  212. 3
  213. 3
  214. 3
  215. 3
  216. 3
  217. 3
  218. 3
  219. 3
  220. 3
  221. 3
  222. 3
  223. 3
  224. 3
  225. 3
  226. 3
  227. 3
  228. 3
  229. 3
  230. 3
  231. 3
  232. 3
  233. 3
  234. 3
  235. 3
  236. 3
  237. 3
  238. 3
  239. 3
  240. 3
  241. 3
  242. 3
  243. 3
  244. 3
  245. 3
  246. 3
  247. 3
  248. 3
  249. 3
  250. 3
  251. 3
  252. 3
  253. 3
  254. 3
  255. 3
  256. 3
  257. 3
  258.  @pcnoad  well, interesting topic, but see, youtube and other platforms are recognized and protected under section 230 as public spaces and free speech does apply or should apply to them, but at the same time, youtube and other platforms and ISP providers are not required to give you any service. just like in the old days long before youtube and the internet and electricity, you had the right to speak publicly in the public square, but no one sent a carriage or a horse to escort you to that public square, its on you to get there. let's look at the 2A, you have the right to keep and bare arms, it says nothing about buying them or making them yourselves, same as freedom of the press did not require you to build your own printing press in order to print leaflets or pamphlets and utilize your right to freedom of the press, same as freedom of religion does not require you to build your own church in order to worship. the thing with freedom of speech is that no one is allowed to block you, at the same time, no one is required to listen to you. the right to a jury trial, the government sets and administers the laws, and therefore, it is the government that ultimately accuses you of breaking that law, and therefore it is incumbent on the government to prove your guilt, through a trial that they have to administer, a fair trial, meaning that you have to have adequate legal counsel and defense, a trial by a jury of your peers, meaning the government cant simply pound a gavel and claim without any evidence that you are guilty and lock you up for life, they have to convince 12 common people that you are guilty. now, lets take this example. if you have the right to housing, but you dont have a house, should you be provided a house? and who provides that house? do the taxpayers pay to build that house? if so, are the taxpayers paying more taxes in order to provide you with your right to housing? lets say that every taxpayer has to pay an extra $15 per month in taxes to provide housing, for a lot of people that is an hour or more of work, work that they dont get paid for since the government takes that money and taxes that they dont benefit from since the house goes to you specifically, would that not be akin to slavery? working to provide something to someone else without reimbursement?
    3
  259. 3
  260. 3
  261. 3
  262. 3
  263. 3
  264.  @kellywills5852  i actually can do the math. out of the 600,000 + deaths in the US from Covid, 94% had co-morbidities, making only about 36,000 dead from Covid alone. worldwide, 214M cases with 4.44M deaths that is 2% of case resulted in fatality. in the US, 38M cases with 630k deaths, thats is 1.6% of cases resulted in death. of those 630k deaths, 94% had co-morbidities, so that leaves 37.8K fatalities with no co-morbidities, i will be nice and round it up. out of 38million cases in the US, 40k deaths is 0.1% of cases resulted in healthy people dying. those are slim to very very slim chances of dying from COVID. these numbers do NOT convince me to take the risk of an experimental new vax, especially a GMO vax. now for a little bit of science. AIDS patients are counted when an aids infected patient dies from a complication. in effect, the AIDS runs its course and does the damage to the body allowing other diseases to come in and kill the patient, and its counted as an aids death. COVID patients are counted when COVID kills a person or is suspected in killing a person. in efect, obesity and diabetes and heart and lung disease runs its course and does the damage to the body allowing COVID to come in and kill the patient and its counted as a COVID death. the way deaths are counted is completely reversed, AIDS is counted because it does the damage and not the killing blow, COVID is counted because it does NOT do the damage and inflicts the killing blow. this is also an experimental vaccine created using mRNA re-sequencing technology, the same kind of technology in a sense that brings you frankenfoods that most countries in Europe and some in Asia have banned. the mRNA sequencing takes only one part of the virus DNA, which is the protein "hook" that allows it to latch onto a cell to begin its process of replication, a virus literally hooks onto a cell and injects that cell with its own DNA subverting that cell and causing that cell to turn into a reproduction factory for more virus particles. now, this vax uses just the protein "hook" from the COVID virus and genetically spliced onto another virus to trick your body and your cells to change their metobolism and cell structure to eliminate the protein "keyhole" receptor that this virus could "hook" onto. now a bit of the red flags. 1. the manufacturers are protected from any criminal and civil liability in connection to this particular vaccine. i dont know of any company in the world that is protected from liability in such a way for anything. 2. the government actively working with mas media to suppress any dissent or questioning of the vax or its efficiency or side effects. 3. the 180 degree flip on reporting stats on deaths from one norm to an exact opposite, as exampled by AIDS. 4. the government pushing in a facistic way for vax mandates. there is NO government mandate for the public to be vaxed against small pox or measles or yellow fever or even the FLU. 5. democrat leadership has turned this into a political agenda from the very beginning with prominent democrats going on public record making public statements that they would NOT take the vax simply because Trump is responsible for its creation. 6. the lack of data on effects of a GMO drug being injected directly into person past 1 or 5 or 10 years does not mean it is safe simply because you didnt die right away. thats like saying that 400 to 450 rem (4 to 5 sieverts) received over a very short period of time is not lethal because you are fine on the next day while not having the data to show that 50% of the exposed people will die from it within 30 days. or a better example would be to say that smoking isnt bad because no one has died from smoking only 1 pack, or smoking for 5 years.
    3
  265. 3
  266. 3
  267. 3
  268. 3
  269. 3
  270. 3
  271. 3
  272. 3
  273. 3
  274. 3
  275. 3
  276. 3
  277. 3
  278. 3
  279. 3
  280. 3
  281. 3
  282. 3
  283. 3
  284. 3
  285. 3
  286. 3
  287. 3
  288. 3
  289. 3
  290. 3
  291. 3
  292. 3
  293. 3
  294. 3
  295. 3
  296. 3
  297. 3
  298. 3
  299. 3
  300. 3
  301. 3
  302. 3
  303. 3
  304. 3
  305. 2
  306. 2
  307. 2
  308. 2
  309. 2
  310. 2
  311. 2
  312. 2
  313. 2
  314. 2
  315. 2
  316. 2
  317. 2
  318. 2
  319. 2
  320. 2
  321. 2
  322. 2
  323. 2
  324. 2
  325. 2
  326. 2
  327. 2
  328. 2
  329. 2
  330. 2
  331. 2
  332. 2
  333. 2
  334. 2
  335. 2
  336. 2
  337. 2
  338. 2
  339. 2
  340. 2
  341. 2
  342. 2
  343. 2
  344. 2
  345. 2
  346. 2
  347. 2
  348. 2
  349. 2
  350. 2
  351. 2
  352. 2
  353. 2
  354. 2
  355. 2
  356. 2
  357. 2
  358. 2
  359. 2
  360. 2
  361. 2
  362. 2
  363. 2
  364. 2
  365. 2
  366. 2
  367. 2
  368. 2
  369. 2
  370. 2
  371. 2
  372. 2
  373. 2
  374. 2
  375. 2
  376. 2
  377. 2
  378. 2
  379. 2
  380. 2
  381. 2
  382.  @santiagomartinez-fn6kh  funny how you mention the hypocrisy of Trump supporters storming a sacred national landmark without acknowledging that the precedent has already been set when anti-Trumpers stormed a sacred historical landmark during the Kavanaugh hearings. and yes, i remember Jesus, he refused to fight, even when his enemies fought him he kept turning the other cheek until he ran out of cheeks and was crucified on the cross. 2000 years later his message is dead, his plight has been hijacked and NO ONE even knows what he looked like. so much for heroes. and yes, the country IS being stolen from under you, your rights are being subverted at every turn. 1. your freedom of speech is gone, you can get banned and ostricized from society for saying the wrong thing and you can do NOTHING about it because the people doing it hide behind government protection. 2. your right to peacibly assemble is being curtailed because in some states it has gone to the extreme of the government fining and arresting you for having thansgiving dinner with too many family members. 3. your right to religion is being destroyed because in most states it is illegal for people to go to church. 4. your right to free press was destroyed during the last administration when the last administration spied on and arrested journalists. 5. your 2A rights are subverted in various places and across the country, no guns in DC or in NYC, and various other restrictions in other cities and states. 6. your 4th amendment rights have already been curtailed when FISA warrants were issued in error, not an oops we made a mistake, but issued because of lies. 7. your right to a speedy and fair trial is out the door, the Patriot act took care of that a little, and the red flag laws popping up all over the place dealt a blow too, and lets not forget the previous administration taht said they can kill American citizens anywhere because they dont have to give you due process. the list goes on, but here is the latest example, your congress just gave hundreds of billions to foreign countries for gender studies and speedboats while the American public lines up in food lines begging for some food from food banks, but dont worry, they threw you some crubs, some people who qualify will get $600 one time payment. but hey, you keep worrying about how someone will come and steal your country out from under you while your country is already being stolen out from under you. i'll just sit back and laugh while you and everyone else is locked in your house because Biden says so, as long as Trump is out. hopefully Biden suffers an anurism in his first year and he leaves and Kamala takes over, and to prove she has big balls like the rest of the big boys she starts another war somewhere, most likely Iran, and then to support that war she institutes the draft and start drafting democrat kids to go off and die in some god forsaken desert.
    2
  383. 2
  384. 2
  385.  @MrMarket1987  Socialism IS a scary thing, i have experience with it, i lived under it, have you? socialism is a great system on paper, everyone profits, everyone has everything they need, but thats because on paper socialism ignores reality and finite resources and the corruption of man. socialism breeds stagnation at its core, it breeds corruption just as easily as any other system, and it breeds death on a biblical scale. there is a difference between having a safety net for people to not fall into poverty and starvation and homelessness and having that social safety net actually be the core of the government itself. here is an example, the OH train derailment was caused by lax safety measures by a private company and lax regulations by the government, and there were injuries and possibly may be deaths from this. all of this was so that a company can make more profits. Chernobyl was built by a socialist government with actual design flaws that were covered up by the same government that built it and kept that information from the people running it until it exploded. the governments solution, draft 600k civilians and hand them a shovel and march them into a burning nuclear reactor. the design flaws were exposed, and the government still did nothing to fix the issue because it was too costly until enough international pressure grew to force the government to fix it. 3 people were charged with that accident in a show trial and sentenced for causing the accident on a faulty designed reactor where they didnt know of the design flaws because the government decided not to tell them. the difference is that the government in OH is not forcing people to go to clean up OH, but if it was a socialist system, then perhaps good ole Bernie would show up at your house with a couple soldiers and hand you a shovel and tell you "go dig peasant", just like the socialist government did with Chernobyl.
    2
  386. 2
  387. 2
  388. 2
  389. 2
  390. 2
  391.  @johnmartin4641  no, its always profitable, the expenses just get passed down to the end consumer as a price hike. they dont use a lot of those leases because in order to drill on a lease, the company needs to first build a road to the leased land, and if they cant get the lease to build the road then they cant get their trucks to the leased land with all the equipment to do the drilling. it goes something like this. you cant apply for a construction lease until you have a drilling lease, and you cant apply for an improvements and easements lease until you get the constructions lease, so first you get the drilling lease, and then you apply for the constructions lease which might get delayed, but once you get that then you can apply for the improvements and easement lease, and that might get delayed too, by the time you get all the necessary leases to do what you need to do your originall drilling lease has expired and you have to start the process all over again. its a way for the government to make money and for the oil company to make money too, the government makes money off the leases and off the taxes on higher fuel costs and its a way for the companies to make more money by raising prices and claiming costs have gone up. each one can simply point the finger at the other party and claim its their fault while secretly they are in bed together making money off the people. i mean how many times have you heard the government claim that these companies have thousands of leases that they dont use, but what they dont tell you is that most of those leases are unusable.
    2
  392. 2
  393. 2
  394. 2
  395. 2
  396. 2
  397. 2
  398. 2
  399. 2
  400. 2
  401. 2
  402.  @BladeValant546  why do i believe what in every what case? since you asked a legitimate question, i will try to answer, not completely understanding your quetion itself. why do i believe that there are not as many deaths as everyone has been claiming? because government agencies have put out information that contradicts the narrative. 600,000 reported deaths from covid but 94% had multiple co-morbidities. that raises a concern for me on the information. why do i believe that this pandemic has been over-hyped? because the WHO refused to call it a pandemic early on because there would have been serious losses on wall street with derivatives tied to the health industry and the WHO labeling a pandemic, and because the CDC came out and admitted that the numbers for people hospitalized for covid have been overinflated by upwards of over 40%, and because of the way the deaths are labeled for this disease compared to other diseasees. for example, AIDS deaths are counted as AIDS deaths even though AIDS is not what kills a person, it is the infection that comes in once the immune system is damaged. AIDS comes in and damages the immune system, then the Flu comes in and kills the AIDS patient, it is counted as an AIDS death. with covid, if cancer and the treatment for it damages your immune system and covid comes in and kills you, its counted as a covid death. its a simple example, but the complete 180 degree turn around coupled with the other items raises several concerns. why do i believe the vaccine is not safe and not really a vaccine? because there are no long term studies for side effects of this type of vaccine (mRNA), the very first vaccine of this type to ever be created, we cant even begin to guess at potential side effects by looking at possible side effects from other vaccines of this type because there are none. this raises a concern. and i dont believe it is a vaccine because traditionally a vaccine allows your body to stop an infection and prevents transmission of an infection, this vaccine admitedly does none of those things. this raises a concern as it builds a false sense of security in people who think they are safe but they really are not. with all these concerns i have to start questioning the narrative of needing this vaccine, and these are just a few of the concerns. notice i didnt mention anything about the vaccine needing a booster, because some vaccines do need boosters while others dont, this does not raise a concern to me. now, with all of this, can you aleviate these concerns? can you counter any of these concerns logically? lets talk honestly.
    2
  403. 2
  404. 2
  405. 2
  406. 2
  407. 2
  408. 2
  409. 2
  410. i have a question? WHO HOLDS THE GOVERNMENTS PURSESTRINGS? the house of course. if people are falling by the wayside its becaue the government is failing them, doesnt matter if its democrat or republican or anything else. the last stimulus bill that was passed was enough to give every single man and woman and child living in the united states, citizen and illegal, literally EVERYONE in the US a $2700 check. so a single mom with 1 kid would have gotten $5400. but instead only about 1/3 of the population got $600, the 1/3 that was verified as employed. the rest of that money went to foreign aid and various other pet projects for politicians. plenty of blame on both sides of the isle, republican / democrat, it dont matter, they both got together to screw over the people. the last stimulus gave 10 million to Afghanistan for gender inclusion or some such identity BS, thats 16,666 people that could have gotten a $600 check. it also gave hundreds of millions to Shri Lanka for a speedboat, and billions to Saudi Arabia and various other countries. you think the republicans were the only ones to push this? democrats pushed it too. and if Bernie were in charge nothing would be different, absolutely nothing, because one man, no matter how well intentioned he is, can not stop a group of people (congressmen) backed by an army of idiots (faithful voting followers). perfect example, AOC called out the last stimulus package as fraught with garbage, and then voted in favor of it. at least i can respect Tlaib for calling out the BS and then voting against it, even though i hate her, i can respect her for that. the government took your money and gave it a fancy name so you wouldnt object when they bent you over and reamed you without even the courtesy of using lube.
    2
  411. 2
  412. 2
  413. 2
  414. 2
  415. 2
  416. 2
  417.  @computernerdtechman  wow, reaching for any straw you can. Hitlers book and Trumps book have absolutely nothing to do with each other, but if Trump is like Hitler because he wrote a book, then i guess Obama is like Hitler for writing a book too, so is every other democrat out there who wrote a book. i dont remember where Trump demonized Hispanics or blacks or muslims, perhaps you can link a source. Trump called the press liars, calling someone who lies a liar is not demonizing, especially a news network like CNN that gave a reporter in 2017 i believe, an award for excellence in journalism, the same reporter came out in 2018 and admitted that he has been running fake news since 2012. and who was it that posted up a fake story during the Mueller investigation where the Mueller team themselves came out in a rare public statement saying that the news story was FAKE? or lets see, how many news outlets have retracted their stories about that Sandman kid because they were lies? or better yet, how many news outlets settled out of court with Sandman rather than go to court and lose over the lies they wrote about him in their "news" stories? but i have yet to see how Trump limited where Americans can get their news? Trump may have fomented his followers into a frenzy, no different than what democrats have done with their followers, but i didnt see any evidence presented by ANYONE during the second impeachment trial to show that Trump instigated the Jan 6th insurrection. but you keep believing your BS that you are spoonfed by democrats who ACTUALLY spied on and put journalists in prison, who started slavery back in Libya, and who fomented their followers to shoot at republicans like that one guy who shot up the republican baseball game that wounded Scalise. who talk about setting up camps for political opponents and creating lists, just like good ole regular nazis.
    2
  418. 2
  419. 2
  420. 2
  421. 2
  422. 2
  423. 2
  424. 2
  425. 2
  426. 2
  427. 2
  428. 2
  429. 2
  430. 2
  431. 2
  432. 2
  433. 2
  434. 2
  435. 2
  436. 2
  437. 2
  438. 2
  439. 2
  440. 2
  441. 2
  442. 2
  443. 2
  444. 2
  445. 2
  446. 2
  447. 2
  448. 2
  449. 2
  450. 2
  451. 2
  452. 2
  453. 2
  454. 2
  455.  @toomuchinfo6487  Clinton raided social security to give a false impression of a surplus . i agree, Clinton & Bush & Reagan helped foster policies that led to the crash that Obama inherited, suck for him i know and it was unfair. Obamas deficit spending really didnt bring anything noteworthy that helped the economy, maybe it staved off a larger depresion, maybe not, that is debatable. Trumps tax cuts did not help only the wealthy, the majority of Trumps tax cuts went to middle class and poor, and with the deficit spending under Trump we at least had something tangable, such as lowest unemployment in decades and in some cases since 1950, higher wage rises in decades, larger small business ownership and participation in decades, and economic numbers that the previous administration claimed were unachievable without a magic wand. an excerpt from a bloomberg article "While the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was far from perfect, it did cut taxes on the middle class and fueled the economic growth that brought unemployment rates to half-century lows before the pandemic." now about those 4 recent republicans. 1. Reagan - didnt help the deficit or curb the spending, started the Trickle down economics craze. 2. Bush Sr. didnt do much except bomn some countried and gave assylum to illegals and gave some tax cuts, thats why he lasted only 4 years. 3. Bush JR. screwed the country up with unfunded wars and raised the debt and deficit. 4. Trump. lower taxes and oversaw a booming economy and unemployment numbers unheard of since 1950's. so on that note, i can forgive deficit spending if there is some tangible benefit to it. 1. Clinton. signed the Glass-Steagel repeal that later led to the 2008 crash. also signed NAFTA that saw millions of jobs leave the country. 2. Obama. inherited a garbage economy that saw a lackluster recovery compared to other countries while at the same time NOT ending the unfunded bush wars that helped fuel the deficit and then starting a few more of his own wars helping add to the deficit. the only tangible result from his deficit spending would be that the economy didnt completely crash, but that is debated in various economic circles, but i'll still give him a thumbs up on that.
    2
  456. 2
  457. 2
  458. 2
  459. 2
  460. yea, socialism is nothing to fear, in the beginning, it looks great on paper and right when it first starts, but then it gets really scary, thats why so many people flee socialist countries. our history is littered with moments of people fleeing socialist countries for democratic ones, or less socialist ones, because socialism is soooo great. as for her being a socialist, who cares, socialist / communist / democrat / republican, they are all the same, ESPECIALLY when they use the same lines that have been used since the 70's, "a government that works for you", im surprised people are still stupid enough to fall for that line, it gives nothing and is meaningless. look at AOC, super duper great socialist, working for the people, driving around in a Tesla living in her luxury highrise sitting by her infinity pool while destroying job creation in NY. look at Bernie Sanders, back in the day he was a great socialist, railing against open borders as a Koch brothers proposal to lower working wages, now all of a sudden since he is worth over a million and has several houses, open borders are a great idea and millionaires are not bad, only the billionaires are bad. which leads me to this question, which workers is this new socialist mayor wanna be protecting by pushing elements of a Koch brothers proposal such as sanctuary city so that illegals can flood into the city and drive down the wages of the working people that are living there. certainly she isnt pushing anything for driving down prices. so yea, great protecting the workers there, by pushing various ideas that will raise taxes on the workers and at the same time driving the workers wages down. i fully endorse this candidate 100% for mayor of Buffalo, that city will go to ruin in a few years
    2
  461. 2
  462. 2
  463. 2
  464. 2
  465. 2
  466. 2
  467. 2
  468. 2
  469. 2
  470. 2
  471. 2
  472. 2
  473. 2
  474. 2
  475. 2
  476. 2
  477. 2
  478. 2
  479. 2
  480. 2
  481. 2
  482. 2
  483. 2
  484. 2
  485. 2
  486. 2
  487. 2
  488. 2
  489. 2
  490. 2
  491. 2
  492. 2
  493.  @goldilox369  i agree with you to a point, im not anti vax, ive had most vaccines, but this is not a vaccine and that is the point that i have to dissagre with you on. vaccines DO stop the spread, and inherently stop the mutation of a disease. look at the diseases we have virtually wiped out with nothing more than vaccinations. a vaccine trains your body to fight a specific disease by introducing a weakened strain of that virus into your body so that your immune system can learn to fight it, that way if you run into it in the world, your immune system attacks it and destroys it before the disease has a chance to grab hold and multiply and spread. thats what a vaccine does. this covid vaccine seems to do none of these things, because somehow the virus infects even vaccinated people, and multiplies and spreads to other people. and that is also how a virus mutates, over multiple generations of a virus replicating and spreading, it mutates / evolves, kind of like humans evolved from apes which evolved from lower primates which evolved from lower mammals and so on, the difference is that viruses live a much shorter span and so generations pas by much more quickly. the thing is, this vaccine doesnt train the human body to kill it fast and effective enough for it to stop spreading, the only thing it does is it masks the symptoms so you dont suffer as much under it. that not a vaccine, in the same way that an aspirin is not a vaccine for a broken leg. on top of that, this vaccine IS built on brand new technology, mRNA, which in effect is used to rewrite genetic sequences in organisms, so this "vaccine" is nothing more than a genetic sequencing tool that introduces a brand new gene sequence into your body, and its not that it introduces a new sequence, it literally rewrites part of your genetic code. with that being said, are you even still human? or are you an experiment in genetic splicing pushed by big pharma?
    2
  494. 2
  495. 2
  496. 2
  497. 2
  498. 2
  499. 2
  500. 2
  501. 2
  502. 2
  503. 2
  504. 2
  505. 2
  506. 2
  507.  @AlanDantes76  yea, he got it from his friend who lives in WI and bought it in WI, so anyone doing any news coverage should be doing due diligence and researching it. i heard people say that he did transport it across state lines and i heard people that said he did not transport it across state lines, so with 2 differing viewpoints and an absence of any charges to the transporting of firearms across state lines i decided to do my own research, and google came up with a link to an NPR article within 0.016 seconds, top of the search list. so i read the NPR article, which literally said that the IL state police declined to file any charges because in the course of their investigation they concluded that the weapon was bought, stored, and used exclusively in WI and has never been brought to IL, according to the IL state police statement. so at that point i figured ok, NPR quoted an actual police department that did an actual criminal investigation. another funny thing that made me question the whole transporting weapons across state lines was, why was Rittenhous's friend who lives in WI charged with gun charges related to this case. people dont do enough research, they listen to pundits who have an agenda, and they are twisted into wanting revenge and thinking it is justice. the same people who will claim that Zimmerman was wrong for stalking and attacking Trevon even though he perceived him as a threat are the same people that think it was perfectly OK for Rosenbaum to stalk and attack Rittenhouse because he viewed him as a threat. i believe that NO ONE is allowed to stalk and attack anyone else, stalking is a crime, at least here in Chicago, so is physically attacking someone, so is threatening to kill someone.
    2
  508. 2
  509. 2
  510. 2
  511. 2
  512. 2
  513. 2
  514. 2
  515. 2
  516. 2
  517.  @sebastianlavallee706  and thats where your argument falls apart, because YOU are full of bullshit and dont care about justice. i made the claim that the judge is being consistent because he CONSISTELY rules in his cases against the use of the word "victim". that is a ruling he consistently uses. do you know what the word consistent means? if he has used that ruling on multiple other cases then he is being consistent with using that ruling. as for them being referred to by criminal terms, why shouldnt they be? they acted criminally by atacking Ritenhouse in the first place resulting in them getting shot. they acted in a criminal manner by associating with rioters and looters and arsonists during a riot where rioting and looting and arson was being commited. doesnt matter if you convict them of it or not, they were in the process of doing it. same way if a guy is stabbing a person and you shoot them you say you killed a murderer even though you didnt convict him of murder. whats pure bullshit is that you are trying to defend pedophiles and claim they are victims which would indicate they are completely innocent of anything when in fact EVERY single one of them was shot WHILE they were attacking Rittenhouse, all the videos from every angle we have seen so far show that is the case. if you call them victims that would imply that Rittenhouse took aim and shot them for absolutely no reason while they were standing on the sidewalk minding their own business, which is not the case. and if Rittenhouse's actions pre or post event can very much be relevant to the case than so can the guys who got shot, including his convicion as a PEDO is is a pre event to the event of the shooting. funny how in the same sentence you can claim that ALL the actions of one person must be scrutinized but NONE of the actions of another person should be, that is bias. it is YOU who is not out for justice, you simply want to run around committing crimes and attacking people and loot and burn things down with impunity where no one is allowed to defend themselves. i would tell you to get off the internet but its already too late, you are a maniac. you find yourself in the peculiar position of defending a PEDO who attacked someone for no reasonand got shot for doing it. wonder how defensive you would be of someone who attacked your child and then claimed they were the victim after you stopped them.
    2
  518. 2
  519. 2
  520. 2
  521. 2
  522. 2
  523. 2
  524. 2
  525. 2
  526. 2
  527. 2
  528.  @cliffgaither  if a company unionizes, then that union will be asking for higher wages and more benefits, which will raise costs. im not saying they dont deserve it or they dont need it, of course they should get it and of course they deserve it and of course they need it.but dont tell me that it wont affect prices because the owners can do this or they can do that, what the owners can do and what owners have historically done are two different things. secondlu, we are not talking about what Bezos has access to, we are talking about his salary, which is not much. the rest of his fortune is tied in stocks, and while yes, certainly he has access to a vast fortune, that would entail him selling those stocks, and too much sales of stocks can have drastic effects on the company as a whole in various complicated ways. as an example, a too dramatic dip in share price of a company could jeapordize their ability to get standard operational loans, called a credit freeze. a large part of the 08-09 crisis was caused by a credit freeze from banks to most companies because most companies opperate on daily or weekly short term operational loans. thats just an example. thirdly yes, if workers are treated well, then there is no need for a strike, but there are instances of where workers are treated well and the union still goes on strike because they want concessions that are either unreasonable or unatainable. i have seen it happen before, i was in the teamsters union. what happens if a union decides they are worth $30 or $50 an hour, and the company simply can not afford it and the union goes on strike because they want it. does that mean the workers were treated bad or does it mean that they wanted unrealistic items that were unnatainable? give the workers everything they want and it wont matter how much the owners give up, it wont be enough to cover what the workers get and eventually prices will have to rise. im not against unionizing, but i also lok at all the aspects from every side.
    2
  529. 2
  530.  @cliffgaither  i agree, but you have to be able to look at both sides of a problem to find the solution. if a pipe breaks in your house, to dont replace all the pipes because the pipe is evil, you figure out why that particular pipe broke and fix it and examine all the other pipes. if a plane crashes, you dont throw out all other planes, you examine why it crashed, and should you fix other planes, do they even share a common failing part. this problem is more complex than a simple broken pipe or a crashed plane, and it requires a more complex examination across all businesses and complex solutions tailored to various industries as they are not all the same. Andrew yang had a wonderful idea during his campaign, taxing companies for robot workers in large amounts to offset the human workers that would lose their jobs to the robots and automation, and use that money to subsidize or give a universal income to those people affected by automation. i say its a wonderful idea because it identified a problem and tailored a solution that fit that exact problem without affecting other industries that didnt have that problem. for example. i have always worked my entire life, ive worked regular blue collar jobs such as warehousing or factory or regular office jobs, i was never a CEO or even management, i simply didnt want that responsibility. and i did own my own company for a short time with no employees. the thing is, i have amassed a decent fortune by simply investing the little scraps of money i had left over. most of my money was made in a very early investment in bitcoin, although i sold it all a while ago, im not a filthy rich multimillionaire. would you praise me that i was able to rise up and better my life? or would you just simply look at me and relegate yourself to the belief that i am evil because i have tons of wealth and it must have been gained through nefarious deeds while standing on the backs of impoverished workers? i was one of those impoverished workers, and i rose above my station by taking risks, ha, if you can call them risks, $10 bucks once in a while is laughable as a risk. but still, i took some risks simply because i paid attention to fringe news. CHIA NETWORK, thats your free tip, check it out.
    2
  531. 2
  532. 2
  533. 2
  534. 2
  535. 2
  536. 2
  537. 2
  538. 2
  539. 2
  540. 2
  541. 2
  542. 2
  543. 2
  544. 2
  545. 2
  546. 2
  547. 2
  548. 2
  549. 2
  550. 2
  551. 2
  552. 2
  553. 2
  554. 2
  555. 2
  556. 2
  557. 2
  558. 2
  559.  Joseph Norm  so wait a minute, you are claiming that we are more advanced than China? China is the 3rd country in the world to put a human in space, second country in the world to land a living organism on a surface outside of Earth, produces and develops their own nuclear weapons and nuclear power on their own, produced and developed a 5th generation jet fighter that rivals the US and Russia all on their own, produces the majority of green technology for the world, and you claim that they are less advanced? in what respect? i could fathom a country like Congo or Somalia or Zimbabwe getting a free pass, i would even go as far as cheer for us to grant them some technology to get them up to speed, but you cant argue that a country that is on the same level of technological advancement as us is less developed simply on the basis that their government has a stranglehold over their economy keeping their population in slave labor conditions. your Paris climate accords amount to this - punish western countries with fines and regulations while rewarding other countries by claiming they are less developed which amounts to manufacturing leaving the punished country where regulations keep pollution low for the rewarded country where they are allowed to exploit the slave labor population and pollute twice as much in order to make more profit, and they sell you this by making you believe that you solved climate change. to make it easier for you to understand. they push this climate change idea till you buy it and support it, then they raise fines on your country and force your country to install costly regulations, then they move the manufacturer to China that allows them to pollute twice as much and show you how they moved that polluting factory out of your country so the climate is better off. what they dont show you and what you refuse to ask about is, how you lost jobs and helped create twice as much global pollution in the process. twice as much pollution over there does not mean you have cleaner air over here, it just means there is twice as much dirty air for everyone to go around. but you feel good about it because you have been told it solves pollution and you dont even bother asking simple questions.
    2
  560.  @pennyc11  while i agree with some of your points, i dont quite agree with others. yea, China knows their mistakes, but they keep making them and appologizing hoping everyne else just ignores it and moves along, kind of like an abusive spouse who keeps abusing but the next day buys some flowers and candy and says i love you and im sorry. and yes, most of America now depends on Chinese goods, ever wonder why? because politicians on both sides of the Isle have been selling us out for decades. as for businesses in CA, ive seen many interviews posted up where most businesses that left CA stated taht it was either the taxes or unfriendly regulations or a combination of both, Waste Management wanted to build a recycling plant in CA at a landfill / garbage dump, and for 10 years they were going through beurocracy, they finally started up a recycling operation in NV and 2 years later finished building a recycling plant for cheaper while they were still waiting to break ground in CA. as for the housing market or lack of affordable housing in CA, i doubt any company is concerned about their employees ability to house themselves. and i CRINGE at people who call CA a communist state, i lived in a communist country, and CA has a long way to go to get there. and yea, i agree that greed is destroying America. now as for a serious warm winter in VA, can you attribute it to human activity? 10,000 years ago when the temp in VA was 10 degrees colder on average, was that atributed to human activity? how about 13,000 years ago when most of North America was cover by an ice sheet a mile thick? was that man made? i would love to meed the human civilization that caused enough global warming 2.3 million years ago that crated an earth without any ice caps on the north and south poles. i wonder what happened to that civilization since eventually the earth cooled and ice caps formed enough to lower the oceans enough to to create a land bridge between North America and Asia for the Native Americans to cross over on foot. every 400 years or so, the earth temperature either lowers or rises, depending on the period, during this 400 year cycle it is rising, this has been recorded in history, texts in Chinese documents reveal cold periods with lower harvests spanning period of 400 years or so. in 1800 something, not exactly sure which year, but Krakatoa exploded causing the year without summer, where snow fell in July, a simple volcanoe exploding affected our climate worldwide, i havent seen a year without summer because too many people run their cars too long. the thing with climate is that it is far more intricate with thousands of inputs that affect it, from the output of the sun to the strength of the earths magnetic field to our position relative in the galaxy to the spiral arms and magnetic currents to the amount of sunspots on the suns surface to the amount of water on the surface of earth and cloud cover and vegitation and composition of ice crystals in the upper atmosphere that formed from evaporation by the ice caps and so on and so on. current climate change theorists anly pose a theory, and they pose it with just a few datapoints while omitting the rest hoping you wont notice because they have "scientist" in their title so that gives them authority to tell you that they concur. science is not about scientists agreeing, science is about scientists being able to prove each others hypothesis through experiments and data. the last time scientists "agreed" that something was correct was when they agreed the world was flat and sickness was caused bad spirits and demons. here is the gist of it. rich elites gather with government officials to sell you something, they employ scientists with "grants" to uphold and validate their story. scientists come up with global warming theory and with the help of the elites pushes this on the public. the public gets scared and demands action from the politicians, who enact new "green" taxes and "green" legislation to extract more wealth from the public, which is then used to to give more grants to more scientist and to line the pockets of elites. ever notice how the people pushing the climate change theory about ocean levels rising are the same ones buying up oceanfront property while flying around in gas guzzling jets every week to chastise people about conserving energy and lowering their carbon footprint? Al Gore, the great climatologist whimpering about climate change has a $30,000 per month utility bill in his mansion. at least i can respect Thunberg for going across the ocean in a boat and using trains as much as possible. but seriously, ask a scientist what the effect of the sun is on our climate and our weakening magnetic field is on our climate and ask if those two inputs have been calculated in.
    2
  561. 2
  562. 2
  563. 2
  564. 2
  565. 2
  566. 2
  567. 2
  568. 2
  569. @Homeless Forstr very well, i'll inform you. after the civil war, republicans (who were against slavery) started moving into the democrat (who were for slavery) areas of the south to help reconstruction and help bring former slave into a freer country. those former slaves finally found freedom when they realized, with republicans help, that they could move to other parts of the country, including cities in the north, after all, who would want to stick around in the south where prospects of prosperity were slim compared to the industrialized norht where industry was booming and everyone got a wage because there was no slavery. freed slaves over generations started moving to large urban areas for prosperity, and the democrats from the south that kept the slaves down all those generations followed them to urban areas and maintained control with disinformation campaigns such as "you know dems and repubs just switched names right". the republicans that came from the north into the south to help the former slaves stayed there helping the slaves that were left behind, while the democrats who followed freed slaves into urban areas established themselves there and flourished by maintaining control over a subjugated population constantly, with the help of the media at the time, since everyone knows what the NYT is or the Chicago Tribune, or Wall Street Journal compared to the Baton Rouge Daily Buegle. long story short, democrats moved out of the south into the north, republicans moved into the south, and then democrats lied and claimed that they just switched names, all to maintain control and dupe more generations into being slaves for dems.
    2
  570. 2
  571. 2
  572. 2
  573.  @ohhah1255  wow, so much to read, I at least appreciate that you made an effort to make a point and an argument. And yes, it is mostly the politicians fault. People elect them in the first place, then they do a piss poor job of fighting for our interests and then people keep re-electing them, and they are the ones that enrich themselves and make the laws to make themselves and their friends richer. You think someone like Pelosi or Waters or Biden or Clinton aren't rich? You try to make it sound as if though the politicians and the rich are 2 different things, but they are not. As for where I was born, yea, post petestroika Russia. My parents were born there, and my grandparents. And no, we were not rich landowners, we were the peasant class. And from what was described by my predesessors about Russia, the only difference between the times of pre and post petestroika Russia was the amount of people that the government killed and the name of the guy in charge, not much else was different. Communism works on a small scale, but it is a poor way to run a society on a national level with hundreds of millions of people. Tell me, would you be satisfied working a minimum wage job as long as you were fed the line that it's for the national good and that your work will help someone a thousand miles away? In a capitalist system you work a minimum wage job that benefits a CEO who lives far away. In communist russia, the government forced you to work on a commune farm so that your crops could feed someone else far away. Here is the kicker. If you don't like your capitalist job, you could strive for something better, you could quit and go somewhere else or just not work at all. In communist Russia, yea, if you didn't like your job, the party would find you another job just as shitty. 30 million people died under the communist regime in gulag work camps, 10 million worked themselves to the bone digging a canal outside of Moscow using their bare hands because they had no choice, they were prisoners in the gulags because they were either criminals or those free spirited people that complained about their previous jobs. Yea, I grew up in that regime, as did generations of my family, did you? I doubt it, because if you did you wouldn't want it.
    2
  574. 2
  575. 2
  576. 2
  577. 2
  578. 2
  579. 2
  580. 2
  581. 2
  582. 2
  583. 2
  584. 2
  585. 2
  586. 2
  587. 2
  588. 2
  589. 2
  590. 2
  591. 2
  592. 2
  593. 2
  594. 2
  595. 2
  596. 2
  597. 2
  598. 2
  599. 2
  600. 2
  601. 2
  602. 2
  603. 2
  604. 2
  605. 2
  606. 2
  607. 2
  608. 2
  609. 2
  610. 2
  611. 2
  612. 2
  613. 2
  614. 2
  615. 2
  616. 2
  617. 2
  618. 2
  619.  @freeluigi4444  yes, it is the same thing, its been going on since the 70's. its always the same message just worded slightly differently every other decade. in the 80' it was global warming, and it was an existential threat that must be solved in a decade. in 2000 it was global warming and its an existential threat that must be solved in a decade. now its global climate change because they cant get away with global warming in the coming years of the cooling phase, and its still an existential threat. if it was such an exitential threat then they would enact measures to stop it, just like they enacted measures during this pandemic, they would lock you in your house and weld the doors shut so you dont produce any carbon. but instead they offer you policies like the Paris accords that push you to move your production out of your cleaner factories in your own country and move them to dirty factories in 3rd world countries that pollute 10 times as much while forcing you to pay fees and give the worst polluting countries a free pass for a decade. then to top it all off, they tell you that you eating cows are bad because they produce lots of carbon so you should eat grass and bugs to prevent ocean level rise while they sit in their oceanfront home eating medium rare steaks. now. since you claim to have been an environmentalist since 1973, maybe you can answer some questions for me. 1. you claim there's never been anything close to this? close to what exactly? global warming? can you explain how much lower the average global temperature was 1.3 million years ago during the last major warm period when there was NO ice caps or snow on the entire planet? 2. can you explain which fossil fuel burning civilization was responsible for raising the global temperature so high and so fast that it melted the 1 mile thick north American ice sheet that covered most of the continent withting a short span of time of about a thousand years? 3. can you explain what significance the suns output has on earths climate and what significance the earths electro-magnetic field plays in reducing the amount of solar energy that reaches the earth, AND what significance does the weakening of the earths electro-magnetic field play in that scenario? 4. can you explain WHY #3 is never included in ANY of those reports from the UN?
    2
  620.  @existentialwealth8025  why dont YOU open your eyes and look at ALL the data? i look at all the data. i look at it over a LONG period of time instead of just what is happening in "real time". lookng at what is happening in real time only and trying to predict future events without looking at past history is as faulty as looking at the sunrise and claiming that the sun will always continue to rise no matter what while disregarding that the sun runs on a cycle of rising and setting. you talk about cities being flooded, mass migration, economic disruption and drought. areas of the world have been flooded and suffered drought throughout history, look at the Sahara, there is evidence that it used to be a lush tropical jungle, now its a desert. look at the middle east and all the oil fields in the desert, those oil fields could only be produced by plankton and such living and dying in mass in shallow oceans. as for flooding, i seriously doubt the city of Venice Italy was built by the Italians in the ocean to start with, im thinking it was built on dry land and slowly flooded for various reasons. mass migration. mass migrations happen for a number of reasons, for example, the Syrian civil war and the uprising of ISIS in the middle east caused mass migration out of that area into Europe, and thats just in recent history. there are plenty of mass migrations and each one can have its own unique reason for it. but let me guess, you would argue that the economic crash of 1929 which caused worldwide hardships and mass migration and finally culminated in WWII was all caused by climate change right? the world runs on a cyclic system, there are warm period and cool periods, those cause adverse weather during the transition phase, by claiming that man is the cause of the current cyclic change completely disregards the previous billion or so cyclic changes that man was not around to be a party to. its like saying the sun rose today because of man since man observed it rising while completely ignoring the fact that the sun has been rising for the past 4.3 billion years. here is an extra tidbit for you, NASA, you know, those space rocket scientists, literally, they announced a couple of weeks ago that the moons wobble (which runs on a cycle of its own) will lead to a higher amount of weather phenomena such as more flooding and adverse weather anomalies like bigger hurricanes and more rainstorms and possible droughts. but yea, that moon wobble, totally man made, evil man caused all that stuff. its you who needs to open your eyes, because you are being told to not eat beef to save the environment by men who are eating beef in your face, you are being told by men to not fly planes to save the environment by men who fly planes to your city to tell you this, you are being told to stop driving cars to save the environment by men you are shouting this message from the window of their cars in thier 20 car motorcade, you are being toldthat the oceans will rise and flood the coasts by men who are buying up house at the waters edge. have you stopped for one second and asked why would he buy that house right on the shore when he told me that the oceants will rise and wipe out the shore?
    2
  621.  @christaylor9095  good question, glad you asked, what im trying to accomplish is to get people to ask at least simple questions without just submitting to an authority like a slave. the scientists claim that climate change is the result of human activity. q1. has climate change ever occurred before without human activity? q2. about 1.3 million years ago there was no ice anywhere on the planet, was that warm period caused by human activity? simple questions such as how did you arrive at this consensus and did you ue all available data and did you leave any data out and why was data left out? what am i prepping for? im prepping for the future. i understand that the world works on cycles, and i understand that society works on cycles too. its not hard to predict what the future holds, the only thing that is unpredictable is the details of the future. example 1. every 80-100 years or so, civilization suffers a global pandemic of some sorts, with the last one being the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918-1920, so its wasnt hard that around 2020 we would see another global pandemic, 3 years prior i invested in some military grade PPE equipmnet, not knowing the exact details of the outbreak other than some outbreak was due to hit us. example 2. every 8-10 years or so, we have some type of economic instability, and so i invested in some precious metals, not a lot, but enough to get by and give me a sense of security. example 3. every 80 years or so there is a major societal upheaval and calamity, we are about due, so i invested in some form of protection several years ago, and made plans to get out of the way if necessary, major riots struck most cities last year with building burning, property damage into the tens of billions, and several dozen deaths. example 4. every couple of decades or so we come to an event that disrupts food production on a scale that cripples some if not most peoples ability to feed themselves, running for the hills and hunting and fishing is not always an option. so i prepped for that and invested in some long term food storage, and no, i dont mean i bought buckets of that 30 year freeze dried survival food stuff and granola bars, but i did stock up on things to last me years that normal people will stock up on to last them a few days, canned goods, beans, rice, various other foods. i also trained up skills in unconventional food gathering in case i do have to get out and be on the go (run for the hills). so yea, im prepping for an eventual future of hardship where i can survive better than most people who are used to going to the store to pick up their food and coming home and flipping on their light switch and turning on their microwave to cook up their TV dinner. simply put, ask some question, you should always question authority instead of taking them at their word blindly. and you should be prepared for at least some eventualities, im not saying be prepared for an alien invasion or nuclear war, but could you withstand a flash flood in your area without needing to wait for a helicopter to rescue you off your roof? if Katrina hit your area, would you be able to get through it or would you be one in the mass of millions needing the government to save your life and put you in the thunderdome as temporary housing? if the 1929 economic crash hit, would you be able to make it through or would you be one of the tens of millions standing for hours in a breadline begging for a slice of bread and a bowl of watery soup? history is littered with examples of hardship that we can learn from and prepare for, because we havent seen the end of droughts and famines and wars and civil unrest. pick one and prepare for it.
    2
  622.  @christaylor9095  my tactics are simple, i simply ask the questions. if global climate change is such a threat and it will cause ocean levels to rise, why would a proponent of climate change like Obama buy oceanfront property that he says will be gone in a few years because of climate change? if they claim that climate change is an existential threat, then why are they not doing something about it instead of just fearmongering and doing nothing to solve it? even their solutions are hypocritical at best and look like economic favoritism. Gretta Thunberg went to the UN to scold western nations with her "how dare you" while turning a blind eye to the biggest polluters in the world. thats like cops scolding you for touching your wife innapropriately while they completely ignore the police chief full on raping your wife in the middle of the street. im pointing out the hypocrisy hoping to get people to notice it and at least be motivated to ask some simple questions of their own, such as "hey, how come you tell us to do this but yet you dont do it yourself?" some things can be explained away, such as air travel, well they need to travel to all these gatherings quickly, but other things are purely hypocritical such as buying oceanfront property while at the same time claiming that the oceans will rise and wipe out those oceanfront properties. its so simplistic that most people should look and say, "hey, wait a minute, hold up". but yet here we are, i ask some questions, and most people, including you, think im just trolling? i care about the planet, i care about our future, i have a kid and i cherish her future, and thats why i have to question what happens, because history is littered with examples of people not questioning their authorities and pushing the next generation into horrendous situations of their own making. i mean yea, lets stop using fossil fuels right now, right this very minute. then let the next generation deal with the fact that they cant feed themselves because those fossil fuels are such an integral part of our basic infrastructure. sure, yea, lets switch from fossil fuels to renewable energies right now, let the next generation deal with crippling taxes needed to pay for the renewable energy push and let them fill in all the holes we made while strip mining for rare earth elements to create all those renewable energy devices. yea, if we keep burning fossil fuels, the earth will keep getting warmer up to a point, maybe a little faster, nothing more than a blip on the scale of the history of the earth, but if we remove all humans from the planet, it will still continue to happen the same exact way, how do i know this, because it has happened before when there were no humans around, and it has been happening even when humans appeared.
    2
  623. 2
  624. 2
  625. 2
  626. 2
  627. 2
  628. 2
  629. 2
  630. 2
  631. 2
  632. 2
  633.  @ChuffedLemon  lets see, there are sooooooo many things wrong with what you posted. 1. its not a vaccine, it is a drug at best, a vaccine causes your body to create an immunity to a disease, this "vaccine" does not do that, it just simply lessens the severity of the simptoms, and that is evident in the CDC mandating that EVERYONE should wear masks regardless of vax status. 2. it is NOT highly effective as evidenced by the CDC mandating that everyone should wear a mask, INCLUDING VAXED PEOPLE. 3. qualified scientists using the scientific method can debunk or support practically anything out there, dont think they cant be bought or corrupted, we have an epidemic of qualified doctors prescribing anything and everything under the sun to get a couple extra bucks from big pharma, and now big pahrma has multi billion dollar deals with governments. 4. months of field trials and months of real life vaccinations do not ensure a safe product. how many years or sometimes even a decade or two do we hear about some drug that has lingering side effects. Agent Orange didnt affect people right away or a couple of months after exposure, but several years down the line it sure did make a mess. i see commercials on TV about how if you took this or that drug in the 90's or 2000's then call the law offices of blah blah blah. you have NO data or any possible side effects going 1 year or 5 years or 10 or 20 years down the line yet you want to claim that its safe. take your scientific field and shove it.
    2
  634. 2
  635. 2
  636. 2
  637. 2
  638. 2
  639. 2
  640. 2
  641. 2
  642. 2
  643. 2
  644. 2
  645. 2
  646. 2
  647. 2
  648. 2
  649. 2
  650. 2
  651. 2
  652. 2
  653. 2
  654. 2
  655. 2
  656. 2
  657. 2
  658. 2
  659. 2
  660. 2
  661. 2
  662. 2
  663. 2
  664. 2
  665. 2
  666. 2
  667.  David Payne  you are right, absolutely right, i am all over the place and contradictory with my use of the word "skills". i should put defining labels before the word skills so that people such as yourself who lack "reading comprehension skills" and lack "critical thinking skills" can understand when i talk about giving people skills i am referring to JOB skills. the kind of JOB skills that will allow people to earn much more than minimum wage. the kind of JOB skills that will eventually allow people to take those JOB skills and the experience they earn on their JOB and open up their own business and be their own boss. take that cashier at Wal-Mart and teach her insurance field JOB skills so she can work in an insurance office making some decent money and who knows, in 10 or 20 years she can open her own insurance office and call it Sally Jones Allstate insurance agency. take that burger flipper and offer to teach him some plumbing JOB skills so he can make a good living and who know, 10 or 20 years down the line open his own plumbing business wiht his plumbing JOB skills and call his shop Bob the Plumber Roto Rooter and charge people $120 per hour to come out on a sunday and fix their leaky faucet. take that day laborer working multiple day hire jobs and teach him some truck driving JOB skills and let him be a truck driver making a decent wage and who know, 10 or 20 years down the line they can get their own truck and call themselves Super Speedy Express. here is a bigger faceplant for you, you advocate for $15/hr because either you dont understand that this is not a way to make people prosper, its just giving them barely enough to keep their head above water, or you KNOW that it doesnt work and you dont care because you know those same people will be back at your door in a few years when the new minimum wage isnt enough, in effect you create a second class of people to control.
    2
  668. 2
  669.  @ebeb516  i agree, minimum wage is too low, but you cant just say minimum wage is too low and thats the problem, you have to ask why is the minimum wage too low? back in the 60's, the dollar was tied to the gold and silver standard. we had silver quarters, and the minimum wage was around $1.25, which were 5 quarters, which amounted to 1 ounce of silver. if you look around closely, early 60's quarters were still made of silver. today, 1 ounce of silver runs for $17 or so per ounce. so the minimum wage was tied to something tangible. but since the dollar was decoupled from the gold standard, inflation has run amok and has not been compensated for by anything. raising the minimum wage does not solve the inherent problem of why people cant survive on minimum wage, because thats just a symptom of a larger more complex problem. its like giving someone morphine to deal with their pain and disregarding that the pain is coming from a broken leg, eventually down the road that morphine will wear off and the pain will return, and the more you give morphine the more addicted the patient become to it. you need to examine the core reasons for why people cant survive on minimum wage and why its low. as for people with $200k college debt and not working in their chosen field, we cant all be philosophers. thats just a joke, more sarcasm really. i know plenty of people with college debt, i work in an office with 800 people in it, and at least half of them are college grads with college debt, and none of them are complaining about their college debt, some of them have paid it off and others are paying it off, while at the same time they are buying cars and homes. of course most of them are not working in their chosen field, but by saying that, they went a more realistic route and studied in a field that would get them a job and a career. as an example, one of my friends at work, his chosen field is history, he wanted to be a historian, although he has a degree in business because he wanted something that would gain him a career instead of just a hobby. i have another friend that actually got a degree in philosophy, he works at a company as a technician though, absolutely nothing to do with philosophy, and the way he explained it to me was, that philosophy was a hobby to him, and he wasted all that time and money for a college degree in a field that has no large calling for people. how many of these people who have these large college debts actually took on those debts to further their hobbies instead of actual careers? i mean i see some really outrageusly stupid college courses out there, prime examples are "underwater basket weaving" which is a course offered by several colleges, or "lesbian dance theory" or the very informative course on "white supremacy" that recently popped up. you have to look at some of these college courses and wonder if they are worth anything and even if you should feel pity for the people spending money on them and then crying about how much debt they have. and yes, i agree with you, $15 is not enough to live decently off of, its barely enough to survive, i know because i have done it living in Chicago, so im not in some rural area with a very low cost of living, but im also not in some high cost of living area either. right now im making $21 an hour, thats enough for me to live in a decent area of the city, raise my daughter all alone, and still save up enough to buy a condo. but it takes the ability to live within your means, and not demand that you live like bill gates or Bezos. there are many people who demand more because they want to live like the Jones's and they are not content with just living for themselves. i know a girl at work, makes about $40k per year, whining and crying about her college debt which she wasted on buying a used car and several fancy vacations. i offered her an opportunity to double her pay right at the beginning and be making low 6 digits within 5 years, she declined because it was an electricians union and she didnt want to do manual work. anyway, those are just stories from experience, but still, you have to look at more than just the symptoms, you have to examine the cause of those symptoms. high college debt is a symptom of a greater problem, and unlivable wages are just a symptom of a greater problem, and you can never solve the problem if all you plan to do is to treat the symptom.
    2
  670. 2
  671. 2
  672. 2
  673. 2
  674. 2
  675. 2
  676. 2
  677. 2
  678. 2
  679. 2
  680. 2
  681. 2
  682. 2
  683. 2
  684. 2
  685. 2
  686. 2
  687. 2
  688. 2
  689. 2
  690. 2
  691. 2
  692. 2
  693. 2
  694. 2
  695. 2
  696. 2
  697. 2
  698. 2
  699. 2
  700. 2
  701. 2
  702. 2
  703. 2
  704. 2
  705. 2
  706. 2
  707. 2
  708. 2
  709. 2
  710. 2
  711. 2
  712. 2
  713. 2
  714. 2
  715. 2
  716. 2
  717. 2
  718. 2
  719. 2
  720. 2
  721. 2
  722. 2
  723. 2
  724. 2
  725. 2
  726. 2
  727. 2
  728. 2
  729. 2
  730. 2
  731.  Rocky Croods  yes yes, religious zealots have always tried to ban "things" from public access on both sides, we are talking about people themselves and peoples livelihoods being banned and destroyed for something as simple as saying an unpopular or the wrong thing, and now its moved on to peoples family members saying something wrong or unpopular, even in the past. trying to ban D&D and metal for its content is completely different from lets say me getting you banned because your father said a naughty word a decade before you were born. i can give you examples of this. leftists have been trying to ban guns for decades now. abolitionists tried to and succeded banning slavery, prohibitionists tried to and succeeded in banning alcohol, nazis banned books, communists banned capitalism and so on. but now in this age, we are specifically banning people for the way they think, or the way they vote, or the opinions they have, and now we have moved on to banning people for what their relatives do and it has gotten drastic to the point taht we are now going back in time. Conor Daly lost his sponsorship because his father used a ratial slur during an interview in 1980, Conor was born in 1990, 10 years later. personally i would like to continue down this trecherous road of banning people for what their relatives did even in the past, Harris's family were slave owners in the past, maybe we can ban her, and Biden made some disparaging racial remarks about "racial jungles" in hte past, perhaps we can ban his grandkids and the rest of his family. how long until the mob comes for you because of what your grandfather said when he was a kid?
    2
  732.  @LavosGaming  yea, nice deflection. the fact that plenty of people and media is talking about "cancel culture" shows that it exists, and no matter how much you deny it wont change that, it is here, thats your ignorance. and i didnt say liberals, i said leftists, perhaps you are confused by the difference between the two. liberals are more open to liberty, leftists are more for authority. so yes, leftists are trying to cancel things. thats your ignorance again. and who is trying to deny transgenders or POC or religions? show me which law the right has put in place that denies any of those people their rights? bet you cant show one example. show me a rule by any institution private or public that has put in rules against those people? i'll give you examples, Evanston IL put in a tax on all marijuana sales with tax revenue going specifically to POC for "reperations, meaning tax revenue specifically routed toward anyone NOT white therefore denying the WHITE group the benefits of that tax revenue. or lets talk about the naacp, a group specifically created for POC only, denying white people as a group from any benefits. can you tell me how many WHITE people BLM has protested in favor of? or spanish people? asians? oh yea, thats right i forgot, they only go out and protest when a black man is killed, forget all those other groups right? now onto your point about religion. EVERY RELIGION OUT THERE DOES IT, religions have been trying to cancel various groups of people for the past ten thousand years, so your argument on that point is mute, thats your ignorance. now as for private companies not wanting transphobia or racism or violence on their networks, thats all good and fine, please explain to me how Gina Carano was racist on the Mandelorian and needed to be cancelled off that show? i would like to see the episode where she drops some N bombs while killing bounty hunters. can you explain how Henry Cavill was racist for dating her? in CT two men were arrested for using the N word in a conversation between themselves, they face up to 6 months in jail and $500 fine, but any POC can walk up to a white person and scream cracker or whatever all day long without consequences, how very inclusive. minority students in Claremont college can post ads for non-white roommates, because of course that doesnt exclude a group of people. or how about the UM-Dearborn fiasco where the college tried to segregate students into racial groups to discuss racism, of course white students were not allowed to go into the POC group, and yep, i guess thats not denying the whole white group anything right? how about Chris Palmers tweets about the GF riots, where he said "burn it down" seems like violence to me, but apparently twitter didnt think so. it has gotten so bat that the the CEO's of twitter and FB were called into a congresional hearings where they acknowledged that people on the right were de-platformed but they couldnt identify a single person on the left that had been de-platformed. so yea, your whole argument of the right doing it constantly is BS, your points are born of ignorance, and no, i dont watch Fox or AON or Newsmax, i dont have cable, thats another thing i guess you are ignorant on. the very fact that plenty of people and politicians and media sources acknowledge that we are in a cancel culture and individuals are getting cancelled more and more for some really illigitimate reasons and you denying it is happening and trying to deflect shows the level of ignorance you have. but please, tell me how Connor Daly was racist or violent or WHATEVER and needed to have his sponsor cancelled because his father said something 10 years before he was born?
    2
  733. 2
  734. 2
  735. 2
  736. 2
  737. 1
  738. 1
  739. 1
  740. 1
  741. 1
  742. 1
  743. 1
  744. 1
  745. 1
  746. 1
  747. 1
  748. 1
  749. 1
  750. 1
  751. 1
  752. 1
  753. 1
  754. 1
  755. 1
  756. 1
  757. 1
  758. 1
  759. 1
  760. 1
  761.  @MistedMind  you dont think you need a license in some states to buy a firearm? lets make a bet then, come to IL and go to ANY gunshop in the state and buy a gun with a "license" more commonly referred to as an FOID card, bet you cant. as for what use is a car without a license to drive it? are you saying that people cant drive a car without a license? according to ABC there are 11 million people without a license due to unpaid fines. according to uscclaims 20% of accidents are caused by unlicensed drivers. so dont go sputtering off with that nonsense. and no, it is not automatically asumed that you are the end user, apparently you have never set foot in a gun shop or tried to buy a gun. every single gun i have ever bought i was asked if the gun is for me or for someone else AND what the intended purpose of that gun is such as home defense or recreation or hunting. as for the applicable federal law for a need for qualification to use it? where is the applicable law for a need for qualification to use your 1st amendment right, or how about your right to vote, or your right to practice your religion? as for checks between all state borders? i've lived in the US since 1979 and have driven across multiple state borders throughout that time, i have never been stopped for a state border check, nor have i seen these border checkpoints, nor has any one of my friends ever been stopped or seen these border checkpoints. AMAZING you make up stuff. funny thing is, when you buy a gun in a state you are not a resident of, that gun shop has to ship the gun you bought to a gun shop in your home state for you to pick up, thats FEDERAL LAW, i know, because it happened to me. i live in IL, and went to IN next door to buy a gun, i had to show them my IL FOID card even though they dont use those cards in IN, then i had to go through a background check at taht gun shop and THEN they had to ship the gun to my local gun shop in IL for me to pick up, and THEN i had to go through another background check at my local gun shop just to pick up the gun i purchased in another state. so how are these fictional checkpoints supposed to catch all these guns if the gun shops have to ship them to other gun shops according to federal law? its amazing how someone like you with no knowledge of how guy buying works can make up BS to support your failed narrative.
    1
  762. 1
  763. 1
  764. 1
  765. 1
  766. 1
  767. 1
  768. 1
  769.  @Mulberrysmile  good for you, you can have as many years of quality life as you want, and if you choose to take the vaxxine because you think it will help or save you, then good for you, im not going to stoop to your level and call you names or degrade you because you didnt do what i thought was right, because it may not be right for you. but dont go degrading other people by white night simping with your excuse of prodecting other people and defending the world or some dumb chit. funny thing is, when you get the vaxxine, yes, you can still get the original virus, and you can still pass it on, thats why the CDC has been recommending social distancing and mask wearing for people who have been vaxxinated, because they can still get the virus. so your hope of not passing on the original is moot, because you still can. as for not being a vector for a new strain, no one can say if these vaxxines even work on any of the new strains, and considering the history of other vaccines and new mutated strains it looks like this vax wont work on new mutated strains anyway, so your argument there is moot also. you fail on both fronts. not to adress your statement of selfish whining and fear mongering? what selfish whining and fear mongering? is it selfish to ask questions and refuse to be experimented on? seems like you are being selfish by preaching everyone be part of this experiment and degrading people who choose otherwise and you whine about how its for the betterment of everyone. if you want to be an experimental lab rat then go right ahead, i choose not to be, i choose to ask questions first. maybe if you fear hurting other people, you should lock yourself in your house and never set foot outside ever again.
    1
  770.  Sunny Madron  oh, it has been tested you say huh? for how long? a day, a wekk, a month? if there was any rigorous testing they would have figured out that some of the vaxxines cause blood clotting and killing animals or people, and that some of the other vaxxines may need a third booster shot now because 2 may not be enough. are there any side effects of the vaxxine a year after getting a dose? or 5 years after getting a dose? are there any side effect to someone taking vaccines and then getting pregnant? will the children suffer any birth defects as a result? oh wait, you cant answer those questions because there isnt enough testing done to give any answers to those questions. as for the numbers being inflated, yes they are. how is it that covid deaths have gone up while other disease deaths have gone down? did we somehow find a cure for the flu or heart disease or other things that have been steadily killing people? oh wait, i know, i know, covid killed all these people before the other diseases finished them off. here is a perfect example for you. AIDS - HIV damages / compromises / destroys immune system, any disease comes in and finishes the person off and its counted as an AIDS death. COVID - heart disease or cancer or any of the other co-morbidities damage / compromise / destroy the imune system, COVID moves in and finishes the person off. its counted as a COVID death. in those examples, the way the deaths are recorded are completely turned 180 degrees around. in AIDS cases the cause of death is the disease that causes the immune damage, not the killing disease that is counted as the cause of death, but in a COVID case it is exactly the opposite. AND YOU DONT BOTHER TO EVEN QUESTION THE RATIONALE OF IT. its like watching a baseball game and the team with the most points wins the game, but then the following week its the exact opposite, the team with the least points wins the game, and you dont question it.
    1
  771. 1
  772. 1
  773. 1
  774. 1
  775. 1
  776. 1
  777. 1
  778. 1
  779. 1
  780. 1
  781. 1
  782. 1
  783. 1
  784. 1
  785. 1
  786. 1
  787. 1
  788.  @Bluebelle51  yes, science is wonderful, and your comment shows how little you know about science. the first vaccine developed was in 1796 by Edward Jenner, for smallpox, and his practice quickly became widespread. since then we have been developing various vaccines for various diseases and MASS PRODUCING them for generations now. so you claiming that large scale production of this vaccine is new and experimental is ridiculous. the "new and experimental" is how this vaccine was developed. and sure, COVID and SARS are both coronaviruses, same way influenza A, B, C, D are all flu viruses, yet they have to give you the right shot for the right flu because the shot for FLU A does not work on B or C or D. so how is it that a flu shot for one of them doenst work on the rest of them, they are all flu viruses right? why is it that SARS vaccine doesnt work on Covid-19? its all a coronavirus right? those slight differences is what makes the vaccine for other viruses completely useless on them, and requires us to develop a whole new vaccine to deal with the current virus. you cant use the SARS vaccine or any part of it on Covid because it doesnt work. there is a 3% difference in the DNA of humans and pigs, but somehow it makes us completely different animals. sure, we are both mammals, sure we are both warm blooded and we give live birth and feed our young with milk and we can eat the same food and we have red blood and 4 limbs and 2 eyes and a mouth and 2 ears and teeth and so on and so on, but completely 2 different animals. same thing with viruses. just because it is a corona virus does not mean it is the same or any way close in the same sense that pigs and humans are mamals does not mean they are close. that is your science lesson for today.
    1
  789. 1
  790. 1
  791. 1
  792. 1
  793. 1
  794. 1
  795. 1
  796. 1
  797. 1
  798. 1
  799. 1
  800. 1
  801. 1
  802. 1
  803. 1
  804. 1
  805. 1
  806. 1
  807. 1
  808. 1
  809. 1
  810. 1
  811. 1
  812. 1
  813. 1
  814. 1
  815. 1
  816. 1
  817. 1
  818. 1
  819. 1
  820. 1
  821. 1
  822. 1
  823. 1
  824. 1
  825. 1
  826. 1
  827. 1
  828. 1
  829. 1
  830. 1
  831. 1
  832. 1
  833. 1
  834. 1
  835. 1
  836. 1
  837. 1
  838. 1
  839. 1
  840. 1
  841. 1
  842. 1
  843. 1
  844. 1
  845. 1
  846. 1
  847. 1
  848. 1
  849. 1
  850. 1
  851. 1
  852. 1
  853. 1
  854. 1
  855. 1
  856. 1
  857. 1
  858. 1
  859. 1
  860. 1
  861. 1
  862. 1
  863. 1
  864. 1
  865. 1
  866. 1
  867. 1
  868. 1
  869. 1
  870. 1
  871. 1
  872. 1
  873. 1
  874. 1
  875.  @charlidog2  so i read your post, and your second paragraph goes off on a tangent of attacking me? for what? because i dont worship the guy you want me to worship? you sound almost like a christian priest or a muslim iman trying to convert me by browbeating me. did i say that YOU have serious issues or self hate or innability to think or accept reality? no. so why do you go of on attacking me? i simply stated that i hate him, and i have plenty of reason to hate him, let me explain. as far as him being on the right side of history? that is not always so, look at his voting record on wars, its mixed, he voted for some wars and against others, in effect he voted in favor of Iraq and Aphghanistan and Libya and voted against the war in Yemen, not exactly what i would portray as being on the right side of history ALL the time. secondly, lets look at his policies, they are socialist leaning policies without a doubt, and socialist policies have proved time and again to effectively destroy a people within a generation. care to look at Russia or the various other socialist regimes in the world and tell me they are shining examples of how people should live? thridly, he is a sellout, and that is what makes me hate him. during the 2016 election, he actually had a chance if he stuck to his guns, he really did, but instead, he sold out to the dems and to the Clintons, and there is no denying that. and i am not going to like a sellout. so now, with all of that said, if you had read my post completely, you would have noticed that i stated that i respect him a lot, because i believe that he genuinely wants to help people, but his policies lean socialist, and those policies have been proven time and again to destroy the prosperity of a people within a generation or two, that is historical fact. personally i dont think being on the right side of history is pushing policies that have destroyed prosperity. but with everything said, i even said that i most likely would not vote for him, but depending on the circumstances i actually might. so i think i have been pretty rational and logical about this, but then here you come along like a fanatical zealot attacking people for not worshiping your god. would you care to start up the inquisition again? shall you put me on the rack for being a heretic? or just straight to the draw and quarter arena? please dont burn me at the stake, i hate when that happens. can i have a choice? i would prefer simple beheading, quick and fast.
    1
  876. 1
  877.  @YouCanNOTvoteOutFascism  yea, like i said, i remember the dems obstructing and hampering Trump during the last 4 years, i cant really recall off the top of my head the exact bills they went against, same as i cant remember exactly which bills the repubs went against during the Obama administration, but i do remember it was there. and yes, i agree with you, both parties are there just to enrich themselves and gain more power for themselves while they pit us against each other. my favorite is the repubs claiming that the dems want to destroy white society and take away our country and give it to Mexicans and the dems pushing that repubs are racist because anything they do is racist such as requiring ID's for voting. the funy thing is most people buy that stuff, and some people that buy it are radicalized by it to do extreme things, i would point to the storming of the capitol during the Kavanaugh hearings in favor of the dems and the storming of the capitol on 1/6 in favor of the repubs. its funny how the dems claim that people crossing over the southern border illegally should be released while forgetting to say that its a Koch brothers "policy" because those people can be easily exploited as a second class workforce. its funny how republicans claim to be about the constitution and pushing the first amendment wt the same time pushing their ideology of marriage and pro-life based on religion. my biggest laugh though was when the establishment politicians kept claiming that Trump, who is an outsider and his first time ever serving in politics, is the actual establishment. LOL as for progressives, i would think that term means progress, but most progressives dont really act like it, they act more like authoritarian welfare stewards. what i mean by that is, they consider progress as instituting a welfare state to give freebies to everyone, free healthcare, free education, free housing, various other free things, and using almost authoritarian tactics to get attention. and traction. a true progressive would work for policies that would bring progress to policies that would help better the human condition and make peoples lives better. giving people free healthcare doesnt make peoples lives better, it just gives people a freebie that is really not free because it has to be repaid to the government anyway. revamping the healthcare system itself to make healthcare accesible to everyone is true progress. giving people a minimum wage of $15h does not make the human living condition better, it just gives a freebie that temporarily raises a persons abilities, but hte detriment is that the inflation it causes soon rises up to meet that new wage while at the same time destroying peoples buying power that are already above that minimum wage. true progress is pushing policies that would raise peoples core skill base where those people would be able to get those higher paying jobs without relying on the government to govern their wages and allow for them to live a comfortable life. forgiving people their college debt doesnt help anyone, since that debt has to be repaid no matter what, whether its the individual or the collective, the only thing it does is it ensures that EVERYONE is forced to pay college debt for the rest of their life through taxes. after all, you dont expect the government to forgive your student debt but then refuse to pay your neighbors kids student debt when they are old enough to go to college in 20 years, someone will have to pay for it. true progress would be pushing policies that would make it possible for people to go to college of their own volition without putting them into catastrophic lifetime debt. just because someone calls it progress, doesnt always mean its good.
    1
  878. 1
  879. 1
  880. 1
  881. 1
  882.  @xyzsame4081  yea yea, look at the 2016 election, Trump won, and 95% of the media coverage on him was negative to the point where a part of it was nothing but pure blatant lies. right now there is talk of Trump forming a third party, and plenty of his followers will go there and plenty of republicans are stating that they will leave the republican party to go there. all of this from a man who during his campaign was smeared as a homophobe and mysoginist and xenophobe and racist and authoritarian and establishment and whatever. Sanders should have realized his potential and his power back in 2016, everyone else seen it, everyone else commented on how much more money Sanders was raising than Clinton, everyone commented on how much bigger Sanders crowds were compared to Clinton. but noooo, either sanders and his entire team were inept or sellouts to not notice it. he should have gone for it, he should have gone independent as he always was instead of hitching his wagon to the DNC and selling out his principles. Trump lost the 2020 election because it was rigged, not in the sense of stolen, but there were enough rule changes made to benefit the democrats, those rule changes included media coverage, and media censorship, along with law changes to voting requirements and how votes are collected. Time magazine did an article recently detailing the "fortification" of our election. so yea, you can go love Sandesr the sellout like a little kd who has been offered free ice cream, because thats all he offered you and you bought it. i have no love for the man, because freebies are not hte way to win my loyalty, character is.
    1
  883. 1
  884. 1
  885. 1
  886. 1
  887. 1
  888. 1
  889. 1
  890. 1
  891. 1
  892. 1
  893. 1
  894. 1
  895. 1
  896. 1
  897. 1
  898. 1
  899. 1
  900. 1
  901. 1
  902. 1
  903. 1
  904. 1
  905. 1
  906. 1
  907. 1
  908. 1
  909. 1
  910. 1
  911. 1
  912. 1
  913. 1
  914. 1
  915. 1
  916. 1
  917. 1
  918. 1
  919. 1
  920. 1
  921. 1
  922. 1
  923. 1
  924. 1
  925. as a pro-lifer, i can answer your "questions from a pro-murderer" Who is going to pay for the birth mothers delivery bill, if she can't afford it? Most states have access to delivery services and healthcare for mothers regardless of their ability to pay. I haven’t seen any news stories where mothers are forced to give birth on the street because they cant pay the hospital. Who is going to pay for the health insurance of the newborn/child, if the mother/father can't afford their own insurance? Most states have insurance plans that they give to children already, not sure about your state, but in IL there is a publicly funded health insurance plan for children. Who is going to pay for the child's school lunches, if the mother/father can't afford it? Im pretty positive that every school district in the country has free school lunches based off the students family income. This extends even to kids in poor families who were wanted. Who is going to pay for this child's education, if the mother/father can't afford it? Pretty much every part of the US has public schools, where the childrens education is completely funded by the state, I don’t think you can point to any locality anywhere in the country and say they don’t have a public school that is completely tax payer funded. So the complete answer to all your questions is, the tax payers already fund these things. How about some questions for you? 1. Can we make abortions completely funded by the people that need them instead of having tax dollars being funneled to abortion organizations like planned parenthood? I mean its kind of ridiculous that you and your ho can go and have some fun time and be too lazy to slap a jimmy on because Joe Taxpayer will pay to clean up your mess. 2. Can we give men a voice in the abortion process? Currently if a woman wants an abortion it is her choice completely. What if the man wants to keep the baby? What if the woman wants to keep the baby but the man doesn’t, can he have a say so? Can he abort his parental responsibilities and child support?
    1
  926.  @marlapate6034  ok, estimates on abortions in the country are from 630K to 886K per year according to Forbes. most contraceptive protection has a failure rate of 7% for pills/patches/rings down to a less than 1% failure rate for IUD's. if you take the lowest rate of abortions (630K) and the highest failure rate (7%), that would give you 44,100 unwanted pregnancies. if you go to the other end, with 886K abortions and 1% of those being contraceptive failure, that would give you around 8,860 abortions. i will even be generous and add those up for you, 630k abortions minus the 44k of abortions from the high rate of failures COMBINED with the 8.8K abortions from the low rate of failures, so 630,000 - (44,100+8,860) = 577,040. thats 577K abortions that happen simply because people were irresponsible. according to USA today, 1% of women get abortions because of rape and 0.5% get abortions because of incest, thats 13,300 abortions off the 886K yearly. so off the low number of 577K we have left, that drops it down to 563K abortions that are done sporadically without reason such as contraceptive failure or rape or incest. i'll even be extra more generous and chop off that last 63K off that number and make it an even 500K abortions per year, thats 5 out of every 6 abortions happen because of irresponsible people, and with groups like planned parenthood filling in the role of doing more abortions than other groups, this is nothing short of a publicly funded form of contraception at the cost of $400-$600 per pop simply because of people going oopsie. your whole premise of people being responsible or getting raped or incest accounts for less than 10% of the total number. and your claim that simply because you know a woman who got pregnant while using protection is as dubious as an anti-vaxer claiming that he knows someone who had an ill effect from the corona vaccine.
    1
  927. 1
  928. 1
  929. 1
  930. 1
  931. 1
  932. 1
  933. 1
  934. 1
  935. 1
  936. 1
  937. 1
  938. 1
  939. 1
  940. 1
  941. 1
  942. 1
  943. 1
  944. 1
  945. 1
  946. 1
  947. 1
  948. 1
  949. 1
  950. 1
  951. 1
  952. 1
  953. 1
  954. 1
  955. 1
  956. 1
  957. 1
  958. 1
  959. 1
  960. 1
  961. 1
  962. 1
  963. 1
  964. 1
  965. 1
  966. 1
  967. 1
  968. 1
  969. 1
  970. 1
  971. 1
  972. 1
  973. 1
  974. 1
  975. 1
  976. 1
  977. 1
  978. 1
  979. 1
  980. 1
  981. 1
  982. 1
  983. 1
  984.  @mischevious  yea, Moringa seeds are useful if you can get your hands on them, but they dont sell them at the local grocery store. with that being said, we share common views, although politicians views in my mind are rather drastic. for example, border security and immigration. i want to see a secured border, but that doesnt mean i want to cut off immigration either, we cant let anybody come over anytime, people have to be vetted before coming in, same as if they were coming into your own home, you wouldnt just let the front door open for anyone to walk in unannounced. same with fiscal responsibility, i dont agree and i hate that our government wastes so much money and resources on these endless wars in hte middle east, not to mention the human lives lost. it should not be so. as for a climate action plan, we cant have a bold one without adverse effects. i mean yea, we all want a clean planet and clean air and water to drink, but we cant take bold and drastic innitiatives just to satisfy a dream. yea, fossil fuels are bad for the air, so we can eliminate them all immediately and stop polluting our air, and while we gasp for our last dying breath because starvation has taken hold, we can all wonder where we went wrong and what happened. the world revolves around oil, the world population exploded because of our use of oil as an indirect cause. trucks that bring food to grocery stores rely on fuel made from oil. power plants that produce electricity for us rely on trucks bringing in crucial supplies, the trucks that run on oil. easy solution is to switch over to electic vehicles and reduce the amount of fuel being burned. but that solution has its own problems. we need to upgrade our electrical grid to accomodate so many electric vehicles that would rely on the grid for charging, right now in some places if one too many people plug in an AC we start having rolling blackouts. imagine having a rollling blackout because of power consumption or worse, a weather related event that could knock power out for several days or weeks and your entire supply chain relies on electric power to keep moving. in hte eastern US they suffer through ice storms sometimes that can knock power out for a week or 2, how do you deliver food to grocery stores with electric vehicles when there is no power to charge up those electric vehicles? one of hte founders of Greenpeace publicly stated that if we implement Greta Thunbergs ideas, there would be mass global starvation on a biblical scale never seen before in history. AOC's green new deal (which her chief of staff publicly admitted was about changing the economy and not climate change) would cost an estimated $90Trillion max over 10 years, with our current operating budget of right around $4T per year, adding an additional $9T per year would be ludicrous, our taxes would have to triple and we would still be operating at a deficit. universal healthcare can be achieved, but over a gradual period of time, you would have to treat healthcare as a readily available commodity, and thats a hard thing to do. its like water, every municipality has a water system, water is delivered to every home, and in exchange every home pays a fee for that delivery, but is that water great? if it was so great then bottled water and water filters wouldnt be a milti billion dollar business. yea, private insurance companies have their beurocrats deciding on who lives and who dies, same as the government would, tell me how many veterans die in hte VA that could have lived? of course we all want a home and food and clean air and affordable healthcare, but to get those things would require a fundamental change in the world, and that change could bring with it bad times. do you have the right to indenture someone into servitude to provide you with that house? if there is no house available, do you have the right to force someone to build that house for you? or to create the materials needed for you to build that house on your own? if there is no doctor available, do you have the right to force someone to become a doctor even if they dont want to? i know, im just speaking theoretically, but those things are not infinite resources, they are finite, and with finite resources there is always a chance, no matter how small, that those resources could be depleted. you want clean air, but we need to house people, do we tear down a forest to make room to build housing and to create the materials for that housing? these are complex issues, and need complex solutions. as for elections. first one i voted in was in 2016, for Trump, because he was the only candidate that was not a career politician with a lifetime of double speek and making promises only to blatantly break them. he was against the war in Iraq when it first broke out, even when other politicians were for it, as a private citizen he was against it. any man or woman that doesnt want war has my attention.
    1
  985. 1
  986. 1
  987. 1
  988. 1
  989.  @injunsun  apparently you failed reading, perhaps you can go to school and read. as i was replying to someone elses post about things being read at 2:25. 2. excluded evidence of rittenhouses behaviour before and after the shooting, same way the judge excluded evidence of Rosenbaums behaviour before and skateboard mans behaviour before, which would have characterized them both as having a pattern of abusive and violent behaviour spanning years. you should be happy the judge did not allow the defense to characterize the 2 people shot as violend wife beaters and PEDOPHILES, because that would make the jury hate them and clear Rittenhouse on day 1. im not arguing that Rittenhouse killed them for this, im arguing that it would prejudice the jury either for or against baed off information that was not pertinent to the events of that night. 3. allowed the defense to charecterize the people Rittenhouse killed as rioters - BECAUSE THEY WERE, even the prosecution in its closing argument characterized them as rioters by listing all the things they did, such as tip over portapotties and set things on fire and flip over trucks and such. you claim these particular men were not witnessed doing these things? THEN WHY IN THE HOLY HELL FUCK DID THE PROSECUTOR DESCRIBE THESE EVENTS AND REFERRENCE THEM FROM VIDEO? as for the protests being about an unarmed person being murdered by a cop? no, wrong again, either you are willfully ignorant or a damn liar. the Kenosha riots happened because Jacob Blake was shot by a cop after fighting with police AND going to retrieve his knife from his car. the police were called because he had RAPED a woman and was wanted and the woman had called the cops. even Blake himself was on a news interview and looked into the camera and SAID "i should have just never went for that knife". so here you are, making up lies for reasons for the riot, and then defending a PEDO who was rioting over a RAPIST getting shot by cops, and to top it off, you are claiming that things didnt happen that the prosecutor himself said happened because they showed video of it happening.
    1
  990. 1
  991. 1
  992. 1
  993. 1
  994. 1
  995. 1
  996. 1
  997.  @f3tsch906  no, my statement about your salty tears is using your own words claiming the judge is biased. and you havent pointed out anything at all that is significant in any manner that would point to the judge being biased. if there was any significant breach of protocal that judge would have been removed a long time ago since this is not the first time this judge has made such rulings. and you didnt make any points, you simply cried, "i didnt like that the judge did this so that means he is biased." boom, end of story. just because you dont like what a judge does is not proof of bias, and its insignificant since no prosecutor has ever brought it up to the bar for the other numerous times this judge has made similar rulings. it IS the judges perogative, if you dont like it, too bad, if the prosecutor had any complaints about it he could have brought it up to the bar which would investigate it, its been done before, judges have been reprimanded and even removed for overstepping their bounds. there is your counterargument, the judge did what he felt was appropriate, and he has done that before on other cases, and the fact that no prosecutor has ever brought this up and this prosecutor has not brought this up to the bar and had the judge censured or even removed or disbarred shows YOU have no argument other than whinning and crying. so here you are, defending a racist PEDO who was screaming racist obscenities and destroying a minority neighborhood and who attacked a kid that was there to help protect a minority neighborhood, by claiming the judge is biased and unfair. i guess you want racists and PEDOs to win and to destroy minority neighborhoods, says alot about you. cry some more salty tears, we love them.
    1
  998.  @f3tsch906  same can be said about you, you dont deal in facts do you. you claim that the judge is biased towards the defense and list some flimsy points, so lets go over those points again. 1. refused to punish Kyle for violating terms of his bail - judges perrogative, plenty of judges do that plenty of times. but lets dive deeper into that shall we. the judge also refused to punish Grooskreutch for lying on the stand, i believe its called perjury, and the judge refused to punish Grooskreutch for filing false statements on his innitial police report, looks like the judge was more biased towards the prosecution than the defense, but still, i leave it up to judges discretion. 2. excluded evidence of rittenhouses behaviour before and after the shooting, same way the judge excluded evidence of Rosenbaums behaviour before and skateboard mans behaviour before, which would have characterized them both as having a pattern of abusive and violent behaviour spanning years. lets dig deeper into that shall we. as i stated before, the judge didnt allow evidence of pre and post behaviour for ALL parties involved, so he didnt allow the jury to hear about Rittenhouses history, same way as he didnt allow the jury to hear Rosenbaums history, OR to hear skateboard bandits history. seems like thats 2 for the prosecution compared to 1 for the defense, looks like the judge was biased towards the prosecution more than the defense, AGAIN. 3. allowed the defense to charecterize the people Rittenhouse killed as rioters - BECAUSE THEY WERE, even the prosecution in its closing argument characterized them as rioters by listing all the things they did, such as tip over portapotties and set things on fire and flip over trucks and such. lets go deeper into that shall we? the people Rittenhouse shot were violent and WERE rioters and looters and arsonists, either by action or by association and accessory to those crimes, the same way a gettaway driver is charged with and convicted as an accessory to a bank roberry or a murder even if he didnt to the actual bank roberry or murder. 4. yelled at prosecutors in front of the jury. damn straight, and if you were the one on trial and your civil AND constitutional rights were being blatanly violated by the prosecution im pretty sure you and your lawyer would be yelling for the judge to stop them. and a prosecutor who has passed his bar and is a lawyer should know better as to which lines you can skirt and how to NOT blatantly cross those lines. judges do tend to give warnings to lawyers on both sides and if those warnings are not heeded then judges do tend to dress down the offending lawyers, its customary to scold someone who has flagrantly broken the rules set forth by the judge and by law AND by the constitution itself. 5. dismissed a gun charge. YES, DEFINITELY YES. especially if the prosecution agrees that the law is flawed to a point where multiple people can come up with multiple and valid arguments when reading the law and the arguments all contradict each other. in this case, the defense claims that reading that law allowed Rittenhouse the right to legally have that weapon, and the prosecution agreed that it could be viewed as that, and when a law becomes murky like that it is the judges JOB as a member of the judicial branch to throw out charges on that law if the law is not clear enough to warrant those charges. what was your argument ot any of those points? 1. wah wah the judge shouldnt have done that because feelings. 2. wah wah the judge should have double standards and allow for the prosecution what he wont allow for the defense because feelings. 3. wah wah the judge shouldnt have done that because more feelings. 4. wah wah more feelings bad judge wah wah. 5. wah wah salty tears wah wah because i dont like wah wah. cry some more salty tears, i use salt to make the gunpowder for my 5.56 ammo. NEED MORE SALT.
    1
  999.  @f3tsch906  my arguments are still the same as in my original post. 1. why did the judge do that? i dont know, i cant give you a reason, can you give a reason other that "wah wah bias wah wah". ITS JUDGES PERROGATIVE. and no, thats not the problem you are talking about, you just want to be salty because you didnt get the verdict you wanted, thats all you care about. 2. you want to make excuses based on your own bias for allowing things for one side while disregarding things for the other side. who gives a shit how far back the history goes, a week or a month or a decade, it establishes a pattern of behaviour. Rosenbaum history goes back a decade or 2 because he has been in custody the whole time and that morning was his first day as a free man in society. if you want to argue that Rittenhouses history should be used in court to establish a pattern of behaviour then you cant argue that other peoples history is irrelevant to establishing a pattern of behaviour. 3. yes, the word victim is a loaded word implying that the person did nothing to deserve being shot, where as the words rioter or looter or arsonist is also a loaded word but they are more accurate in describing the activities of the people shot during that night. as for your comment about the one armed bandit being at the protest being a medic, THATS A LIE. he wasnt a medic, his medic license expired 4 years ago, he was a pretend medic and you LIE. but i like how you have a problem with the judge not allowing a word that could help the prosecution, hopefully one day you get your wish, and you have to stand in front of a judge that allows words that help the prosecution against you. 4. yes, prosecution tampered with evidence. they submitted a version of the video that had a lower resolution and was cropped and withheld the original high quality video with the original resolution. its the same thing as the prosecution taking a photo on paper, and cutting parts out with scissors and then taking a blurry picture of it and giving it to the defense. that is the exact definition of tampering with evidence, and the prosecutor should have been immediately thrown off the case and then disbarred and even charged. 5. are you a WI bar certified lawyer? no you are not. you claiming that the exemption is only for hunting is your opinion formed from listening to other talking heads making their own opinions. the judge and the prosecutor and the defense attorney all 3 came together and declared that the provisions of that law were confusing enough to make the law useless because it could be interpreted in either direction. but i guess you internet guy are smarter than 3 educated people who have made the law their career for multiple years, yup, ALL HAIL INTERNET SMART GUY. so on to your entire rant that the judge is biased. you made no point, you cant show any bias, just being salty over a verdict you dont like. too bad. you didnt prove any bias, other than your own. now enough of your salty tears, go back to the salt mines and replenish that salt you lost whinning about a biased judge that you cant prove was biased.
    1
  1000. 1
  1001. 1
  1002. yea, corporations should pay their fair share, as if. once a corporations expenses go up, they raise prices on their goods and services or fire employees, or a combination of both. if you dont believe that then you are not paying attention, as it happens all the time. so it works kind of like this, you want to give free healthcare or childcare to people, you tax the cable company more to "pay their fair share", a couple of months down the line your cable bill increases, because the cable companies operating expenses increased, and so you are now in effect paying out of your own pocket for the very thing you voted for. better example. you want to give free healthcare or childcare to people, you vote to increase taxes on stores to "pay their fair share", the larger stores start increasing their prices on the goods they sell to cover the increase in their "operating expense" which is the higher tax. the smaller stores which already have a hard time competing with the large stores raise their prices just to stay afloat and loose business as more customers flock to the bigger box stores for cheaper prices, since the big box stores get their products at a discount since they buy it in bulk compared to the small stores. the small stores finally go out of business, while the big stores still stay in business and pass the new taxes off to the consumer. so now, you as the consumer are paying for the very taxes you voted for, while at the same time you destroyed your neighbors small business store and left him destitute and in need of welfare, guess we gotta raise more taxes on the corporation so they pay their fair share some more.
    1
  1003. 1
  1004. 1
  1005. 1
  1006. 1
  1007. 1
  1008. 1
  1009. 1
  1010. 1
  1011.  @neveklund3267  yes, but what you are demonstrating is that you will punish cops no matter what, good or bad. Tell me, when was the last time you heard the mob actually stand up for a cop? When the mob claims all cops are bad, do they distinguish between the bad and good cops? The message the mob is sending is that no matter what, the system will not stand by the police. Why would a good cop want to be a cop when no matter what he does the mob and the system will not support him. Brown in MN was shot by a cop, Obama own DOJ led by Eric Holder put out a report stating that the cop did nothing wrong and was justified, the mob demanded the cop be prosecuted and imprissoned. It started the whole BLM movement. The cop who shot the drunk driver in the Wendy's parking lot, even though the drunk fought with and attacked both cops and took one of their weapons and shot a cop on the face, the mob claims it was murder and demands that cop be punished. Would you take a job that puts you in danger and allows for people to shoot you in the face and you can't do anything about it or else you could face prison? When have you seen the mob stand up and defend a cop when there was an altercation? There is no such event. You can punish all the bad cops you want, but when you start allowing the mob to dictate justice arbitrarily against every cop for every infraction, no one will want to be a cop anymore. Seattle is losing cops and they can't replace them because they are falling short on applicants. MN had to call in cops from other states to help because they are short. Minneapolis voted to defund their police and now they are backtracking and actually spending more just for sign up bonuses to hire cops to replace the ones that quit and they are falling short. Other countries don't have the cops quitting like we do but then again other countries don't have the group hatred of cops like we do, they recognize that there are bad cops and they target those individuals instead of having mobs running through the streets chanting how all cops are bad. You need to open your eyes before it's too late, because you will find yourself in a lawless land with no police at the mercy of whatever gangland decides to allow you to live. You think only bad cops will leave? I'm watching bad cops leaving because they don't want to face the consequences and good cops leaving because they don't want to risk their lives to the mob mentality. The message the mob is putting out there is that no matter what a cop does he is wrong and evil.
    1
  1012. 1
  1013. 1
  1014. 1
  1015. 1
  1016. 1
  1017. 1
  1018. 1
  1019. 1
  1020. 1
  1021. 1
  1022. 1
  1023. 1
  1024. 1
  1025. 1
  1026. 1
  1027. 1
  1028. 1
  1029. 1
  1030. 1
  1031. 1
  1032. 1
  1033. 1
  1034. 1
  1035. 1
  1036. 1
  1037. 1
  1038. 1
  1039. 1
  1040. 1
  1041. 1
  1042. 1
  1043. 1
  1044. 1
  1045. 1
  1046. 1
  1047. 1
  1048. 1
  1049. 1
  1050. 1
  1051. 1
  1052. 1
  1053. 1
  1054. 1
  1055. 1
  1056.  @thetimekeeper955  apparently you misunderstood my comment. i never implied that paternity leave has anything with encouraging single mothers. paternity leave is one single isse in a larger problem, and no, im not against paternity leave. what i was refering to was various items in a larger ideology on both sides. for example. progressives - push for more welfare, which encourages single parenthood since parents start looking at the situation as if they dont need each other any more. a woman can have a child, and the government will help come in and pay for that child and take care of that child. this encourages single motherhood, and there are certainly some cases where women have more kids simply because they get a bigger handout in the form of government benefits. while im not against having help for families and for children, i do recognize that it is encouraging women to be single mothers. conservatives - push for laws against abortion and to dismat=ntle a womans right to choose, while at the same time pushing to cut funding to these social programs that would help a woman financialy who is forced to have a child due to their policies. both sides fight on the battlefield which is the family, and both sides push their agendas, and both sides work against a family unit however covertly they do it. if you think only one side is wrong all the time and the other side is never wrong, then thats wrong thinking in itself. paternity leave is just another battle to be fought in the war, ever notice how the two sides are always opposed, no matter the idea.
    1
  1057. 1
  1058. 1
  1059.  @IrvGottiRumRunner  i know why Hilary lost, it was a combination of the reasons you gave and a mixture of the previous administrations policies that drove people away as they didnt want a continuation of those policies any more. as for Liberals / Leftists, i may inadvertently use the term Liberal when i do mean leftist, i appologise for that, its an old habit that im trying to kick, when i say liberal, i mean leftist. and as far as the difference between progressives and leftists, i dont see any difference between the two since they often paint themselves with the same brush, and liberals sometimes tend to just in and hold the same vieews, not alwasy, but sometimes. i dont have an unwillingness to listen, i listen all the time, i ask questions and i listen, but no one seems to respond with an answer, so claiming that im unwilling to listen is disingenuous itself. and yes, i replied to Sophie and agreed with her assertion for the most part, except for where she claimed that only conservatives dont listen. i tend to believe its equally spread among everyone. now please explain this assertion you make about my blatant dishonesty with splitting hairs over the definition of family, i would like to know where you get that from? and what would you consider engaging in good faith? mostly what i have done is commented to add context or facts that have been omitted or asked simple questions. so what good faith are you talking about? do you mean good faith in where as i shouldnt ask questions and just agree with the whole hive mind mob mentality? i didnt realize asking questions is bad faith and i shouldnt question the mob.
    1
  1060. 1
  1061. 1
  1062. 1
  1063. 1
  1064.  @xjarheadjohnson  talking about babies, you pointd out Thailand, i figured i would point out a statistic, then you go hyperbolic with all the countries that have better infant mortality, its a garbage argument. alot of countries have univeral healthcare, some are better and some are worse, so it must not be the universal part of the healthcare that makes a difference. but i guess you dont have neough college education to think past a signle issue, you think that universal healthcare for all will make things better. we have great healthcare here already, making it universal healthcare will do the following, it might cause costs to go up in the same way college tuition skyrocketed when the government started getting involved in it. and it will for certain lower overall healthcare when a limited resource gets delegated to everyone at the same time, for example. a doctor can see 40 patients per hour in a week, if you raise the number of patients that go see a doctor, then either the doctor can not spend an hour on each patient or the overflow of patients will need to wait which creates a backlog of waiting patients. in either situation the level of healthcare diminishes, while at the same time, everyone that can pay for it will be forced to pay for it through their taxes, which will increase. every time you add people onto a system it causes the costs of that system to increase or causes the level of service to decrease. France is listed as #1 in healthcare, what is not mentioned is the income tax rate, at 27k you are paying 30% tax, at 74k you are paying 41%, and thats JUST the income tax, not including the various local taxes and the EU taxes. you point out other countries and point out how they are better without looking at why they are better or how and completely disregard other places that have the same things and are worse. if you like the healthcare somewhere else, than move to somewhere else instead of demanding that we have the same here and sticking the bill for it to other Americans. i speak from experience when i say that universal healthcare is not better, because i lived in some of those countries, and ive used their healthcare system from time to time.
    1
  1065. 1
  1066. 1
  1067. 1
  1068. 1
  1069. 1
  1070. 1
  1071. 1
  1072. @Tanner really? far more freedom? you think having things provided for you is freedom? slaves in 1860's southern states had everything provided for them, i guess they were free right? 1. people in the US have the freedom to pursue higher education, the only ones that are crying over student debt are the liberals that got useless unemployable degrees in underwater basket weaving. 2. people here have freedom to pursue healthcare, as far as the bankruptcies, sorry that you werent smart enough to be an adult. example, my brother got Pneumonia, severe enough to require going to the hospital, he didnt have health insurance, that was maybe 10 years ago, to this day he hasnt seen a bill from the hospital about it. i dont know about other places, but in Chicago we have a publicly funded hospital called Cook County. and doesnt Canada have longer waiting times to see doctors? great, you wont go bankrupt, but you might die waiting. 3. you think no one in the US is allowed to open a business? you think there are no corporations operating in Canada? childish. 4. so no one has ever in the history of Canada ever been killed by a criminal on theri way to or from a school or store or hospital? again, childish. 5. funny how if a republican looses an election its free and fair, but yet democrats started the whole craze of unfairly loosing elections back in 2016. if you want to to blame anyone for that then start looking at democrats first, it was Hilary and the rest of the good democrats that started claiming the election was rigged back in 2016. you leftys are all the same, if it goes your way then its free and fair, but if it doesnt go your way then its unfair and there was interferrence and foul play and whatever. you can dish it but you cant take it. you like Canada then stay there, we all know why you are defending it, because you are afraid that big daddy Trudeau might activate his "emergency war powers" like some deranged power ranger and come knocking your door down to drag you away. real freedom there.
    1
  1073. 1
  1074. 1
  1075. 1
  1076. 1
  1077. 1
  1078. 1
  1079. 1
  1080. 1
  1081. 1
  1082. 1
  1083. 1
  1084. 1
  1085. 1
  1086. 1
  1087. 1
  1088. 1
  1089.  @ants_in_my_eyes_Wilson  what sweeping assumptions? can you point out what sweeping assumptions that i have? is it the assumption that you have the freedom to go work anywhere else other than Amazons torture chamber? last i remember we outlawed slavery, so yea, its a fact, if you dont like your job then go work somewhere else, millions of people do that each year. or do you think its an assumption that millions of people went online instead of going to their local store? plenty of stores small and big were closing up several years before the pandemic even hit citing online sale companies specifically Amazon. mall around the country have been closing and shuttering because the stores were going out of business because people were doing their shopping online. or do you think im assuming that democrats shut down all those little stores? well who shut them down? its not like the pandemic combined into a life size version of itself and learned to speak english and shut everyone down, it was democrat mayors and governors that shut their citties and states down. 15 days to slow the curve, and that 15 days has dragged on for 2 years. somehow republican areas have opened up already a long time ago while democrats have been crying "how could they, they are killing grandma, close them back down." so yea, democrats closed down everything and only allowed big box stores and online shops to run, and then passed all sorts of regulations that stopped some people from going to even those big box stores. how the hell do you think Bezos has made more money in the past 2 years than during the rest of his lifetime? yea, i have a brain and i use it to look at the bigger picture, maybe you should too.
    1
  1090. 1
  1091. 1
  1092. 1
  1093. 1
  1094. 1
  1095. 1
  1096. 1
  1097.  @r3conwoo  am i being serious right now? about what? that it was an individual doing a stupid thing? yea, pretty serious. unlike most people on here foaming at the mouth trying to label this as some conservative terrorist conspiracy and blame every conservative out there. last time a whole group of people were being blamed for some perceived slights and injustices it didnt turn out too good for that group, although in the end it didnt turn out so good for the people doing the blaming either. my grandfather told me stories about that time, he explained the bullet holes in our wall and how the nazis shot up the house during the war. now what do i see. history repeating itself all over again here in the states. its rhetoric that started being pushed since 2008, if you didnt vote for a certain candidate then you are probably a racist. and its been propagated all the way till the 2016 election when a certain candidate went up and told her supporters that she considers her opponents supporters as irredeamable, racists, mysoginists, an entire basket of deplorables. its been propagated and pushed to where prominent political figures have gone out in public and advocated for harrassing the opposition, and becoming confrontational with them. how long of this campaign of provocation and harrassment and labeling should one side take before they decide they had enough? or should they just keep taking it until the concentration camps are build and the lists drawn up and they are led into the furnaces before they say enough? these are the very tactics that the nazis used to turn the people into a monstrous population that because complacent and accepted the wholesale extermination of people. history is repeating itself, and for so many people who claim they are educated to not notice the signs is kind of surreal. i mean seriously, you are vilifying an entire group of people and then are surprised when some of them snap? what outcome do you expect when you have spent over a decade vilifying an entire group of people simply over their political agenda?
    1
  1098. 1
  1099.  @grmpEqweer  oh i see, so its OK to commit terrorism and put a fuzzy name on it like "marching" if you agree with the group doing the "marching"? they werent marching, people marching dont cause tens of billions in damage and make entire neighborhoods look like warzones. i understand, you support terrorism as long as you approve of the ideology behind it, then you give it fuzzy names like marchers. how many of those unarmed black people getting killed by cops is unjustified? Michael Brown in Ferguson was UNNARMED, and he was shot and killed by a white cop. and OBAMA and HOLDER both came out after the DOJ report and said it was justified. i can understand black people are terrified of the police, because the media has hyped up a false narrative that cops are out there to murder them. of the roughly 350 million police interactions per year, how many unarmed black people were killed per year? out of those, how many were justified? now if you want to pull up numbers with your 20% more likely, here some numbers for you. 6.8 million arrests in 2019 26.6% arrested were black 51.2% of murder arrests were black 52.7% of robbery arrests were black 33.2% of assault arrests were black in fact, the only 3 stats where blacks came out to be representative of the whole population (13%-14) were in just 3 categories dealing with alcohol such as DUI or drunkenness or various liquor laws. everything else is roughly 30%-40% of arrests. pretty remarkable that a black person is 4-5 times more likely to commit murder and then claim they are terrified, i mean 51.2%??? more than whites and hispanics and asians and EVERYBODY else put together. there is your damn numbers.
    1
  1100. 1
  1101. 1
  1102. 1
  1103. 1
  1104. 1
  1105.  @GoldenRetrievers4President  yea, the same thing would be happening under Trump because YOU said so, i guess you are a geo-political master or something right? lets look at a comparison of Trump and Biden. Trump - lower fuel prices Biden - Higher fuel prices Trump – lower inflation Biden – higher inflation Trump – lower covid deaths without a vaccine Biden – higher covid deaths WITH a vaccine Trump – more peace deals between countries Biden – more wars between countries Trump – no famine Biden – warns you of coming famine Lets compare democrat policies to republican policies themselves. FL ranked higher on economy and education and lower death rate with less lockdowns than NY or CA with stricter lockdowns. Yea, Trump was so bad, Trump has very, very little diplomatic skills when dealing with the international community, I mean, its not like he travels around the world and deals with politicians with his property deals now does he. Aholes like you a couple of years ago were claiming that he was making deals with people like Putin over property but now you turn around and claim he has no experience dealing with people like Putin? Here is a fun fact for you, Biden is so great dealing with the international community that they laugh at him, and a large portion of our fertilizer comes from Russia, yes, the same Russia that Biden and the democrats have been badmouthing with lies and recently slapped with sanctions. Guess what that fertilizer does? It grows crops. Buckle up buttercup, because its going to be a rough ride by the end of this year, and you will be starving.
    1
  1106. 1
  1107. 1
  1108. 1
  1109. 1
  1110. 1
  1111. 1
  1112. 1
  1113. 1
  1114. 1
  1115. 1
  1116. 1
  1117. 1
  1118. 1
  1119. 1
  1120. 1
  1121. 1
  1122. 1
  1123. 1
  1124. 1
  1125. 1
  1126. 1
  1127. 1
  1128. 1
  1129. 1
  1130. 1
  1131. 1
  1132.  @hizzlemobizzle  yea, i watched the video, plenty of problems with the solutions that David proposed. David lives in a country where gun ownership is a privilege, nothing more, so those solutions are common sense, but those common sense solutions do not work for rights. his first solution, getting a license to own a gun, name me any other right that you need a license to use? would you instill a licensing requirement on any one of your other rights? check with your previous partners and friends to see if they object? all it takes is 1 bad breakup from a phsychotic partner to negate your ability to protect yourself from that partner. how many women get killed by an ex boyfriend or ex husband, and you want to put that kind of power in their hands? excuse me Mr. ex-boyfriend, so and so wants to get a gun, do you feel they are safe to have a gun? absolutely not Mr Government, i dont believe my ex-girlfriend should have a gun so that she cant defend herself when i plan to come by and kill her next week. what else? safe storage? yea, because everyone know that if you lock your weapon in a safe and then go crazy and want to shoot up a school, of course that safe is going to prevent you from opening it and getting your gun. even with all those solutions, it does nothing, absolutely nothing to stop someone who already has a gun in hand. Davids proposals are good for a country that treats its citizens worse than pet dogs like Canada, but they dont work so well when they are rights. and yes, i say worse than dogs, because i would not punish my dog if he killled someone that was attacking him, but yet as Trudeau said publicly, you do not have a right to defend your life with a gun, in other words, if someone wants to kill you, you have to let them or get punished by the governemtn for protecting yourself. but i would leave you with this question, all those "common sense" propoals he proposed, would you put those on any other rights? how about voting rights? get a license to vote and your relatives and pat partners and whatever have to consent, and any single person says no and POOF, your right to vote is taken away? how about a license and a waiting period for abortions? how about just a simple consent from the father of the baby before an abortion is allowed? you wouldnt put those restrictions on any of your rights, but expect others to put it on theirs.
    1
  1133. 1
  1134. 1
  1135. 1
  1136. 1
  1137. 1
  1138. 1
  1139. 1
  1140. 1
  1141. 1
  1142. 1
  1143. 1
  1144. 1
  1145. 1
  1146. 1
  1147.  @jojen  yea sure, you know this as fact because you have some secret evident of it? let me guess, the people that would be needed to build up the building would have flown in from other places too right? and the local shops in the area would have flown in people to work in them from other areas right? and the property values in those areas would have only gone up for the people that would have flown in from other areas right? lets see, Amazon added 800 jobs in a NYC office they already had instead, ALL those jobs went to locals. WV on MD i forget which state got the A2 headquarters bid was rejoicing in the extra economic output in thier state and the locality. even IF only 10% of the jobs went to locals, that would have been 2500 good jobs, and the other people flying in for those jobs would need housing which would boost the rental market. local shops would have been inundated with more business needing to hire more people, and more small businesses would have opened up to supply the need of those 25,000 workers. not to mention the $30 - $3 = $27 BILLION with a capital B in projected tax revenue generated from that project over 10 years, thats $2.7 billion per year extra that could have been generated to help the ailing infrastructure and implement social programs for people left behind by the project. AOC could have argued that some of that $27 billion in new tax revenue should be used for projects to help the poor people in the neighborhood. but alas, it was not meant to be, and when EVERY other politician railed against her and grilled her for it, she stapped away and claimed she didnt do anything, this shows that EVERYONE including AOC knew she did bad when she even denied later of doing anything, liek a little kid, "it wasnt me". i may have a smooth brain, but at least i have a brain, what do you have considering you side with AOC when SHE wont even take responsibility for this messup and EVERYONE knows it was a messup.
    1
  1148. 1
  1149. 1
  1150. 1
  1151.  @Pancakegr8  im curious to see what your idea of a living wage is? ive seen examples of peopel posting that $15 an hour is not enough, and $20 an hour is not enough. what i would suggest instead? how about instead of raising peoples wage just by default, offer some training courses. how about we popularize trade schools again? right now, Trucking companies across the country are offering hiring bonuses, some as low as $3000 and some as high as $12000, they are also offering to cover CDL driving classes and expenses. in other words, they will send you to learn how to drive a truck AND they will pay you for doing it AND give you a sign on bonus at the start. plumbers unions are suffering a shortfall of plumbers in the near future and are actually looking at hiring on young people and paying for their training and education. a good plumber after a few years in the field can make up to $25 an hour, and thats just a few years, its not uncommon to find a blumber of 20-30 years making $60 or more per hour. Carpenters union are starting to do the same, my nephew joined a carpenters union 1.5 years ago and is already making $22 an hour. electricians unions are doing the same thing, in fact, there was an article not too long ago that they are suffering because most electritians in the country are getting ready to retire. i know of 1 electrician making $625,000 per year, although he works on those high tension high capacity lines, but still. cell tower install techs, as technology progresses they will need more and more people to build those, they make $125k or more per year. have the government start investing in green energy the right way, i dont mean making silly loans to companies called Solindra that go under and bankrupt in a year, but have the government maybe start funding technology courses for engineers and techicians. you want to fill the world with wind turbines but you have no one to repair those wind turbines. or solar panels. its not about giving people more money hoping to prop them up, its about giving people better opportunities to give them better potential to prop them up. if you want to make someone into a doctor, you dont give money to the hospital, you take a person and give them the oportunity to become a doctor by opening up the doors to the medical school that will teach them. how many actual grants are there for medical students? how does someone become a wind turbine techician? where does someone even go to join a trade union? have the government help the people connect with those resources instead of just throwing money at people hoping to solve their problems. it wont help a person if you raise the min wage to $15 an hour because very shortly inflation will catch up and that $15 an hour will not be enough either. have the government collaborate with all those resources to give people a better life.
    1
  1152. 1
  1153. 1
  1154.  @Pancakegr8  the downside is higher taxes. we already subsidize Walmart employees in part with welfare because they cant afford to buy food or pay rent or other issues. subsidizing wage increases would be direct money payments. for example, if a person is making $9 an hour, and you subsidize them to $15 an hour, thats $6 per hour as a direct payemnt, and someone else needs to be taxed at $6 an hour to make up that payment. if half the country needs to be subsidized at $6 per hour then the other half that dont need to be subsidized needs to be taxed at $6 per hour. that could lead to potential job losses in the form of people quitting their jobs or it could lead to more subsidization. i make $21 an hour, if i get taxed $6 an hour on top of the taxes i already pay, that would drop me to $15 an hour. right now as a single father, im doing ok at $21 an hour, if i drop down by $6 to $15 an hour, it will be much harder for me to make ends meet and i would be strugling and probably require my own subsidy, and if the government wont subsidize me because im at $15 an hour, then what is the point of me working my azz off just to strugle, i think at that point i would quit and have the gov take care of my needs completely. the other downside of subsidizing is that it breeds an atmosphere of dependance, peopel become dependent on those subsidies. plenty of times i have heard that people are preferring to stay on unemployment during this pandemic because they make more on unemployment than at work, so there are plenty of people with the mentallity of not striving to be better, and i kind of understand their side, whats the point of working when its a dead end job? but give them an opportunity to start working in a job that pays little but has great potential, like a trade profesion, it starts small, but there is always the outlook that eventually you will make big. a burger flippers only outlook is hoping the deep frier spill on them and they could sue.
    1
  1155.  @Pancakegr8  do you think those billionaires are billionaires because they have billions stashed away in a bank account? most of Bezos wealth is locked in his stocks. most billionaires that run companies have stocks, that is their net value, on paper, because of the stocks and stock options they hold, not because thats how much money they have on hand. so if you start taxing them based on their value, they wont be the only ones that suffer. a lot of those stocks are owned by hedge funds which run 401k portfolios. so lets say you tax Bezos at 50% of his value. that means he has to sell 50% of his stocks to pay that tax. when large sale orders like that pop up, it lowers the price of that stock. so now the many 401k accounts that hold that stock lose some value, depending on how much is being sold off, but if $30 billion goes on sale at once, that would significantly drop the share price and negatively impact various 401k accounts. its more complex than this, i know, this is just a laymans basic example, im not including that this would have a panic ripple effect into various other stocks affecting more 401k, but in effect, you tax someone heavily forcing them to sell a large portion of their stocks which affects 401k accounts which severely impacts retirement accounts for numerous individuals. so now these individuals that were saving for their retirement nestegg saw its value drop, possibly significantly, and therefore affecting their ability to retire, and so they have to work longer or possibly still retire and maybe even rely on government subsidies because their retirement accounts lost a lot of value. redistributing wealth is not the right way to go in my opinion, creating wealth by giving people opportunities to gain skills to create wealth is a much better strategy. maybe instead of giving out foreign aid to other countries, maybe use that money to re-invest in our own people, to create a strategy of pumping out higher skilled people that can do more with those opportunities. if you tax Bezos 100%, then you get $60 billion, then you can redistribute that wealth to people, but the following year you cant tax Bezos and gain billions because you taxed it away from him the previous year, now what do you redistribute the following year? at 60 billion redistributed across 350 million people, you can give each person $171.00 per person, its innefective at helping most people more than 2 -3 months, then what? but if you give people an education and skills, they can use those skills and education to lift themselves out of their predicament. give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for life.
    1
  1156.  @Pancakegr8  actually yes, there is an end to taxing their income, if you tax their billions away, then they no longer have billions to make more billions for you to tax their money away. you think Bezos jumped from 20 bil to 60 bil because of the money he made? no, he jumped that much in value mostly because the stocks he owns rose up in value, if you take those stocks away today then tomorrow he doesnt have any stocks to rise in value. dont get me wrong, i think its an obscene amount of wealth to hold in one place, but to take it away just to waste it fruitlessly is a waste. we have welfare programs already in place that help feed people, and we have other social programs that help house people and take care of most of their needs, what we need to do is eliminate the waste in our government and start targeting that money towards education and skill improvement, the people are already getting fish, its no point in giving them more fish thinking they need more fish, now is the time to teach them how to fish. if you have a burger flipper making minimum wage just getting by, do you really want to give him more money to help him get by better or do you want to teach him how to make a better life for himself. of course there are people who dont have food, so give them food, im not saying to not give peopel their basic needs, but what i am saying is dont concentrate on that being the only thing, meet peoples basic needs and divert the majority of it to making peoples lives better or else you really havent helped anyone do anything other than eat good steak for a little while. taxing billionaires is not going to solve much of anything, you will simply take peoples money away and 1 of 3 things will happen, 1. the billionaires will be taxed out of existance and you wont have them to tax within a couple of years. 2. the billionaires will simply leave and put their money somewhere else and you still wont have them to tax. 3. the billionaires will stick around and they will continue to be billionaires and you will continue to tax them, but this is a low probability of that. if you get taxed on the value of your stuff, how long before you have to start selling some of your stuff in order to cover your taxes? how long until you cant afford to buy new stuff because you have to cover the taxes on the stuff you still own? if you own your own home, and i tax you at 50% of your value, can you afford that hit? or do you have to sell your home to cover the 50% tax on that home? its the half life principle, if you own $1 billion in stock, and it goes up in price to $3 billion, and i tax at 50%, you have to sell $1.5B in order to pay the tax, that also stunts the stock growth since most peopel would have to sell some of their shares to cover the tax. the following year because of the huge selloff, the stock hasnt grown or had stagnant growth, lets say it grew in price to $2 billion, and i tax half it drops you down to $1 billion. the following year you get taxed till you are below a billion and so on and so on until you have nothing. its a simplistic argument but it can be seen anywhere, for example in the housing market. right now reent prices are falling like a rock in NYC because there is a huge supply and very little demand. in 2008-09 there was a housing market crash because prices for homes dropped because there was too many homes on the market and not enough buyers, some of those homes were overvalued, but thats another topic. basi supply and demand coupled with a half life rule can be put into economics such as this. do you really thing Bezos was paid $40 billion last year by Amazon? no, it was mostly because the Amazon stock he owns trippled in price mostly fueled by covid lockdowns. the point is, we already feed systemically chronically poor people, now lets educate them so they can feed themselves.
    1
  1157. 1
  1158. 1
  1159. 1
  1160. so i watched your video and and have a few points to put in. 1. the argument of being anti-establishment, you and Vaush both may have a different definition of what the establishment is, i define the establishment as a "career" politician that has spent many terms in office in an "established" political career. Trump does not fit that definition, considering that he hasnt even finished a term in a job that would not alow enough terms to set up an established career. 2. Tim pool attacks Pelosi plenty of times? no, most of Tim Pools vids are reporting on news stories about Pelosi. 3. Criticizing Trump for the Pandemic response is possible, but you have to look at certain factors. Vaush claims that Trump did poorly in his response to the pandemic. i ask, poorly compared to what? was Trumps effort to respond hampered by anything? sabotaged by other elements of the government? does Trump have the power and authority to respond in the same manner as other countries? you compare the US to countries like Germany and Japan. a. Germany right now is under a harsh lockdown to where ALL non essential people are to stay at home and are allowed only 1 hour per day to be outside to complete any tasks such as exercise or shopping, on no visitors allowed at anyones home, its comparable to a US supermax prison except our prisoners get to have visitors. do you or Vaush believe teh president has the authority to implement su measures? b. Japan - their societal structure and cultural norms are comparatively different than the US, they have been wearing masks since 2003 and is considered as a courtesy and a sign of respect. they have a more homogenous (misspelled word) society than the US and have a more subservient disposition towards people that we dont have here in the states. for example, in the states its not uncommon to see on the news a thug beat up an old woman and steal her walker, but if you attempt to do that in Japan, a band on magic ninjas appear from the void of oblivion and commit Hara-Kiri on you for simply thinking about doing such a thing (thats a joke). either way, comparing several countries that have different norms and different societal structures is disengenuos (misspelled word) at best, its like comparing a Chevy beater truck to a Ferrari and a Porsche and complaining that the Chevy didnt beat them even though it has wheels and an engine just like the others do 4. Critical race theory - Vaush did an excellent job of defending this ideology and sidestepping and excusing it, that does not make him right. i did a bit of reading on critical race theory, and yes, it is racist at its core by definition. its teaching push racism or sow the seeds of racism at its base, in the same way that Nazis in Germany pushed their anti Jewish ideology. CRT teaches that white supremacy and racial power are maintained over time and the law plays a role in that. it is not that different from when the Nazis in Germany were teaching their kids that Jews were bad and maintained their power to keep the German people down. i tell you, Hitler is smiling right now in the great beyond. should an ideology that sows the seeds of racial hatred be taught in our schools or implemented in our government institutions? in the same way that i dont believe that creationism or Klan teachings should be taught in our schools or implemented in our government institutions is the same way i feel about CRT. Vaush looses credibility points with me when he supports such an ideology and makes excuses for it. 5. your statement that the right wingers want to deplatform Vaush in the same way they "claim" that the left is doing to them. while i am no fan of deplatforming anyone because i am a staunch believer in the old rule of "if you dont like whats on TV then turn it off" it is NOT a "claim" that the right is making, it is fact. i would point you to Stephan Molenue's YouTube channel but it seems he got banned and kicked off Twitter and facebook also, so then i would point you to Alex Jones's channel but it seems like the same fate befell him, maybe Milo Younopolis (i know i butchered that name) but nope, and a whole slew of others. its funny how during the senate hearings where the CEO's of Facebook and Twitter and Youtube/google were unable to name even a single left wing individual who has been banned from their platforms. 6 USPS sending masks? and what exactly would 5 masks sent to every household accomplish? on average, there are 2-4 people living in each household in the US, some have only 1 while there are others that have 7 people in a household. sending each household 5 masks is at best a bandaid cure for a gunshot wound where in most cases that supply of masks would last for at most a week. for the record, yes, i am a Trump supporter, i guess that puts me on the right, and i dont care for Vaush, during that whole 4 hour debate there were several points that Vaush lost credibility in my eyes, the biggest point was on the discussion for for the Russia probe, where Vaush claims that the Russia probe netted numerous high level convictions, while omitting what those convictions were for. to me thats a lie of omission that paints a completely different narrative than the truth. when Vaush claims that the Russia probe was successful because it resulted in high level convictions, it paints a narative that there WAS Russia collusion, but what he omits from his point is that the high level conviction was for an unrelated crime of money laundering committed a decade before, and he omits the fact that the other convictions were of such low level as lying to FBI agents and some of those convictions were actually guilty please that were coerced out of the convicted. he also omits to point out that most of the Russia probe was flawed by FISA court abuses which is a fact based on a lawyer that worked on the probe being charged with tampering with evidence and numerous intelligence personnel stating on the record that multiple FISA warrants had erroneous information and multiple errors and were improper. a lie of omission is still a lie, and Vaush lied in portraying the Russia probe, in the same context as if a child molestation investigation against an individual was successful while because there was a conviction while neglecting to mention that the conviction was against the individuals neighbor for car theft 10 years ago. while i consider that for the most part, both Tim and Vaush were on point, and they kept a cool demeanor except for one spicy part, i would not consider listening to Vaush since i do not hold him as a credible individual, i view him as an apologist for the left pushing leftist ideology while making excuses for its existence, if the same manner that he tried to excuse and redefine CRT into something that it is not. as for you Mr. Rational Nation, you seem cool and collected, so i think i will subscribe to your channel and listen in from time to time to some of your musings.
    1
  1161. 1
  1162. 1
  1163. 1
  1164. 1
  1165. 1
  1166. 1
  1167. 1
  1168. 1
  1169. 1
  1170. 1
  1171. 1
  1172. 1
  1173. 1
  1174. 1
  1175. 1
  1176. 1
  1177. 1
  1178. 1
  1179. 1
  1180. 1
  1181. 1
  1182. 1
  1183. 1
  1184. 1
  1185. 1
  1186. 1
  1187. 1
  1188.  @oarguello  yes you are exactly right. its sentiments like yours about caring for people who are suffering that cost us thousands of our own lives and trillions of our own dollars going off to other countries to set them straight. we should have never gone to Afghanistan in the first place. we should have never gone to Iraq in the first place. they were sold as necessary wars by evil elitists with their own agenda and then its was continued with the whole "think of the poor innocent people" sentimentality like yours. 9 out of 10 people coming to the southern border get denied asylum, ever wonder why? its not because they are fleeing political persecution or violence or whatever else BS reason they give, its simply because they are economic refugees coming here for the jobs and the welfare. maybe they should stay in their own country and make it better. perhaps if they realize that the US is a harsh mistress they wont be so eager to help when the US comes to invade, and the US will have a harder time invading. maybe end the constant cycle of the US getting involved in these pointless endless wars with no real objective. but noooo, your only solution is to help those poor innocent people, oh think of the children blah blah. if you are soooo worried about some dictator abusing his own people, then maybe strap a rifle to your back and YOU go help those people instead of insisting that the rest of us send our sons and daughters to die and spend trillions of our tax dollars to accomplish absolutely ZILCH.
    1
  1189. 1
  1190. 1
  1191. 1
  1192. 10 symptoms of woke mind virus. 1. You read books, and dont burn them. (except if its books you dont agree with so you demand they be taken away, wonder how Mark Twain is doing). 2. You embrace science. (only science that pushes an agenda and has no studies or research done behind it and is usually wrong). 3. you are willing to change your mind when new information becomes available. (only if that new information reinforces your narrative, if the new information goes against your narrative you demand that the people that brought this information be silenced while calling the fascists and nazis and racists) 4. you understand that most issues aren't black and white. (except when you disagree then you bring in black and white race into every argument). 5. you believe in true equality for all people. (except for white people, those people should be labeled as oppressors always and stopped from using their white privilege to even breathe). 6. you like to share. (only when you share your ideas with everyone else, opposing ideas and opinions should not be shared with anyone just your own opinio0ns and ideas should be shared) 7. you embrace cooperation. (only with your own kind, anyone that does not agree with your ideology should always be regarded as a racist fascist nazzi) 8. you respect others rights. (except if its rights you dont agree with) 9. you believe culture and arts have value. (except when there is a political message to send and subverting a culture works in your favor and furthers your ideology) 10. you care for the planet and all of its life. (thats why you push policies that would destroy the planet in the long run and cause people to die on a biblical scale.)
    1
  1193. 1
  1194. 1
  1195. 1
  1196. 1
  1197. 1
  1198. 1
  1199. 1
  1200. 1
  1201. 1
  1202.  @valmacclinchy  yes, i have heard Bernie speak, and yes, i agree that in a wealthy country our healthcare is unnaceptable, but then again, who is going to pay for it all? our taxes? our taxes get wasted on a myriad of other things, such as foreign aid to countries for projects that they dont need, what was it? some odd millions for Shri-Lanka to buy a speedboat? how many billions have gone to Pakistan when they were hiding Bin Laden right next to their biggest military command base? how much of our money gets wasted on NATO to cover the bills that other members of NATO dont cover because they are unwilling to meet their budget requirements to be members of NATO. how many billions have we already sent to Ukraine? how much money is being wasted on illegals here in the US, i would estimate its in the tens of billions at least. i live in Chicago, and the ones that came on busses for TX are being housed in 5 star hotels now in the burbs, and given free healthcare while our own people cant get medical attention and live on the streets. these are just some examples. our system is broken, because its run by ineptitude at every angle you can look at, and the real tragedy is that none of the voters care, as long as their guy makes some fancy speaches and promises, and if he doesnt follow through wilth his promises then he can just blame some boogeyman on the other side. tell me, what has bernie done or tried to do to better anyones life, what broken thing has he tried to fix? nothing, he just whines about it.
    1
  1203. @Val MacClinchy  you may not drive on "my" highway, but neither do I, but you and I still benefit from that highway. You know what does drive on that highway? The truck that is bringing food to the local grocery store, and the truck bringing fuel to the gas station so the ambulance has enough gas to transport a person to a hospital, there are so many other benefits. But enough of that. As for Bernie being the amendment king, it's not that hard to tack on an amendment to a piece of legislation that you know will pass. The hard part is creating legislation of your own, which he doesn't do. So instead of bringing you a cake, he brings you crumbs and expects you to celebrate. He was around for the 08 crash, why did he not draft legislation to fix that problem from happening again? In 2016 he warned this was going to happen, why didn't he draft legislation to fix the problem he warned about? Oh yea, he was too busy whining about it and kissing democrats ass. At best he is a Charleston offering bandaid short term fixes for long term problems and selling it in a way so people buy it. His biggest gimmick is raise the minimum wage to $15/hr as if though that will fix the problem, it won't, just like it didn't fix it the last 4 times they raised the minimum wage. This way in a couple of years he can swoop in as a hero championing to raise the minimum wage again. His other gimmick is tax the millionaires and billionaires... oh wait, only the billionaires now since he is a millionaire, like that's gonna solve anything either, those taxes will simply be trickled down to the end buyer of a companies products. You want to raise the tax on a billionaires income like Bezos? The company will simply pay him more to offset that higher tax and then charge more for their products and services. That billionaire will still make the same money but you will be paying more and Bernie will be screaming about the billionaires and offering you the same failed policy of taxing them more. Everyone cries about how the rich make an obscene amount of money, but no one goes after it in a practical way. 1. Corporate tax, applied to profits post operational costs as a percentage based on profit percentage, meaning, if a company made 20% profits, then they get taxed at 20% on their profits, if they make 60% profits then they get taxed at 60% on their profits, and if they make 100% profits, then they get taxed at 100% on their profits. This will disincentive companies from price gouging and will actually force companies to start charging better prices and to start paying better wages. If Amazon had to pay 120% taxes on their profits, you would see how quickly they would start shifting those profits towards better pay for their workers just to bump up their operating costs and lower their profits margin to lower their tax liability. 2. Personal income taxes, the same way like xorporate taxes, your living expenses would be operating costs and anything above that would be calculated as profits and taxed the same way. That's a more permanent solution to a long term problem than "make the rich pay their fair share" nonsense. Elon Musk paid 12 BILLION in taxes to the IRS this year, that's more than the yearly operating budget for the city of Chicago with millions of people living in it, he paid more in taxes than millions of people, which part is fair?
    1
  1204. 1
  1205. 1
  1206. 1
  1207. 1
  1208. 1
  1209. 1
  1210. 1
  1211. 1
  1212. 1
  1213. 1
  1214. 1
  1215. 1
  1216. 1
  1217. 1
  1218. 1
  1219. 1
  1220. 1
  1221. 1
  1222. 1
  1223. 1
  1224. 1
  1225. 1
  1226. 1
  1227. 1
  1228.  @leax_Flame  and what do you bring to the table that is productive? what exactly? you think whining about wages and demanding the government fix your lives with a minimum wage will help? the government has raised minimum wage many times before, and somehow still here we are today because the current minimum wage is not enough and you think raising it is going to solve all your problems. you want an easy instant fix with instant gratification right away without thinking of the long term consequences, ironically its what the climate change people say about corporations, that they think of short term benefits at the cost of long term consequences. all for a quick buck i guess. the funny thing is you dont even realize the situation you are in. you want $15/hr minimum wage, that will for the short term raise those people out of poverty, and within a few short months prices are going to start catching up on everything. its a ripple effect. you are fighting over unskilled jobs with other people who are unskilled AND with illegals who will take that job for a third of what you want. you are effectively working towards NOT benefiting anyone in the long run. raise the minimum wage by 100%, that will give the poor some extra purchasing power for a short time, but all those businesses WILL raise the prices on their services and their goods to cover for the rise in employee costs. withing a year, those prices go up by 100% to make up for workforce expenditures, and now those people are back in poverty again, while at the same time you destroyed the buying power of the middle class. that guy that was making $15/hr before, you think he will be happy with making minimum wage now? he is going to go to his boss and demand a higher wage because his grocery bill went up, and his gas cost went up, and his clothing cost went up and the cost of everything he buys went up. that maintenance guy working in a building is going to go to the building manager and demand a higher wage because his costs of living are going to go up, and the building manager is either going to have to raise everyones rent to cover the higher wage or lay the guy off and have the building fall apart. thats what you offer, helping NO ONE while at the same time hurting others, because you havent learn from the past, you havent seen that this kind of stuff has gone on before and here we are in the same situation all over again. you are insane, and thats not an insult, that is a fact, as stated by Einstein himself. "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result".
    1
  1229. 1
  1230. 1
  1231. 1
  1232. 1
  1233. 1
  1234. 1
  1235. 1
  1236. 1
  1237. 1
  1238. 1
  1239. 1
  1240. 1
  1241. 1
  1242. 1
  1243. 1
  1244. 1
  1245. 1
  1246. ​ @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1247.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1248.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1249.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1250.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1251.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1252.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1253.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1254.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1255.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1256.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1257.  @quadcom  i know exactly who you are because you are on here with your head in the sand ignoring the possibility of it happening, OAN did several news stories where people have claimed that someone voted in other counties using their names and their vote was not counted, FOX news did a couple of stories on it already and so did NPR. TX removed 95,000 illegals from their voter registry logs, and its a national joke that dead people vote for democrats in cities like Chicago, and democrats fight tooth and nail to eliminate voter ID from voting. with all that, you should be asking if we are doing any investigating instead of asking for proof that it really is happening before acting on it. you should be asking why are democrats fighting tooth and nail to stop voter ID's, or you could just keep denying it and leave a herritage for your kids where they live in a country where they have to work to pay for people that refuse to. right now in Chicago they are working on implementing a new law for a transfer tax of 20% for property, while at the same time blowing $51 million a month to house and feed illegals. its a real posibility that more municipalities could pass such a law and when you die, the house that you leave your kids will be lost because they cant afford the 20% transfer tax, and its all VOTED on and you dont even know for sure if the votes are legitimate because anytime anyone ever brings up the idea to investigate democrats jump up and claim its a lie and it doesnt happen and there is no evidence so we dont need to investigate, JUST LIKE YOU.
    1
  1258. 1
  1259. 1
  1260. 1
  1261. 1
  1262. 1
  1263. 1
  1264. 1
  1265. 1
  1266. 1
  1267. 1
  1268. 1
  1269. 1
  1270. 1
  1271. 1
  1272. 1
  1273. 1
  1274. 1
  1275. 1
  1276. 1
  1277. 1
  1278. 1
  1279. 1
  1280. 1
  1281. 1
  1282. 1
  1283. 1
  1284. 1
  1285. 1
  1286. 1
  1287. 1
  1288. 1
  1289. 1
  1290. 1
  1291. 1
  1292.  @KL-lt8rc  an AR IS my security at home, when i go groery shopping i strap something more comfortable for the occasion. im not gonna deny that i like my cool toys, but im also not going to deny the statistics that you are oblivious to, and im not going to deny myself options simply because you dont like them. at home my AR is my first line of defense, and i have my reasons for that, reasons that you are most likely oblivious to. but hey, when your door gets knocked in by 3 or 4 guys and they shoot your dog, maybe you can CPR them to death while explaining the merits of your security system that you pay for that was dissabled. look i know CPR, its not going to do any good while there is a gun pointed at me or bullets flying at me, i cant CPR the bad guy away. and where i live, no dogs allowed per HOA rules, that leaves security system, either a stand alone or a monthly subscription to one, i have a stand alone. its like having a car, would you toss out the airbags because you have seatbelts? would you toss our the crumple zones and reinforced frame because you have airbags? its funny how everything you go for you want more security, the more the better, safer cars, safer online banking, more security for everything except when it comes to your family, then you want to delegate that responsibility away from yourself and delegate it to someone else whose track record you doubt anyway (government) FBI statistics, a little over 1,000,000 home invasions per year. home invasion is defined as an intrusion into a living domacile while the occupant is present. 60% of those are by 2 or more perpetrators, and 40% are by 3 or more perpetrators. NYPD statistics show that trained officers have a 30% hit ratio at a target on a range at 15 feet during nominal conditions, meaning target standing still, no stress, good lighting and visibility. that ratio drops when there is movement and poor visibility and stress. so in good conditions, 3 bullets will hit your target out of 10. FBI statistics also show that only 28% of people shot were 1 shot stops, meaning 1 bullet stopped the assailant. so on a good day, if my home is invaded by 3 guys, i better pray my aim is true and perfect, and each shot is a headshot, because anything less and me and my family is dead. so yea, i'll take my AR with the 60 round drum mag because it gives my family the best chance of surviving.
    1
  1293. 1
  1294.  @KL-lt8rc  so my argument stands, you DONT get rid of your airbags in your car, if they are malfunctioning then you replace them with ones that operate properly, im talking about ones that operate properly, they can and do in some instances cause injury and death, but you still dont get rid of them. as for making guns more secure and safe? how so? with what? yes, i understand that the CDC study was mostly self reported, thats why i admitted that the 3,500,000 number was way too high, but the 750,000 low number is an actual number that the CDC stated was confirmed by multiple accounts and valid, so ummmmm, you dont believe in the science if it doesnt support whatever your narrative you like? yes, i use the number 400 killed by riffles because we are discussing the AR-15, which is a rifle, not classified as a pistol unless it is manufactured in a pistol form, you can not legally modify an AR-15 riffle into an AR-15 pistol, its illegal according to the feds and ATF as it would violate the NFA. try to stay on topic as we are talking about RIFFLES. i am staying on topic and not switching anything mid argument, i would call it a discusison, but to each his own. we are discussing the AR-15 riffle, and so me posting information pertinent to the AR-15 in our discussion is correct, but since you refference the link i posted and claimed that all gun deaths have been dropping, that was a different post to a different person. so either you are either a troll running multiple accounts and are getting confused, or your argument is so weak that you need to bring in parts of other arguments to try and support your flimsy foundation. my post with the link was in response to another poster claiming that gun murders have been rising since Trump got into office. and yes, i read the Scientific America article, do i agree with it completely, no, crime is crime, its like saying most crime can be eliminated if you eliminate the guns that cause crime, doesnt quite work for countries that eliminated guns and still have crime. now for the 40,000 deaths by guns, the majority of those are either suicides or accidents, and in the cases of accidents, usually the shooter faces murder charges, personally i feel that is apropriate and the accidental shootings should be more scrutinized and sifted through to figure out if the accidental shooting was self inflicted and moved to the suicide column or if it was accidentally shooting another person and moved to the MURDER column. but trying to use the 40,000 gun deaths per year argument to justify those as gun crimes is disingenuous at best, would you call for car accidents to be treated as crimes all the time? no you wouldnt. as for the suicide portion, Japan has a high suicide rate and i believe in 2018 or 2017 there was only 3 suicides by guns, while the rest chose other methods such as strangulation or poison, do we treat rope as an evil weapon? but the gist of it is this, i am comfortable with my AR and my various other firearms, im not convincing anyone else that they must get one, if you dont want one, thats perfectly fine, but you are trying to get them taken away from me over your personal feelings, if thye are dangerous for your family, by all means, dont get one, stay away from them, not everyone is competent enough to handle a firearm, hence the accidental shootings, but it is still up to everyone to decide for themselves. but if you are worried about being killed or injured by a bad guy, then stay at home and dont come out, the world is a dangerous place. or you could move to a safe country like England, there you dont have to worry about a scary AR, just the mass stabbings that so far put Londons murder rate above NYC. of you could move to France, no scary ARs there, just the occasional truck plowing through crowds, maybe Japan where you have to deal with a crazy cult gas attack once in a while. or maybe, just maybe, you can start asking how to really stop these shootings instead of figuring out how to make people defenseless and dependent. its like a farmer punishing the sheep because the wolf has teeth. why is there no mass shootings in gun shops, and gun shows, and gun ranges? i mena there are more guns than people there, those scary fully semiauto assault guns should be able to knock out half the worlds population with the number that are present. why is it that you are OK with securing a bank with armed security but think your schools deserve less than that?
    1
  1295. 1
  1296. 1
  1297. 1
  1298. 1
  1299. 1
  1300. 1
  1301. 1
  1302. 1
  1303. 1
  1304. 1
  1305. 1
  1306. 1
  1307. 1
  1308. 1
  1309. 1
  1310. 1
  1311. 1
  1312. 1
  1313. 1
  1314. 1
  1315. 1
  1316. 1
  1317.  @therationalnational  i see, so Ryan Grim is an expert authority on DARPA memos and the language because he is a journalist and political commentator that worked on the Intercept and Huffpo and the Young Turks, so his personal commentary opinion is fact when he debunks the documents because of the language used in them? yep, the paid and owned mainstream media pundit was given his script to read and he read it and you believe him. i would at least say that what you report you genuinely believe in and are not bought off by higher interests, where as he is giving his personal opinion which is molded by his owners and not actually debunking anything. him saying that the language sounds ludicrous or nonsensical is his opinion, and i notice he doesnt back up his statements with anything to prove his opinion, such as when he claims that there are no redactions, and you dont usually get to see secretive documents without redactions. those redactions are put in when the document is released through normal channels, but when a document is stored it is stored in its original unredacted format so it can be disseminated and redactions added in based on necessity. more and more its starting to look like this virus was created in a lab and Fauci helped fund the creation and it either escaped by accident or was released on purpose, but you go on and buy the narrative that some bat flew 900 miles to the wet market and a got a little splooge on its face for a pengolin screwing a snake and POOF you have a new virus, because of course the government would never run a dangerous experiment and would never release a disease into the general public like the Tuskegee Syphilis experiments.
    1
  1318. 1
  1319. 1
  1320. 1
  1321. 1
  1322. 1
  1323. 1
  1324. 1
  1325. 1
  1326. 1
  1327. 1
  1328. 1
  1329. 1
  1330. 1
  1331. 1
  1332. 1
  1333. 1
  1334. 1
  1335. 1
  1336. 1
  1337. 1
  1338. 1
  1339. 1
  1340. 1
  1341. 1
  1342. 1
  1343. 1
  1344. 1
  1345. 1
  1346. 1
  1347. 1
  1348. 1
  1349. 1
  1350. 1
  1351. 1
  1352. 1
  1353. 1
  1354. 1
  1355.  @lilrayallen13  oh noes, the storming of the capitol? do you mean the time that the democrats stormed the capitol during the Kavanaugh hearings or that time where the Secret Service had to evacuate the president to the white house bunker for safety reasons? which storming of the capitol are you referring to? Trump didnt tell anyone to question the news, he just pointed out that the news organizations have an agenda and they will lie to push that agenda, most people have realized this. he never told people that the virus was a hoax, you are lying. as for trusting medical information, EVERYONE that has been fearmongering about this virus has flipped on practically EVERY issue at hand, Fauci himself has said one thing only to completely reverse his stance a few days later on multiple occasions. wear a mask, dont wear a mask, wear a mask and even maybe multiple masks. vaccine works, then it doesnt work, then it works , then it only works partially. i remember VP Harris on video saying that she wouldnt trust ANY vaccine developed under the Trump administration, in fact, EVERY democrat that was running for president in 2020 said the same thing, they wouldnt take it and they wouldnt trust it. Biden himself said that he wouldnt trust it because there wasnt enough testing done on it, THATS ON VIDEO. but yet we shouldnt question it because .... reasons. as for the elections being rigged, yes, he did say that, and he pointed to discrepancies, to where we are getting more and more information from AZ that they had faulty election results and one of the lawsuits that was filed, the judge himself stated that yes, there are massive discrepancies but he did not feel he had the authority to discredit a bunch of voters. you say this isnt normal anywhere else in the world? you are right, its only normal here in the US, in 2016 democrats were screaming at the top of their lungs about a rigged election to where we got 3 years of investigations. DEMOCRATS normalized this. and yea, Trump supporters ARE their own entity in the republican party, because they recognize that the republican party is no different from the democrat party, they are only there to enrich themselves at the expense of the regular people, its something you are blind to.
    1
  1356. 1
  1357. 1
  1358. 1
  1359. 1
  1360. 1
  1361. 1
  1362. 1
  1363. 1
  1364. 1
  1365. 1
  1366. 1
  1367. 1
  1368. 1
  1369. 1
  1370. raising minimum wage does nothing but raise inflation, it does not raise up the lower class as people are tricked into believing, it in fact destroys buying power for the middle class. when you raise the minimum wage, you have to pay your workers more, and therefore you have to raise the prices of products that you sell to cover the higher cost of labor now incurred. over several months, a short span, prices go up in all areas and stabilize into a new norm, the workers that got raised to $15 an hour find that their pay increased but the cost of products and services increased by relatively a close amount, therefore not really raising them out of poverty while only giving them a small boost in purchasing power for a short period of time. now workers who make $15 - $21 per hour, their purchasing power is devastated because they see the same increase in costs for services and product, they stay at their current pay, so they make the same but since things cost more they can buy less now. here is an example: milk costs $10 to produce a bottle per hour, a person making $10 per hour can buy 1 bottle of milk for an hours of work. if the wage goes up to $15 per hour then the price of the milk goes up to $15 per bottle. that person now making $15 per hour still can only buy 1 bottle of milk, but a person making $20 per hour used to be able to buy 2 bottles of milk can now only buy 1 bottle of milk and have some money left over and on the 3rd hour after saving that worker can afford to buy 2 bottles at once. this is just a rudimentary example on 1 product for the sake of being easy, the economic ramifications across a wide range of products and services are intricate and would take an economist to explain thoroughly, but still, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour would do nothing to really help people in poverty and it would destroy the buying power of people just a little above poverty. this is nothing but a ploy by government elites to help push people into poverty and make them dependent on government handouts therefore making them more controllable. notice how no one in congress ever talks about actually reforming education to make it more accessible to people? all they talk about is loan forgiveness, but nothing about giving people equitable access to education that would teach people skills that would lift them out of poverty.
    1
  1371. 1
  1372. 1
  1373. 1
  1374. 1
  1375.  @Spiral.Dynamics  40 years of conservatives denying the "truth" on climate change? what truth? why is it that this truth you peddle is filled with all sorts of missing data and irregularities and inconsistencies. maybe you should objectively look at that truth of yours and examine what exactly you are being sold. Kissinger went and opened up China to the rest of the world back in the 70's to 80's in order to make rich people richer by giving away jobs to 3rd world countries, and the lie they pushed is pollution and global warming. so not they can tell you taht the factory here creates pollution which causes global warming so they have to shut it down, but you still need your fancy gadgets, so they outsource the production to a country like China that creates twice as much pollution to create the same item, they just neglet to tell you that the pollution is still being created but in larger quantities while your manufacturing base is destroyed and your countries wealth being extracted. and please, explain what constitutional right the alphabet community is being denied. if its got such popular support then how come no laws are passed in favor of these so called rights that they dont have. systemic racism and systemic sexism dont exist. i would like you to point to a law that is currently held up that creates racism or sexism. please point to the law or the systemic behavior. and no, inequality DOESNT exist, if you think it exists, then i dare you to go and start a fist fight with Obama, that Black man will have you killed before you can come near him. you want to talk about inequality, then please point to which organization is opperating for the advancement of white people, tell me which month is white history month, and i cant seem to find the white voices category on my PRIME subscribtion. its not equality to are seeking, its special privileges for a select group and vengeance over perceives slights that neight you experiences or I committed but yet you want to push that ideology on todays society. you want an example of inequality? Evanston IL passed through a city ordinance where tax revenue generated by controlled substance sales will be directed toward black communities and black homeowners ONLY. you tell me what its called when a government will funnel tax money to a specific community based on a physical characteristic? yea, 600 people were charged for the capitol riots, so what, im not going to deny it and im not going to say it was wrong, i will say that yea, they should be charged, they should have NOT been there and they should have NOT done what they did. at least i can admit when someone does wrong, can you say the same about antifa or BLM for the riots of 2020? no i guess not, your whole stance is that they have legitimate gripes because you agree with them so its OK.
    1
  1376. 1
  1377. 1
  1378. 1
  1379. 1
  1380. 1
  1381. 1
  1382. 1
  1383. @Ander P well, apparently you lack any logic, but please, point to any legal document that describes driving or the equivalent as a RIGHT? or electricians, yep, article 79 of the constitution claims electricians or any other proffesions are a right, its right after article 78 enshrining unicorns as Americas sacred animal. and yes, the militia IS the people, responsible gun owners. and yea, if you want to start infringing on other peoples rights, then its just as fair to infringe on yours as well. and for the record, please explain what the Heller decision by SCOTUS was? from my understanding, District of Columbia v. Heller originated in a suit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., in 2003. In Parker v. District of Columbia, six residents of the federal District of Columbia asked the court to enjoin enforcement of three provisions of the district’s Firearms Control Regulation Act (1975) that generally banned the registration of handguns, prohibited the carrying of unlicensed handguns or any other “deadly or dangerous” weapon capable of being concealed, and required that lawfully stored firearms be disassembled or locked to prevent firing. The district court granted the government’s motion to dismiss. In 2007 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, after determining that only one of the plaintiffs, Dick Heller, had standing to sue (because only he had suffered an actual injury, the denial of his application for a license to possess a handgun), struck down the first and third provisions and limited the enforcement of the second. The government filed for certiorari, and the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on March 18, 2008. did you read that part? DICK HELLER HAD STANDING TO SUE BECAUSE OF THE DENIAL OF HIS APPLICATION FOR A LICENSE TO POSSESS A HANDGUN. to put it mildly, SCOTUS ruled in favor of Heller as a license to possess a handgun was unconstitutional.
    1
  1384. 1
  1385. its not that people dont believe in climate change, its that some people are not convinced by the climate change hysteria. you see, some people know that climate changes on a cyclical basis, sometimes it gets hotter and sometimes it gets colder, and its a predictable cycle. 13,000 years ago, most of North America was covered in a mile thick ice sheet, that ice sheet melted within a small handfull of centuries, we have geological evidence of this, long before human civilization was big enough to cause any effects to the climate. its hard to convince people that climate change will cause the oceans to rise when your main spokesman (Obama) bought an oceanfront property, doesnt he know that its going to flood? its hard to convince people that fosil fuel burning by humans is a major problem when the people claiming it are flying all over the globe constantly. Harry and Megan used 11 airplanes round trip for themselves and their luggage for 1 trip to a climate change summit in Brusselss a few years back. its hard to convince people that climate change is bad when your biggest activist and spokesperson is a petulant child that is too stupid to graduate high school even (Gretta). its hard to convince people to curb their energy use to save the climate when the guy telling you to curb your energy use actually uses more energy in one month than most people will in thier lifetime (Gore). Al Gore's mansion has $30,000+ energy bill per month. so realistically, the person who didnt graduate high school, burns more fuel in 1 day then you will in your lifetime and uses more electricity in 1 month than you will in your lifetime is telling you that what you are doing is bad and it will flood your home, and he is telling you this from his beachfront property that he just recently bought.
    1
  1386. 1
  1387. 1
  1388. 1
  1389. 1
  1390.  @buckseedamerica2743  what are you yammering on about? i bet if you went out and asked any whatever supremacist out there if he would vote for a black gay woman that guaranteed she would not send their kids to die in a foreign war or if they would vote for a white man that would guarantee they would send their kid to die in a foreign war i bet you most would vote for a gay black woman hands down. most people care about themselves and their kids and their family, the whole black / white BS is just a BS game developed by the people in charge so they can wind you up and make you go at each other so you are too busy to bother them while they rob you blind and enslave you equally. once you stop looking at black / white, and you start looking at slave and slavemaster, then you realize you have been duped. the same people that claim they are fighting for you are the same people that have been enslaving you for generations. systemic racism and police brutality is a problem thats been ongoing in democrat run areas for generations, yet those are the same people that will dupe you into believing its the other guys fault, if you are black then its the white guys fault, if you are white then its the black guys fault, if you are poor then its the rich guys fault, if you are an American then its an illegals fault if you are vaxed then its the unvaxed fault. look at who your president is, Biden who wrote the 94 crime bill that targeted hundreds of thousands of young black men for prison because he didnt want his kids growing up in an urban jungle, and who helped bomb another country into the slave age. Harris who used the 94 crime bill to throw young black men into prison for extended sentences so she could use them as SLAVE LABOR to fight california wildfires, and then she laughed and cackled about how she smoked weed and listened to TuPac albums WHILE throwing black men in prison for extended sentences for smoking weed and listening to TuPac. these 2 people managed to convince you that the other guy who never made a public policy before OR after he was elected was more racist than them.
    1
  1391. 1
  1392. 1
  1393. 1
  1394.  @Kilmoran  such as what? such as they are for a few things? they are for loosening voting restrictions while pushing gun restrictions, its racist to need an ID to vote but they want you to have an ID to buy a beer or a gun. same day registration to vote but mandatory waiting period to buy a gun. smart enough at 16 to vote for politicians that can install life altering policies but too dumb to buy a gun at 21. in favor of a few things. were they in favor of SALT tax cuts for the rich? yes, they voted for it. were they in favor of corporate giveaways in the infrastructure bill? yes, they voted for it, Rational National did a video about it not that long ago. terrible or short sighted things. were they in favor of redoing the rules on judicial appointees? yes. was it shortsighted? yes. Trump and the republicans thanked them every time they appointed a new SCOTUS judge. are they in favor of nationalizing the elections? yes. is it shortsighted? yes, considering that historically the opposing party to the president wins control of the congress in the midterms of the presidents first term. will it allow republicans to take control of the elections on a national level in 2022? yes, im waiting for how the democrats will be crying about how republicans in GA and FL and TX are allowed to dictate the rules on how elections are run in democrat states like NY and CA and its not fair. were they in favor of Obamacare? yes, and they knew it was a terrible idea because they purposefully excluded themselves from the legislation and then worked feverishly to distance themselves from Obamacare during the midterms which they were destroyed in. Obamacare ended some democrats careers. they agree on certain legislation they want. seems like almost no one votes against a pay raise for them, and i believe only 1 democrat voted against the war in Afghanistan, at least Bernie Sanders pointed it out, and he voted for the war, just like the republicans did. funny how all these wars start and most of them vote for them.
    1
  1395. 1
  1396. 1
  1397. 1
  1398. 1
  1399. 1
  1400. 1
  1401. 1
  1402. 1
  1403. 1
  1404. 1
  1405. 1
  1406. 1
  1407. 1
  1408.  @philliprogers964  i completely agree with you that cops need more training, but waiting a few seconds can turn into a deadly situation. when should this "wait a few seconds" rule be enacted exactly? is it when a suspect starts pulling a gun, wait a few seconds till a criminal pulls his gun and fires, then its OK to consider it a threat? when do you start putting some of the blame and responsibility on the criminals? example - Toledo shooting in Chicago recently. cops respond to shots fired, cops come to the scene, Toledo runs off with a gun and cops know it.. cops chase toledo down an alley for a block, taking more than a few seconds. still wait a couple of seconds to decide if Toledo is a threat? Daunte Wright - was being arrested after a traffic stop on a warrant for a weapons violation, during his handcuffing he breaks free and starts reaching into his vehicle. should the cops stand around for a few seconds waiting for Wright to turn around and shoot them with the gun he possibly had before confirming if he is a threat? Jacob Blake - police are called out to a "domestic disturbance". woman claims Jacob Blake sexually assaulted her, police come out and chase Blake around till he gets to his vehicle and reaches into his vehicle. cops shoot him. should they have stopped and waited around for a couple of seconds waiting for Blake to pull out the knife he had in his car and start stabbing people before deeming him a threat? i agree police need more training, more specialized training, but you cant say that they need to wait a couple of seconds to se if its a threat when they are assesing the situation the whole entire time with a possible perpetrator that at times is acting in an aggressive and threatening manner. but i concede there are also cases where cops act without thinking. example, two cops answer a call of someone at a park with a gun, they get to the park and hop out of their car and start immediately firing at a kid with a BB gun, i believe they were charged. another example is Van Dyke in Chicago, rolls up on a police scene, hops out of his vehicle and within a second or two guns down McDonald, he has been convicted on multiple counts. a black man in a Walmart in OH i believe, was in the store and picked up a BB gun from a shelf and was looking to purchase it and walked around looking for an associate, someone called the cops and the cops opened fire immediately upon arriving. there are various other cases. thah wait a couple of seconds rule would only apply to cops arriving fresh on a scene, not ones that are already on the scene.
    1
  1409. 1
  1410. 1
  1411. 1
  1412. 1
  1413. 1
  1414. 1
  1415. 1
  1416.  @CoffeeDrinkerKim  yea, thats the typical definition, in most cases, but not in this case, this is a simple slow roll towards genocide, and we have seen it many times in history, this is just one more step. the steps towards a genocide. 1. Classification Groups in a position of power will categorize people according to ethnicity, race, religion or nationality employing an us versus them mentality. 2. Symbolisation People are identified as Jews, Roma or Tutsis, etc., and made to stand out from others with certain colours or symbolic articles of clothing. 3. Discrimination A dominant group uses laws, customs, and political power to deny the rights of other groups. The powerless group may not be granted full civil rights or even citizenship. 4. Dehumanisation The diminished value of the discriminated group is communicated through propaganda. Parallels are drawn with animals, insects or diseases. 5. Organisation A state, its army or militia design genocidal killing plans. 6. Polarisation Propaganda is employed to amplify the differences between groups. Interactions between groups are prohibited, and the moderate members of the group in power are killed. 7. Preparation The victims are identified, separated and forced to wear symbols. Deportations, isolation and forcible starvation. Death lists are drawn up. 8. Persecution Victims are identified and isolated based on their ethnic or religious identity. Death lists are drawn up. In state sponsored genocides, members of victim groups may be forced to wear identifying symbols. Their property is often expropriated. 9. Extermination The massacres begin. The perpetrators see their actions as “extermination” since they do not consider their victims to be entirely human. 10. Denial The perpetrators of the genocide deny having committed their crimes. Victims are often blamed. Evidence is hidden and witnesses are intimidated. 1. CHECK. democrats have been categorizing republicans based on their race / religion / political affiliation. 2. CHECK. various activist groups are identifying people as "white nationalists" based on symbols such as flags they have or hats they wear or even hand gestures they make. 3. CHECK. various businesses have already discriminated against conservatives based solely on their views and a federal court even ruled that the current administration VIOLATED the first amendment rights of conservaties. 4. CHECK. conservatives and republicans are vilified by being called vile things like racists and nazis in order to dehumanize them and make physical attacks allowable, ever hear of "punch a nazi" 5. IN THE WORKS. the FBI already admitted that it is targeting Trump supporters as extremists, and ONLY Trump supporters. 6. IN THE WORKS. mainstream media has already been pushing propaganda targeted against conservatives. 7. IN THE WORKS. currently the FBI is working on identifying all Trump supporters as "extremists", and pretty sure they are making a list and checking it twice. 8. IN THE WORKS. J6 protesters are held in solitary confinement awaiting trial for charges such as tresspassing while to date no arrests have been made for the 5/26 riots that caused a church across from the white house to be burned down and a white house checkpoint burned down and white house security perimeter breached where the president was evacuated to an underground secured bunker for safety. the former president was impeached for allegedly commiting an act that the current president BRAGGED about doing. the former president is charged with fraud where the government has claimed fraud where no one was defrauded and no banks claimed any fraud and the government is trying to take away property by undervaluing it and auction it off. 9. UPCOMING. 10. IPCOMING AND IN THE WORKS. everyone on the left is DENYING that this is happening. are you going to deny this too?
    1
  1417. 1
  1418. 1
  1419. 1
  1420. 1
  1421. 1
  1422. 1
  1423. 1
  1424. 1
  1425. 1
  1426. 1
  1427. 1
  1428. 1
  1429. 1
  1430. 1
  1431. 1
  1432.  @TheRealBlueValhalla  yea yea, im so bad that you are still here, and i spew so much nonsense that it has you doing mental gymnastics trying to make excuses for bad behavior just to defend a politician based on ideology alone. you stated that the OH gov has not declared a state of emergency as reasoning for why FEMA decline aid to OH, but then your next statement says that if they oversee an area like transportation then they should go in. FEMA doesnt oversee transportation, do you see how that works. FEMA denied aid to OH because they havent declared a state of emergency yet FEMA sent people there because they oversee transportation or something? PETE went to OH AFTER Trump went because the optics looked bad that the federal government didnt go to a disaster site like that, that is something that is obvious, yet you wont admit it. the federal response to this MULTI-STATE disaster has been severely lacking and bordering on criminal NEGLIGENCE, but you wont admit that either. people like you keep claiming that conservatives and people on the right will blindly support Trump no matter what, yet those same people if you talk to them will admit faults with the man and praise him. but people on your side will praise Biden no matter what, no faults what so ever. who is in a cult right now? Biden hired a transportation secretary whose experience is being mayor of a small town that most people couldnt point to on a map and never heard of, with no experience in transportation whatsoever, but you wont point that out either will you? the administration failed in this situation, OWN IT. the transportation secretary failed in this situation, OWN IT. FEMA failed in this situation, OWN IT. instead you dance around the point and make excuses, typical cultist, your leader cant do any wrong.
    1
  1433. 1
  1434. 1
  1435. 1
  1436. 1
  1437. 1
  1438. 1
  1439. 1
  1440. 1
  1441.  @varab6287  blah blah blah racism blah blah. funny how all this racism is running rampant in major cities where the same people that claim victimhood are the ones that keep electing the same politicians that they say are abusing them with rampant systemic racism. if you dont like the system, then work on changing the system, stop electing the same politicians that drive that racism instead of going out and attacking and destroying innocent people lives that just want to live their lives in peace. you ramble on about Fox news brainwashing people while CNN and MCNBC and the others have brainwashed you to believe that a man who authored the 1994 crime bill that disproportionately targeted young black men and put them in prison and a woman who used that law as a prosecutor to put young black men in prison for extended sentences were not racist and the real racist was a man who was in favor of gay marriage before most politicians ever thought of it and who was the first man in FL to open his club to minorities a decade before anyone else and who thought that illegal immigration should be stopped because it destroys middle and low income wages which affect minority groups more. take your racism and shove it, most people who cry and whine about it are the same ones voting for and supporting the politicians that push it. perfect example is here in Chicago, the democrats elected Rahm Emanuel simply becaue he was Obamas right hand man, and he turned around and in his first term in office he shut down half the schools on the southside which is mostly minorities. then to top it off, these ame people re-elected him. fuck them, if they cry about racism its because they brought it upon themselves and they get only laughter from me.
    1
  1442. 1
  1443. 1
  1444. 1
  1445. 1
  1446. 1
  1447. 1
  1448. 1
  1449. 1
  1450. 1
  1451. 1
  1452. 1
  1453. 1
  1454.  @juresichj  oh INDIANA you say? tell you what, lets make a deal hall we? i live in Chicago IL, Indiana is only a few minutes drive for me (30-60 minutes). but tell you what. come down here, we hop in my car, and we drive to Indiana for me to buy a gun, since most of those laws in Indiana dont exist, it should be easier right? here is the deal, if i can walk out of an Indiana gun shop with a gun, i will give you a check for the value of that gun. but if i run into a hassle or something and i dont walk out with a gun, then YOU give me a check for the value of the gun. i will even give you the advantage of picking the gun shop and picking the gun itself. last time i went to Indiana and stopped at a gunshop, i purchased a gun, a small 22 pistol. at which point, before even letting me look at the gun, the clerk behind the counter asked me for an ID, i gave him my IL state drivers license, noticing that, he asked for my FOID, which i had to show him that also. my friend was with me who lives in IN and only had to show his IN drivers license. now that the clerk had my ID and my FOID, he allowed me to look at the gun, i liked it so i bought it. the sales process went like this, i paid for the gun, they made me fill out a 4470 background check form, and they made me fill out ANOTHER form indicating which FFL (federal Firearm License) shop in IL they should send the gun to, because since i am from IL, i can not buy it in IN and take it home to IL. so i gave them info for my local gun shop which is an FFL dealer, they then verified with the FBI and the FFL dealer that they were legit and can receive shipment of my firearm. so home i went, $300 lighter and empty hands. my gun arrived at my local FFL in IL, they called me to inform me that they received it. this was about 2 weeks AFTER i had already paid for it, because you know, the first store in IN had to run the background check and wait a week for that to clear before they could even ship the gun to IL. so anyway, i go to my local gun shop in IL to pick up my new gun, and lo and behold, i have to go through ANOTHER background check, to pick it up you see. so i fill out another 4470 background check form, and wait another 5 days in order to pick up a gun that i already paid for and ALREADY did a background check when i bought it. but yea, you believe the BS that you have been fed that its so easy, lets go and do this, i would like a new free gun.
    1
  1455. 1
  1456. 1
  1457. 1
  1458. 1
  1459. 1
  1460. 1
  1461. 1
  1462. 1
  1463. 1
  1464. 1
  1465.  @yaash4123  the same CDC that parroted Chinese propaganda pushed by the WHO during the beginning of the outbreak? the same CDC that finally admitted that the reported numbers for hospitalizations were misrepresented by over 40%? the same CDC that has pushed to silence any dissent and block any alternate information concerning the dissease by claiming its misinformation? that CDC? funny how various other medical conditions or diseases may have a main treatment and possibly alternate treatments and there is research done for other alternate treatments without them being labeled misinformation, but god forbid you say a single word against big Pharma daddy Phizer, because then its labeled as misinformation. the FDA get hundreds of millions from big Pharma lobbyists to get drugs passed, and working in coordination with CDC information manipulation, they have turned you into a big Pharma permanent customer / test lab rat without your choice or consent, and when a voice of dissent emerges, it is labeled as evil and bad, smeared, and the government enacts emergency powers to crack down and destroy a protest using draconian tactics that most countries you would consider corrupt and anti-democrating dont use, while at the same time they tell you you that they are not taking away your right to protest, and you cheer for it. maybe next protest that pops up, that you agree with and support, maybe the government will crack down on them too claiming that they are a threat and dangerous and terrorists. dont donate to any protests or groups you believe in, remember, if the government gets pissy, they can come after you now for supporting them.
    1
  1466. 1
  1467. 1
  1468. 1
  1469. 1
  1470. 1
  1471. 1
  1472. 1
  1473. 1
  1474. 1
  1475. 1
  1476. 1
  1477. 1
  1478. 1
  1479. 1
  1480. 1
  1481. 1
  1482. 1
  1483. 1
  1484. 1
  1485. 1
  1486. 1
  1487. 1
  1488. 1
  1489. 1
  1490. 1
  1491. 1
  1492. 1
  1493. 1
  1494. 1
  1495. 1
  1496. 1
  1497. 1
  1498. 1
  1499. 1
  1500. 1
  1501. 1
  1502. 1
  1503. 1
  1504. 1
  1505. 1
  1506. 1
  1507. 1
  1508. 1
  1509. 1
  1510. 1
  1511. 1
  1512. 1
  1513. 1
  1514. 1
  1515. 1
  1516. 1
  1517. 1
  1518. 1
  1519. 1
  1520. 1
  1521. 1
  1522. 1
  1523. 1
  1524. 1
  1525. 1
  1526. 1
  1527. 1
  1528. 1
  1529. 1
  1530.  @Honorbound43  no, if you restrict access to guns you restrict them for everybody, not just criminals, but then again, we already have laws restricting criminals access to firearms. as for what was going on 100 or 200 years ago, thats history, at that point in time we also didnt have the criminal problems we have now, and no, lots of people carried guns back then, and very few towns actually had any restrictions on guns, in fact, the shootout at the OK Corral was the very first shooting in the very first "gun free" zone in America. now, for what supreme court judges have said, its funny how you just cherry pick only the judges that were for gun control, you dont want to mention the MANY judges that have stated that the 2a guarantees individual rights, along with many founders who have stated as much, including James Madison who signed a letter of marque and reprisal telling a private ship owner that the second amendment protects their right to carry cannons. funny how SCOTUS ruled that the 2a extends to INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS regardless of membership in a militia. as for 2a ppl having no problem with restricting access to guns when it comes to minorities, we 2a PPL are fighting to preserve 2a rights for EVERYONE, none of us have made any claim as to only allowing a certain racial group for owning them. gun control started becoming huge after the civil war, when democrats feared former slaves being armed, as for the NRA, funny how you would bash on an organization that was started after slavery ended specifically to teach and help former slaves exercise their 2a rights. funny how all the gun control happens in large cities with large minority populations, pushed by democrats, im guessing democrats and people like YOU have a problem with minorities having guns, because ive never seen a minority at the gun shop or at the range get treated badly.
    1
  1531. 1
  1532. 1
  1533. 1
  1534. 1
  1535. 1
  1536. 1
  1537. 1
  1538. 1
  1539. 1
  1540. 1
  1541. 1
  1542. 1
  1543. 1
  1544. 1
  1545. 1
  1546. 1
  1547. 1
  1548. 1
  1549. 1
  1550. 1
  1551. 1
  1552. 1
  1553. 1
  1554. 1
  1555. 1
  1556. 1
  1557. 1
  1558. 1
  1559. 1
  1560. 1
  1561. 1
  1562. 1
  1563. 1
  1564. 1
  1565. 1
  1566. 1
  1567. 1
  1568. 1
  1569. 1
  1570. 1
  1571. 1
  1572. 1
  1573. 1
  1574. 1
  1575. 1
  1576. 1
  1577. 1
  1578. 1
  1579. 1
  1580. 1
  1581. 1
  1582. 1
  1583. 1
  1584. 1
  1585. 1
  1586. 1
  1587. 1
  1588. 1
  1589. 1
  1590. 1
  1591. 1
  1592. 1
  1593. 1
  1594. 1
  1595. 1
  1596. 1
  1597. 1
  1598. 1
  1599. 1
  1600. 1
  1601. 1
  1602. 1
  1603. 1
  1604. 1
  1605. 1
  1606. 1
  1607. 1
  1608. 1
  1609. 1
  1610. 1
  1611. 1
  1612. 1
  1613. 1
  1614. 1
  1615. 1
  1616. 1
  1617. 1
  1618. 1
  1619. 1
  1620. 1
  1621. 1
  1622. 1
  1623. 1
  1624. 1
  1625. 1
  1626. 1
  1627. 1
  1628. 1
  1629.  @tart8228  healthcare as a human right? so now its your human right to appropriate someone elses labor? you know, we fought a war over slaver sentiments like yours. paid family leave? yes, you are right, companies should pay you for not working. as for making the uber rich pay their fair share? i dont think you know the meaning of the word fair share, when people like you say make the rich pay their fair share what you really mean is take everything away from them that they worked for to give me freebies. Elon Musk paid $6 billion in taxes, come back to me when you can show that YOU paid your "fair" share in taxes just like him. as for taking climate change seriously, thats a whole other topic that can be debated ad nauseum. the fact that people like you can spread lies and cherry pick information to push your narrative does not make it a crisis, but hey, what do i know, lets go ask Obama what he thinks of climate change and how it will make ocean levels rise, i think he is sitting on the beach at his $10 million oceanfront home at Marthas Vinyard laughing at people like you that believe that nonsense. i mean, if climate change was so real and the oceans were rising, then why would someone like him who had all those advisors around him buy an oceanfront home, unless he knew it was a scam and they made you swallow it. as for America turning into an oligarchy? America has always been an oligarchy, the only difference is that in America everyone has a chance to rise up, is Russia, the only people that had a chance to rise up were the "friends" connected to the people in charge, everyone else stood in a damn breadline waiting for their crumbs.
    1
  1630. 1
  1631. 1
  1632. 1
  1633. i completely agree with you Rational National, you are absolutely right, Trump has failed the country in his Wuhan Flu response, and this is coming from a Trump supporter. Trump should have done the right thing and go FULL authoritarian. he should have locked the country up completely, throw out the 10th amendment to the constitution, to hell with states rights, federal government Trumps everything. when he instituted the European travel ban and New York State courts overturned it as "unconstitutional", Trump should have moved the military in and arrested the judge and every single democrat cheering for the overturn on charges of treason and sedition and executed the whole lot of them, because COVID of course. and since we are suspending the 10th amendment, we should go ahead and suspend the 1st amendment for EVERYONE, because you know, cant have people spreading disinformation out there, no 1st amendment for me or you or anyone. and contact tracing, we need all that fancy contact tracing, even though courts ruled already on various occasions that surveillance on US Citizens is illegal and violates the 4th amendment, to hell with that, we are suspending amendments left and right, out with the 4th amendment. lets see, what else, oh yes, help the American people by sending everyone money, yup, we need to do that, Trump should sign an executive order right away that gives EVERY American a $1200 per week check from the government, and for any democrat that was screeching earlier this year about how Trump doesnt have the authority to redirect money in the government because the house "holds the pursestrings", if any democrat so much as blinks an eye in the wrong direction on this then Trump should send in the FEDS to arrest them and execute them on the spot for sedition and treason, because COVID. and since we are suspending pars of the constitution and amendments everywhere, lets do away with the right to DUE PROCESS shall we, lets do what Germany or Poland or France or various other European nations are doing, everyone gets locked in their house for 23 hours per day with only 1 hour allowed to go outside for exercise or go to the store, because COVID. only essential workers allowed to go outside, we can set up checkpoints all over the place and dress guards in jackboots and teach them how to say "daj mi papiera JUDEN", because COVID., anyone caught outside gets arrested for treason and sedition and sent away to a camp where they will be summarily executed for their crimes. when you claim the American people are not being helped, it makes me wonder what insidious dark magic was at work that gave an extra $600 in unemployment benefits, and where did the eviction and forclosure moratorium come from, and that $1200 lump check for taxpayers come from? my daughter right now is receiving unemployment, it was granted to her because she lost her job due to COVID, even though her office is still open and fully staffed and there were no cutbacks and she actually quit her job, under normal circumstances she would be inneligible for unemployment, but here she is receiving it. Funny how you think Biden would do something, enact some executive order, dont know what order but some executive order. last i heard Biden talk on the subject was his great solution of a national mask mandate, and even in that speech he understood that as president he would not have the authority to do something like that because as he stated, he would go to the governors and ask them to institute it, and then he would go to the mayors and ask them to institute it, because even in his feeble state of mind he understands that the president does NOT have the authority to institute such an order. and lets talk about those food lines, yes, it is tragic to see food banks being overrun by people needing food, can we look at why those people are there? normally they would go to the store with their paycheck and buy food, but apparently they are missing their paycheck, perhaps they didnt get a paycheck because their job has been eliminated by LOCAL authorities either on the state or city level with draconian restrictions, and perhaps they didnt get unemployment or their unemployment ran out, the unemployment that is run on a state level, i dont remember unemployment being run on a federal level, correct me if im wrong, but here in Illinois its called IDES (Illinois Department of Employment Security). so yes, it is tragic that people are lining up at food banks, but blaming a president for that is disingenuous in the same way as it would be for blaming Obama for the massive unemployment in 2009 same way as it would be for blaming bush for the crash of 08, there are more factors at work that need to be looked at. its like saying the Titanic sunk and its the captains fault all those lives were lost, without looking at the substandard materials used in construction or the faulty design of the ship with too few life boats. Yes, the president is sitting in the white house, watching the news on TV, reading newspapers, and most likely getting briefings on relevant matters, im kind of glad that he is not out golfing at Mar-a-Lago and actually taking this matter with a bit of seriousness, and i can also say thankfully that Biden is making practically daily appearances on this matter, and that he stopped hiding in his basement like he has done for the majority of this campaign. Yes, the USPS should have sent out 5 masks to everyone in the country, who knows where they would get those masks to send out considering that average people were having a hard time finding those masks on their own with stores reporting shortages and out of stock nationwide, but its the USPS, they can manage somehow. Enough ranting, a rational person would look at everything and at least say that country A is doing this or that and it would be nice if we can do the same but we cant because the way our country is set up with our constitution and our guaranteed rights.
    1
  1634. 1
  1635. 1
  1636. 1
  1637. 1
  1638. 1
  1639. 1
  1640. 1
  1641. 1
  1642. 1
  1643. 1
  1644. 1
  1645. 1
  1646. 1
  1647. 1
  1648. 1
  1649. 1
  1650. 1
  1651. 1
  1652. 1
  1653. 1
  1654. 1
  1655. 1
  1656. 1
  1657. 1
  1658. 1
  1659. 1
  1660. 1
  1661. 1
  1662. 1
  1663. 1
  1664. 1
  1665. 1
  1666. 1
  1667. 1
  1668. 1
  1669. 1
  1670. 1
  1671. 1
  1672. 1
  1673. 1
  1674. 1
  1675. 1
  1676. 1
  1677. 1
  1678. 1
  1679. 1
  1680. 1
  1681. 1
  1682. 1
  1683. 1
  1684. 1
  1685. 1
  1686. 1
  1687. 1
  1688. 1
  1689. 1
  1690. 1
  1691. Trump didnt oppose direct payments, Trump opposed the bloat. the last stimulus bill was $3T and gave the American people $1200 one time payment, and thats only to people who actually filed tax returns the previous year. if that $3T was divided equally among EVERY American in the US, then every man, woman, and child would have received $9090 one time payment, but instead only about half the population received $1200 one time payment. and no one questioned what pork the rest of that money went to. with this new bill concocted by both parties in congress, $900B would give each man woman and child $2700 one time payment, but instead, only about half the people in the country qualify for $600 one time payment, and everyone else can starve with the comfort of knowing that gender studies in Pakistan or whateverstan are safe, because thats where the money is being diverted. you miss the whole point, its not about how big a check people receive, its about people starving while the government they depend on takes away their resources they need and gives it away to other countries. and that is something that should be pointed out. Tlaib for her credit called out this BS and actually voted NO on this bill, i'll give credit where credit is due, i respect her for that, AOC on the other hand called out this BS and then like a typical hypocrite voted YES for this bill. its not McConnell's deal, its not Pelosi's deal, its the establishments deal against the American people, and thats the biggest point you miss out on.
    1
  1692. 1
  1693. 1
  1694. 1
  1695. 1
  1696. 1
  1697. 1
  1698. 1
  1699. 1
  1700. 1
  1701. 1
  1702. 1
  1703. 1
  1704. 1
  1705. 1
  1706. 1
  1707. 1
  1708. 1
  1709. 1
  1710. 1
  1711. 1
  1712. 1
  1713. 1
  1714.  @eratinuwu1952  electrical issues were not what caused it to explode, in fact, an unforseen design flaw that was revealed during the investigation that occured after the explosion was teh cause. up until the actual explosion, everything was running fine, in fact, absolutely NO ONE believed it was possible for an RBMK reactor to actually explode, it was an impossibility, even western scientists couldnt believe it, they felt those reactors were dangerous, but NO ONE believed it could explode. but fine, i'll give you another example then. how many medical procedures and drugs and hip replacements and pieces of medical equipment such as prosthetic hips were found to have some significant issue years and years later, even decades later to where compensation is sometimes or most of the time owed to victims who suffered ill effects? the biggest issue i have is that the manufacturers have been granted immunity from civil and criminal penalties associated with these vaccines, almost as if though they know there is some significant issue that will pop up a few years down the line and they dont want to get in trouble. no company in the history of the world has that kind of protection for any product they manufacture. would you buy a car from a guy that makes you sign a waiver that says he is not responsible if the car explodes and hurts you? would you go to a doctor that makes you sign a waiver that says you cant sue him if he fucks up? think about it for a moment, they are giving you an experimental vaccine and made sure that you cant do anything about it if it hurts you, its all on you. do you seriously not want to even question it? are you really just blindly going to stand there and say, well, those two guys over there with doctors coats on say its ok, so jab me.
    1
  1715.  @KL-lt8rc  perhaps you are refering to 42 U.S. Code § 300aa–22 - Standards of responsibility, effective Oct 1 1988, and perhaps you failed to read section (2) For purposes of paragraph (1), a vaccine shall be presumed to be accompanied by proper directions and warnings if the vaccine manufacturer shows that it complied in all material respects with all requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.] and section 262 of this title (including regulations issued under such provisions) applicable to the vaccine and related to vaccine-related injury or death for which the civil action was brought unless the plaintiff shows— (A) that the manufacturer engaged in the conduct set forth in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 300aa–23(d)(2) of this title, or (B) by clear and convincing evidence that the manufacturer failed to exercise due care notwithstanding its compliance with such Act and section (and regulations issued under such provisions). or maybe you missed the section under this law such as this. (e) Preemption No State may establish or enforce a law which prohibits an individual from bringing a civil action against a vaccine manufacturer for damages for a vaccine-related injury or death if such civil action is not barred by this part. in effect, the whole law means that you cant sue a manufacturer for a side effect that is known and labeled with the vaccine, the doctor doesnt have to volunteer that information, but he is required to give it to you if you ask for it. so if you get a measles shot, and it gives you a heart attack, the manufacturer cant be sued because they gave ample warning to everyone and documented that the measles vaccine can in some cases cause heart attacks. thats why all those fancy commercials for drugs on TV have disclaimers about possible side effects. so tell me, which bottle of J&J vaccine had warnings for known side effects of blood clotting? i mean they only found out about the blood clotting issue after they administered it to millions.
    1
  1716. 1
  1717. 1
  1718. 1
  1719. 1
  1720. 1
  1721. 1
  1722. 1
  1723. 1
  1724. 1
  1725. 1
  1726. 1
  1727. 1
  1728. 1
  1729. 1
  1730. 1
  1731.  @Remember_when  show you one what? show you a candidate? well lets see. Bernie Sanders, personally i dont like anyone who wants to bring socialism down on the people, becaue i lived in a socialist country, so i know about socialism from experience, but still, Sanders has a history of trying to help people, even if its mediocre help, its still more than most politicians do. Donald Trump, i know i know, everyone is going to talk about how he is a racist or bigot or nazi or mysoginist or whatever, but seriously, out of all the presidents in recent history, he is the only one that did not start a new war in a new country, and actively worked to end the wars we were involved in, 4 peace deals in the middle east and even brought Kim Jong Un IL whatever in North Korea to the table to at least talk. Rand Paul, he has worked on helping people, i dont know the specifics, but people say he is pretty decent. Desantis of FL, as governor he has led his state the way his constituents needed and wanted during this whole pandemic, even people like AOC who talked trash about him still went on vacation to his state. she could have chosen any other state, if it was the beaches, she could have gone to CA or Hawaii, they have more beutiful beaches there, i know California has a purple sands beach, the cliffsides surrounding the beach are loaded with amethyst deposits that wash down through natural erosion onto the beach and mix with the sand to create streams of purple sand. Hawaii has black sand beaches and a green sand beach, much nices than FL regular sand beach, so it wasnt the beaches, perhaps AOC recognized that Desantis ran his state properly, even if she cant publicly state that, thats why she went there to party for vacation. there are a few good politicians out there, the trick is to recognize the grifters for what they are and stay away from them. notice how i put Sanders at the top of my list, even though i admit i dont like him over his socialist views, he gets the top position because i feel he genuinely wants to help people, even if he goes about it the wrong way in my opinion.
    1
  1732. 1
  1733. 1
  1734. 1
  1735. 1
  1736. 1
  1737. 1
  1738. 1
  1739. 1
  1740.  @paulpeterson4216  and the problem with your argument is that you assume i would call you a socialist or a commie or a nazi, i wouldnt do that because you admire social programs or safety nets within countries. i believe it was Norway or Sweden, one of the two that came out in a press conference and bluntly stated that they are not a socialist country, they are a capitalist country with social programs, or something to the effect. but either way, none of those countries are socialist, they are all capitalist, their economic engine is driven by capitalism. they use the proceeds from that engine to fuel social programs, and im not going to argue about their social programs, there are good points and bad points about their social programs. they pay higher taxes, and they have longer wait times at doctors, but the benefit is that everyone is covered and no one is left behind. as for being unequal? unequal in which way? there are many ways to measure equality. a black gay woman is mayor of a MAJOR US city, there are a lot of people from various walks of life that are successful and a lot of people that are not. there are poor people and there are rich people. are people unequal because there is white privilege? im wondering how much white privilege does that hillbilly living in a trailer in Alabama have compared to someone like Michael Jordan or Barrack Obama? i live in a neighborhood in Chicago that is very much unsegregated, there are people from all walks of life in my neighborhood, we view each other as equal. perhaps this inequality here is driven by the politicians that for generations have been busily working on dividing us to where in the last several elections there was a strong emphasis on the race of the candidate. are we unequal in wages and wealth, why yes of course we are, no one will argue that, do we need a living wage, yes we do, but its not as simple as raise the minimum wage. Germany for example, has used part of their taxes that should have gone to pay for NATO to fuel their economy and social programs, forcing the US to pitch in for what they and various other members of NATO fall behind on. Germany also did not have an influx of illegal immigrants that the US has had, the government has been claiming for decades that there are about 11 million illegals living in the US, but in 2019, MIT and YALE jointly published a study showing that the 11 million number is not accurate, and it is mouch closer to 23 million and could be as high as 33 million, thats 10% of the US population. various people and economists on both sides of the isle at one point or another have stated or confirmed that illegal immigration causes wage suppresion, especially for low and lower middle class workers. there are various reasons for this inequality, most people praise Steve Jobs and forget that whole inequality argument or that Steve Jobs was a profiteer of slave labor as his products were manufactured in Chinese companies that were one step above nazi concentration camps. i would back a socialist candidate, if it was a candidate that was pushing for more social programs for the people that deserve it, but most of these candidates are pushing for policies that will wreck our country. open borders and sanctuary cities to suppress the wages. defund the police to drive up crime while they hire their own personal security staff. true socialists come up with ideas and plans to help their countrymen, and they get corrupted by the power and damage their country. these democratic socialists and just fakers, they use the socialist brand to make people believe that they will get free stuff if they just vote for them, while still pushing elitist ideals. so no, i dont think of you as a commie or socialist or nazi simply because you like social programs, you can not point to a single person in this country that does not have some social program that they like, im in favor of social programs, but those social programs need to be accessible to ALL equally that live in the country. its kind of like the fridge in your house, its a social program, it has food and all members of your household can get food and eat it, but you dont leave your front door open and allow anyone or even your neighbors to just come in and take what they want? and you dont dictate who can or can not have which food in your family or household.
    1
  1741. 1
  1742. 1
  1743. 1
  1744. 1
  1745. 1
  1746. 1
  1747. 1
  1748. 1
  1749. 1
  1750. 1
  1751. 1
  1752. 1
  1753. 1
  1754. 1
  1755. 1
  1756. 1
  1757. 1
  1758. 1
  1759. 1
  1760. 1
  1761. 1
  1762. 1
  1763. 1
  1764. 1
  1765. 1
  1766. 1
  1767. 1
  1768. 1
  1769. 1
  1770. 1
  1771. 1
  1772. 1
  1773. 1
  1774. 1
  1775. 1
  1776. 1
  1777. 1
  1778. 1
  1779. 1
  1780. 1
  1781. 1
  1782. 1
  1783. 1
  1784. 1
  1785. 1
  1786. 1
  1787. 1
  1788. 1
  1789. 1
  1790. 1
  1791. 1
  1792. 1
  1793. 1
  1794. 1
  1795. 1
  1796. 1
  1797. 1
  1798. 1
  1799. 1
  1800. 1
  1801. 1
  1802. 1
  1803. 1
  1804. 1
  1805. 1
  1806. 1
  1807. 1
  1808. 1
  1809. 1
  1810. 1
  1811. 1
  1812. 1
  1813. 1
  1814. 1
  1815. 1
  1816. 1
  1817. 1
  1818. 1
  1819. 1
  1820. 1
  1821. 1
  1822. 1
  1823. 1
  1824. 1
  1825. 1
  1826. 1
  1827. 1
  1828. 1
  1829. 1
  1830. 1
  1831. 1
  1832. 1
  1833. 1
  1834. 1
  1835. 1
  1836. 1
  1837. 1
  1838. 1
  1839. 1
  1840. 1
  1841. 1
  1842. 1
  1843. 1
  1844. 1
  1845. 1
  1846. 1
  1847. 1
  1848. 1
  1849. 1
  1850. 1
  1851. 1
  1852. 1
  1853. 1
  1854.  @BlursedSYNthesis  wow, all those points, lets go over them. 1. you know absolutely nothing about planes or engineering. redundant systems do not work alongside primary system, they only take over if the primary system fails, unlike vaccines AND masks. planes do not have multiple engines in case an engine fails, they have multiple engines to provide enough power to generate lift for its design weight. if an engine fails in the air the crew declares an emergency and heads to the nearest airport where they are granted priority clearance to land and fire crews are standing by. if an engine fails on the ground then the aircraft is forbidden to take off because it will not generate enough thrust and acceleration to lift off in the first place. 2. thanks for pointing out that the vaccine is useless. 3. thanks for pointing out that the vaccines are even more useless than useless. 4. i call BS for the simple fact that people who have been vaccinated are still told to wear a mask. the government telling you that eventually you will get back to normal once more people are vaccinated are the same people (government and WHO) who told you that human transmision doesnt exist, and who told you that you need to lock down for 15 days to flatten the curve, and various other garbage. 5. i call BS again. the vaccine is not going to stop the spread, so far all it does is lessen the symptoms, but doctors are saying that even vaccinated people can still get it and spread it. as for some people not caring about the well being of others, did you wear a mask before covid to stop the spread of the FLU or any other disease? i didnt think so. as for caring about other people, by what right does anyone else have the authority to lock you in your house and take your job and livelyhood away to protect someone else? if there is someone out there with allergies to you, should that person be allowed to lock you up for their safety? its like saying all drivers should be locked in their house and not allowed to leave because its dangerous for people to drive, or all men should be locked in their house becase some women get raped. i completely agree with locking you in your house and letting you live like a caged animal in order to protect others.
    1
  1855.  @BlursedSYNthesis  ok, lets go through this mess. 1. the FAA mandates an overabundance of safety, it still will not clear an aircraft to take off with less than all engines in operating order. if the FAA mandates that every aircraft be able to operate on only 1 engine, then why do planes burn all that fuel by runing all 4 engines? because the FAA also mandades that for safe operation the aircraft must have all engines operating at all times. but i will grant you that there are some things made to opperate in tandem, so i will stand corrected on that. 2. i will still describe it as useless, as you said, we dont know that it stops the spread and we dont know that it doesnt. we simply dont know what it can do, which means it wanst tested properly and makes it useless. 3. still twice as useless, as you said, we dont know if it protects against variants, but it PROBABLY does? probably is not a fact, it is a guess. 4. apparently you didnt read what i wrote. thats on you. as for the claims of human transmision, can you explain what they meant then when they said "no clear evidence of human transmission" was it just some word salad that they tossed together so apologists like yourself can later twist it up like a pretzel to fit your narrative? or should we have said yes for sure there is human to human transmission because they didnt find clear evidence of it? the WHO worded it specifically to be misleading and interpreted from any viewpoint later on. every politician and every group out there was touting a 15 day lockdown to flatten the curve, once the 15 days passed and people saw it did nothing thats when the doctors and scientists stepped in to push for a 6 week lockdown and somehow we are on year 2 of a lockdown. 5. yea, doctors are saying they dont have enough data for sure to announce if vaccinated people can spread it or not. the main reason for wearing a mask according to the doctors, is so you do not spread it to other people, thats the whole story they push, wear a mask for others safety. so if you get vaccinated then why do you need to wear a mask, so you dont spread it to other people? for other peoples safety? or for fashion? so far all i heard is plenty of dont know, not sure, not enoguh data. and yes, i can understand that science takes time, i can appreciate that, but i can also think critically and question. and a simple question i have is, if we are wearing masks and social distancing to not spread the disease to others, then why take those measures if we get vaccinated, unless the vaccine doesnt work, after all no one knows do they. and exactly my point. its not moving the goal posts. by what right do you have to impose your will on others freedoms? by what right do you have to shut down someones store and destroy their livelyhood for your safety? i can understand not allowing complete freedom, but at what point do your rights to be safe end and another persons right to be free start? your safety should be your concern, not everyone elses concern, especially passive safety. sure, you can limit the driving speed for everyone to ensure everyones safety, but you cant limit everyones speed limit to zero just to ensure your own safety. same as you cant lock every man in their house because a woman may get raped, same as you shouldnt be allowed to shut down everyones business because you may get sick. at what point do you take personal responsibility for your own safety instead of completely destroying other peoples lives to ensure your own safety? you put up the example of your right to swing your arm ends at my right to not get hit in the face. should we lock you up because you swinging your arm infringes on my right to not get him in the face? or should we look at it more as an example of personal responsibility? if you are standing on your own property swinging your arm, and i walk onto your property and put my face in your arms path, does that make you at fault or me? if the store owner down the street wants to run his business then simply dont go there instead of demanding he be shut down. maybe you should go live in a yurt if you want society to stop living their live to assure your safety, after all, you could get hit by a car crossing the street, how dare they drive their cars and vio0late your right to live, or an airplane might fall out of the sky on you, how dare they violate your right to safety. look, you want to take your vaccine, and wear your masks, and eventually when they come to shove a cattle prod up your azz like they are starting to do in some countries in Asia to test for covid you be my guest. but dont sit there and spew a bunch of nonsense because you are too lazy to ask even simple questions. oh and no, Covid is not worse than the FLU, out of all the people that died from Covid, 94% of them had co-morbidities that weakened the victims immune systems. funny how when you look at AIDS deaths and Covid deaths, case 1 disease A causes the damage and disease B cases the death but its counted as disease A death but in case 2 disease A causes the damage and disease B causes the death so its couted as disease B death. the really funny part is that most people, including you dont even question why governments and the scientific and medical community would completely flip and reverse the way they report those deaths for this case. whats that saying, a man who dare not question is a slave?
    1
  1856. 1
  1857. 1
  1858. 1
  1859. 1
  1860. 1
  1861. 1
  1862. 1
  1863. 1
  1864. 1
  1865. 1
  1866. 1
  1867. 1
  1868. 1
  1869. 1
  1870. 1
  1871. 1
  1872.  @patrickbranchini378  and what crime was Rittenhouse commiting? did anyone call the cops on Rittenhoue to report his criminal activity? no, no one did, becaue at the time no one had any credible or reasonable information that would point to Rittenhouse committing a crime. you cant simply claim someone is committing a crime and then use information gained after the fact to justify your actions, you dont want cops doing that do you? if a cop stops and frisks a bad guy you claim its a violation of that guys rigths even if the cop finds a gun and drugs on him, because he had no reason to assume the guy was committing a crime, but yet you flip the script around and all of a sudden its ok to stalk and attack a guy without any reason and then later get information to prove your intent. as for ill intent, please tell us what intent did the guy who fired off shots into the air as Rosenbaum was chasing Rittenhouse? what was that guys intent on carrying a firearm at a protest? and on top of it discharging it negligently in the air too? woops, there goes another kid hit by a stray bullet because a peaceful protestor shot his gat in the air. and Grooskreutz, what was his intent for carrying a firearm at the protest, as he testified, he was carrying his firearm illegally, its cut and dry, he knew he didnt have a permit to carry his weapon concealed, yet he did it anyway. i guess those guys had ill will, but you wont look at them. you have no moral high ground to stand on. as for you carrying at a Trump rally, if the secret service doesnt stop you, then so be it. but just for the record, lets say you could bring a riffle to a Trump rally, and someone decided to stalk you and then attack you for no reason other then they perceived you as a threat and you had to shoot them, then i guess i would be on the witness stand doing the same thing that every single witness for the prosecution did, and that is to admit that you acted in SELF DEFENSE. i have always been forgiving of a persons right to defend themselves, no matter the affiliation or political bias or skin color, but with you i guess none of that matters, because a white kid being stalked by a PEDO and then attacked by that same PEDO is perfectly justifiable, and the real tragedy is that you cant even explain why its justifiable.
    1
  1873. 1
  1874. 1
  1875. 1
  1876. 1
  1877. 1
  1878.  @joeyager8479  of course the situations were different, but the basics of the situations were the same. Trevon, a black kid walking along not attacking anyone is stalked by another person and then attacked by the person that stalked him because he viewed that kid as a threat. Rittenhouse, a white kid walking along and not attacking anyone is stalked by another person and then attacked by the person that stalked him because he viewed him as a threat. same type of situation, the only differences are that Travon is black and did not have a weeapon while Rittenhouse is white and had a weapon. and having a weapon is not a cause to attack someone since plenty of people have weapons and WI is an open carry state. im pointing out the hypocrisy and double standard on these threads where people will claim that Travon should not have been attacked and Rittenhouse was justifiably attacked and giving no other reason that Rittenhouse had a weapon. i dont believe that anyone is allowed to attack anyone else unless that person becomes a direct threat, just carying a gun in a non threatening manner is not a threat, and in some states where it is legal to open carry a weapon, attacking someone for openly carrying a weapon could get you shot and then on top of it sued for violating civil rights. these are the same types of people that would say that if Ritttenhouse was black and carrying a weapon the cops would gun him down, implying that it would be wrong, but at the same time deffending attacking Rittenouse because he is not black.
    1
  1879. 1
  1880. 1
  1881. 1
  1882. 1
  1883. 1
  1884. 1
  1885. 1
  1886.  @522abet  sure, i can name one, i can name more than 1. 1. Biden violated the free speech clause of the first amendment, that is coming out in the news now with the governments coercing of banning speech on social media platforms that have FCC protections. 2. multiple democrats have violated the freedom of assembly and freedom of religion clauses of the first amendment during the pandemic. 3. multiple democrat mayors and governors committed sedition and are in open rebelion against the federal government by declaring themselves sanctuary cities and states in violation of federal immigration laws. 4. Pelosi committed fraud and abuse of power by filing frivilous impeachments in an attempt to commit a coup against a legitimately elected president. 5. Schiff committed fraud and embezzlement of public funds by pushing an investigation based on lies. 5. Obama and Biden violated the freedom of the press clause of the first amendment and the 4th amendment by spying on journalists without warrant and arresting journalists. 6. Biden violated federal laws with regard to classified documents when they were found in his private residence, from the time he was a senator and should not have been allowed to posses them. 7. Hilary violated federal laws with regard to the handling of classified documents, this was confirmed before the 2016 election when FBI director Comey held a press conference and admitted that the investigation confirmed that Hilary and staff violated the law, but they wont press any charges. 8. Rashida Tlaib commited an act of insurection by having a public speech and telling her followers to riot and storm the capitol. 9. Jamaal Bowman committed insurection by pulling a fire alarm in an attempt to stop a vote in congress, same thing J6 defendants are being charged with. Jamaal Bowman plead guilty. 10. Biden violated federal law as stated in the equal rights protection act which forbids discrimination on the basis of race by giving financial aid to farmers with prefference to black farmers over all other races. the list just goes on and on.
    1
  1887. 1
  1888. 1
  1889. 1
  1890. 1
  1891. 1
  1892. 1
  1893. 1
  1894. 1
  1895. 1
  1896. 1
  1897. 1
  1898. 1
  1899. 1
  1900. 1
  1901. 1
  1902. 1
  1903. 1
  1904. 1
  1905. 1
  1906. 1
  1907. 1
  1908. 1
  1909. 1
  1910. 1
  1911. 1
  1912. 1
  1913. 1
  1914. 1
  1915. 1
  1916. 1
  1917. 1
  1918. 1
  1919. 1
  1920. 1
  1921. 1
  1922. 1
  1923. 1
  1924. 1
  1925. 1
  1926.  @mckenzie.latham91  meanwhile you spew vaccine misinformation yourself right in your response. you claim that covid disinformation is massively responsible for vax bias and hessitancy and opposition worldwide, its a corporate talking point. the majority of people who refuse to get vaccinated are not hessitant because of disinformation, they are hesitant because of the lack of information out there about the vaccine and a lack of trust in organizations and people who have damaged their credibility on their own. its funny how MSM and prominent people and various organizations claim that questioning them is wrong and anyone that gives any info counter to the narrative should be ignored and silenced instead of debunked. 1. CDC has been parroting the CCP narrative during the whole beginning of the pandemic, and we all know the CCP uses propaganda when disseminating information for their own purposes, and related to the pandemic the CCP has been working to minimize their liability in this pandemic. 2. Fauci has flipped flopped on every single issue during this pandemic back and forth. 3. the numbers in this pandemic have been manipulated and even the CDC admitted that the numbers are overblown by upwards of 40%. 4. they claim the vaccine is safe but at the same time cant provide any data on possible side effects for a 5 year and 10 year study and are working to lock any data related to the vaccine for a period of 75 years. 5. 2 weeks to stop the spread or flatten the curve, that was 2 years ago. and the whole the vaccine stops the infection and stops the spread, but apparently thats not true either. and then there is blatantly obvious politically biased crackdown and double standards dealing with various groups. BLM protest perfectly fine, Sturgis biker gathering super spreader event. and lets not forget all the prominent politicians who push for tighter restrictions while at the same time when they think they are not being watched they flout that rhetoric, such as AOC demanding that people wear masks and avoid crowds and various other locations and then her going to FL to party in a large crowd while not wearing a mask. people are asking why do they need a vaccine that no one know what its capabilities are 5 or 10 years down the line when people who push the vaccine have been proven wrong time and time again and have been proven as hypocrites, but you call those people dissinfo. good job, you allowed the system to turn you from a human to a sheep to a lab rat to a lifelong big pharma customer.
    1
  1927. 1
  1928. 1
  1929. 1
  1930. 1
  1931. 1
  1932. 1
  1933. 1
  1934. 1
  1935. 1
  1936. 1
  1937. 1
  1938. 1
  1939. 1
  1940. 1
  1941. 1
  1942. 1
  1943. 1
  1944. 1
  1945.  @yeelahowah7476  credit card companies and banks dont prey on unsuspecting students, its not like those banks and credit cards jump on them and force them to sign up for their products now do they? they offer a service, but if those "students" are too stupid to understand the costs, then perhaps they are too stupid to vote too. maybe we should raise the minimum age for "students" to get credit cards or loans, along with raising the age for voting. you allow kids to drive at 16, and you want them voting at 16, but then you claim they are too stupid to get credit cards and bank loans. pick one. i would be absolutely fine with having 0% student loans, in fact, thats a system that should have been implemented s long long time ago. its one thing to get a credit card with interest rates attached to it, a credit card is not a necessity, its a whole different thing to get a student loan which for the most part is a necessity for the majority of people if they want to better their life. and yea, i would be absolutely fine with having the government forcing the banks to cancel the interest on those student loans, thats a profit part that doesnt exist except on the banks books. now to my "shifting the cost" argument. if you argue that the government should do student debt forgiveness, in which all student debt if cancelled and taken over by the government, well, then the government has to pay for it. the only way the government pays for it is through taxes, from tax payers, which i am one. so now you explain how the government is going to pay your student debt without using taxpayer money that it gets from taxpayers? now, as for human rights, where do you draw the line at what a human right is? is college education a human right? if there are no teachers to give you that college education, should you be allowed to enslave someone and force them to be a teacher to provide you your human right? lets take water and air, you can go drink water from a river or a puddle all you want, and breathe all the air you want. no one is stopping you from doing that. but let me guess, you want the clean fresh crisp water, thats your human right correct? do you force people to provide you with clean fresh water? do you force people to dig a trench to put in pipes and construction workers to build the filtration plant and force people to work in that plant just to deliver clean water to you as a human right? healthcare, you want that as a human right? so should we force people to build that hospital and force others to be doctors to provide you with that healthcare? human rights are constructs that cost nothing and secure your personal dignity and command over your own environment and your own destiny. things that others provide to you do not qualify as human rights, because if no one is there to provide it to you then you simply dont get it, and if you dont get it then are you human anymore? no.you dont have a right to someone elses labor or products simply because you are human.
    1
  1946. 1
  1947. 1
  1948. 1
  1949. 1
  1950. 1
  1951. 1
  1952. 1
  1953. 1
  1954. 1
  1955. 1
  1956. 1
  1957. 1
  1958. 1
  1959. 1
  1960. 1
  1961. 1
  1962. 1
  1963. 1
  1964. 1
  1965. 1
  1966. 1
  1967. 1
  1968. 1
  1969. 1
  1970. 1
  1971. 1
  1972. 1
  1973. 1
  1974. 1
  1975. 1
  1976. 1
  1977. 1
  1978. 1
  1979. 1
  1980. 1
  1981. 1
  1982. 1
  1983. 1
  1984. 1
  1985. 1
  1986. 1
  1987. 1
  1988. 1
  1989. 1
  1990. 1
  1991. 1
  1992. 1
  1993. 1
  1994. 1
  1995. 1
  1996. 1
  1997. 1
  1998. 1
  1999. 1
  2000. 1
  2001. 1
  2002. 1
  2003. 1
  2004. 1
  2005. 1
  2006. 1
  2007. 1
  2008. 1
  2009. 1
  2010. 1
  2011. 1
  2012. 1
  2013. 1
  2014. 1
  2015. 1
  2016. 1
  2017. 1
  2018. 1
  2019. 1
  2020. 1
  2021. 1
  2022. 1
  2023. 1
  2024. 1
  2025. 1
  2026. 1
  2027. 1
  2028. 1
  2029. 1
  2030. 1
  2031. 1
  2032. 1
  2033. 1
  2034. 1
  2035. 1
  2036.  @BasedRedemption  i completely agree about the taxes part, the way stocks and bonds are taxed right now is laughable. if you buy stocks you only get taxed on them when you sell them, which allows people to use them as collateral for securing loans or what not. stocks should be taxed on a yearly basis based on their rise in value, not necessarily their value as a whole because that would be unfair to most middle and lower income people. i can afford to buy a few shares of a company, should the government keep taxing me per year on how many shares i have and how much value they hold or just on how much they appreciated over a year. but that is an argument for tax reform at the government level. now as to running a company while paying a living or a good wage, most companies cant do that. a company moking cars for example, pays most of its workers a good living wage, but the car itself is overpriced compared to the materials cost to make the car. look at constuction companies, the workers make a decent living, but a house that costs $20-$30k in materials costs around $100k to build, most of that is tied in teh salaries of the workers, with some being profits for the companies. for most companies if not all, the labor costs of production are over 50% of the total costs of production, and far exceed the raw materials costs. i used to work for Coca Cola. i know it cost the company $0.04 raw material cost to produce each 2 liter of coke or whatever drink. about $0.83 was tied up in labor costs, and $0.19 was tied to operational costs (electrricity/building maintenance/taxes/etc) this was back when 2 liters would sell for around $1.29 average at stores. the rest was profit. so the workers made a decent wage, but that brought up questions of was a 2 liter bottle that cost $0.04 in raw materials worth $1.29 sales price? i dont work there anymore, but to my knowledge, only a few years ago, the raw materials on a 2 liter bottle now cost around $0.07 per bottle, and each bottle sells for roughly $2.XX at stores now, with the majority of the price going to the workers. Bezos is not making his billions off the profits of Amazon, he is making his billions off the price of the shares he owns. he was worth $20b before his divorce, and he gave up half to his ex, and then somehow shot up from $10b in net worth to $60b in net worth? i know Amazon did not make $50b profit in the past year to put in Bezos pocket. its kind of like saying all those people who bought shares of the gamestonk and made tons of money made it because the company generated so much profit. i'll agree, Bezos is disgustingly rich, obscenely rich, and it begs to question should anyone hold that kind of wealth, but you also have to examine how that wealth was accrued and was at accrued at the intentional and direct suffering of others (employees).
    1
  2037. 1
  2038. 1
  2039. 1
  2040. 1
  2041. 1
  2042. 1
  2043. 1
  2044. 1
  2045. 1
  2046. 1
  2047. 1
  2048. 1
  2049. 1
  2050. 1
  2051. 1
  2052. 1
  2053. 1
  2054. 1
  2055. 1
  2056. 1
  2057.  @jontraz5993  you are right, I don't want to pay for someone else's healthcare, I also don't want to pay for someone else's tuition, especially when that tuition involves degrees in insanity such as gender studies and lesbian dance theory. I would be willing to pitch in to pay for someone's college if it involved degrees in STEM, but not every degree under the sun. Funny thing is a lot of these college loans are used for personal things such as a car and spring break vacations, I know, I have several friends I work with that have done it. Your analogy about an antidote is LUNACY. A better analogy would be, "we have this antidote, but you have to pay for it" then a couple of years later "we still have this antidote, but those people don't want to pay for it so you pay for theirs". It's double dipping, pay for your own college and then pay for someone else's college too. If you want free college that's fine, everyone that wants it should be marked for a 30% increase on their taxes for the rest of their life to pay for it, this way you get a college degree without the debt you are saddled with and you don't saddle other people with that debt. As for the defence budget, I don't like it that high either, I sure as he'll want it lowered, I don't want us spending billions to be the world police, I want other countries to pay their fair share of NATO costs. The last presidents that did NOT get us involved in foreign conflicts are Carter and Trump, everyone else had to go off half cocked and blow something up. You still haven't explained or convinced me as to why I should pay for your personal debt. You want a college degree, they YOU pay for a college degree.
    1
  2058. 1
  2059. 1
  2060. 1
  2061. 1
  2062. 1
  2063. 1
  2064. 1
  2065. 1
  2066. 1
  2067. 1
  2068. 1
  2069. 1
  2070. 1
  2071. 1
  2072. 1
  2073. 1
  2074. 1
  2075. 1
  2076. 1
  2077. 1
  2078. 1
  2079. 1
  2080. 1
  2081. 1
  2082. 1
  2083. 1
  2084. 1
  2085. 1
  2086. 1
  2087. 1
  2088. 1
  2089. 1
  2090. 1
  2091. 1
  2092. 1
  2093. 1
  2094. 1
  2095.  @PILLOCK4  who said anything about abandoning democracy? im just pointing out that putting in honest and altruistic politicians is a pipe dream fantasy 99% of the time, and thats mostly due to people who think that sticking with their party is more democratic than holding their politicians accountable. here are a few examples. 1. the same people that cry about racist corrupt police departments are the same people that will vote in democrats that have been running these corrupt racist police departments for GENERATIONS. a. Chicago is so bad, and the police are so bad and crime is so bad, yet its a city thats been run by democrats for the last 100 years, same can be said about most other major cities. 2. the same people that whine and cry about the wage gap and companies not paying a living wage are the same people that support democrats open borders policies which is a republican Koch brothers initiative to help stifle lower incomes. 3. Biden, the same guy who authored the 94 crime bill that targeted minorities specifically for prison, partnered with a woman who as a DA in CA sent black men for longer sentences in prison managed to convince democrats that the guy he was running against who lowered minority unemployment to 50 year lows was more racist. 4. you have Barack Obama calling for censorship as if though the 1st amendment doesnt exist and democrat leaders cheering it on and democrat voters supporting it while screaming at the top of their lungs how they are pro free speech. 5. not long ago democrats were praising Bush JR. as a saint for going against Trump, the same Bush Jr. that got us involved in the middle east costing thousands of American lives and untold hundreds of thousands if not millions of middle east civilians lives. the examples can go on and on and on, Obama talking about climate change and how the oceans will rise while buying beachfront property and NO ONE even says "hey???" AOC going to party with rich people driving around in a Tesla living in a luxury apartment living a lifestyle that most Americans cant afford to live and absolutely NO ONE calls her out on it, in fact, people make excuses and deflections for it. how long has Mitch "the turtle" McConnel been in office? what has he accomplished other than being a speed bump for democrats? can you name me the last president where things seemed to get at least a little better under? at least i can say that republican voters have shown their leaders that they had enough of them twice in recent memory, the first time when republican voters started forming their own Tea Party, and the other time when they swept aside and snubbed all the republican candidates for president and chose and outsider like Trump. what have the democrats done? they voted in a guy who made promises and then went and started a slave marked in Libya, then they tried to vote in a woman whom helped the last guy start those slave markets in Libya and whined and cried when she lost, then they voted in a guy who was NO. 2 in the administration that started slave marked in Libya. its not about abandoning democracy, its about holding leaders accountable for their failures and punishing them for their wrong doings, something that is lacking on both sides, but seems to be completely nonexistant on the democrats side,.
    1
  2096. 1
  2097. 1
  2098. 1
  2099. 1
  2100. 1
  2101. 1
  2102. 1
  2103. 1
  2104. 1
  2105. 1
  2106. 1
  2107. 1
  2108. 1
  2109. 1
  2110. 1
  2111. 1
  2112. 1
  2113. 1
  2114. 1
  2115. 1
  2116. 1
  2117. 1
  2118. 1
  2119. 1
  2120. 1
  2121. 1
  2122. 1
  2123. 1
  2124. 1
  2125. 1
  2126. 1
  2127. 1
  2128. 1
  2129. 1
  2130. 1
  2131.  Atheos B. Sapien  and NY governor was cooking the books too, but i pointed out official numbers given not just by a couple of governors that cooked their books, but numbers for the entire US AND numbers for the ENTIRE world, and specifically numbers from last year to prove my point that millions of people recovered from having covid without a vaccine because there was no vaccine last year. and i didnt just give numbers from Florida, or from NY, but i gave numbers from the CDC which covered the whole US and i gave numbers from the WHO which covered the whole world, to show my point that tens of millions here in the US and hundreds of millions around the world have recovered from COVID without a vaccine. but what are you trying to say, that everyone in the whole world is cooking their books to show lower numbers? for what purpose? they are trying to push the vaccine so it would be counter productive for everyone to cook their books to show lower numbers of deaths. i know exactly what questions to ask. 1. what is the mortality rate of COVID. 2. what is the effectiveness of this vaccine. 3. what are the long term (5 and 10 year) effects of THIS vaccine. 4. is the risk of long term effects outweighed by the risk of death from COVID without the vaccine? you can answer 1 by putting in some effort into doing research on it because no one is trying to give an accurate number, some say its 1-5%, while others say its up to 50%. you can barely answer or guess at 2, where some are saying 97% effective while the latest Israeli study says 46% effective, so again those numbers are all over the place. there is absolutely no way of answering 3 because there is absolutely no data on this vaccine or any other similar vaccine as this vaccine is the first of its kind. there is no way of answering 4 because it relies on answering 3. maybe you are too ignorant to follow the conversation.
    1
  2132. 1
  2133. 1
  2134. 1
  2135. 1
  2136. 1
  2137. 1
  2138. 1
  2139. 1
  2140. 1
  2141. 1
  2142. 1
  2143. 1
  2144. 1
  2145. 1
  2146. 1
  2147. 1
  2148. 1
  2149. 1
  2150. 1
  2151. 1
  2152. 1
  2153. 1
  2154. 1
  2155. 1
  2156. 1
  2157. 1
  2158. 1
  2159. 1
  2160. 1
  2161. 1
  2162. 1
  2163. 1
  2164. 1
  2165. 1
  2166. 1
  2167. 1
  2168. 1
  2169. 1
  2170. 1
  2171. 1
  2172. 1
  2173. 1
  2174. 1
  2175. 1
  2176. 1
  2177. 1
  2178. 1
  2179. 1
  2180. 1
  2181. 1
  2182. 1
  2183. 1
  2184. 1
  2185. 1
  2186. 1
  2187. 1
  2188. 1
  2189. 1
  2190.  @kimberlywilliams2656  1. Trump made it easier to prosecute financial crimes like money laundering, enacting the most sweeping overhaul of financial crimes safeguards in decades. 2. Trump made it possible to follow the Pentagon’s money. In 2018, the Trump administration for the first time attempted a Defense Department-wide audit. 3. Trump goosed the economy with tax cuts that didn’t pay political dividends. The 2017 tax bill slashed individual and corporate tax rates and made dozens of other major changes to the tax code that affected virtually every facet of the economy, from small businesses to university endowments. 4. Trump cracked down — mostly successfully — on unwanted calls and texts (robocalls). 5. Trump took a big swing at finally fixing health-care technology. Early in 2020 — just before coronavirus upended daily life — the Trump administration released a big ball of rules meant to sweep aside barriers to sharing health information. 6. The anti-monopolists started winning - two Trump picks, FTC Chair Joe Simons and DOJ’s Barr, have spent the past two years more aggressively looking into antitrust concerns raised by Silicon Valley. In recent months, the DOJ filed a landmark antitrust case against Google, its biggest monopolization case since the 1990s suit against Microsoft. 7. Trump doled out billions in aid to farmers. 8. Trump’s White House took quiet steps to promote U.S. development of AI America gained 7 million new jobs – more than three times government experts’ projections. Middle-Class family income increased nearly $6,000 – more than five times the gains during the entire previous administration. The unemployment rate reached 3.5 percent, the lowest in a half-century. Achieved 40 months in a row with more job openings than job-hirings. More Americans reported being employed than ever before – nearly 160 million. Jobless claims hit a nearly 50-year low. The number of people claiming unemployment insurance as a share of the population hit its lowest on record. Incomes rose in every single metro area in the United States for the first time in nearly 3 decades. i wont even go into the foreign policy stuff because there is a lot to list.
    1
  2191. 1
  2192. 1
  2193. 1
  2194. 1
  2195. 1
  2196. 1
  2197. 1
  2198. 1
  2199. 1
  2200. 1
  2201. 1
  2202. 1
  2203. 1
  2204. 1
  2205. 1
  2206. 1
  2207. 1
  2208. 1
  2209. 1
  2210. 1
  2211. 1
  2212. 1
  2213. 1
  2214. 1
  2215.  @BeardiusMaximus  its not that i disregard the answer, its that i simply dont agree with the answer. what in the democrats history when dealing with Sanders has given you the idea that they will even consider giving him the nomination? was it when they gave him the nomination in 2016? oh no, they snubbed him. was it when they gave him the nomination in 2020? oh no, they snubbed him again. was it when they gave him a cabinet position in the Biden administration? oh wait, they snubbed him some more. and now here you are trying to make the point that this time, maybe just this time, they might consider him? its like a kid who keeps sticking his hand in the fire thinking that this time the fire wont burn him. going as a 3rd party candidate is not going to be easy, i know that, but you discount the fact that he can hire people to help him build up an infrastructure to help bring up a 3rd party, like the green party. its ironic how there is only 1 3rd party (green party) candidate that runs for president, its almost like they nominate their candidate to run for president. being a 3rd party candidate he can hire in people to build up the infrastructure, he can raise the money, and with that money he can do things. even if there is only a 1% chance of him getting the 3rd party nomination, its still infinitely higher than the percentage chance of getting a nomination from the democrats who have demonstrated historically of snubin Sanders at every opportunity. yea, in 2016 he came in pretty big, and then what happened? they paraded Clinton on stage, dropped balloons and nominated her. BOOM, thats how hard the DNC had to work to stop him. in 2020, pretty much the same thing, and then when picking cabinet members for Bidens administration, they pretty much didnt even ask Sanders, yup, they had to work months and years and decades to formulate that plan of snubbing him. if he goes with the democrats again, they will simply use him to help gain donations and then snub him just like every other time. going 3rd party, with his name recognition alone he would draw in support for the 3rd party, not even calculating how much money he would bring in through campaign donations. he would draw in support from a lot of independents, and some democrats, and believe it or not, even some republicans that have grown to have the republicans that are in office right now. believe it or not, there is a lot of sentiment against republican leadership from republicans because of their inability to act on anything. you notice how republicans formed the Tea party because they were disillusioned with the republican party? you notice how republicans went for Trump, a man who literally had absolutely NO presence in government before? if you look at current polls, people in both parties are disenfranchised with both parties, republicans and democrats can muster about 30%-40% support in any demographic. Tim Pool did a segment on it a couple of days ago where he broke down each demographic and their support for each party. the country is silently begging for a 3rd party, and i think Sanders could be the leader of that 3rd party.
    1
  2216. 1
  2217. 1
  2218. 1
  2219. 1
  2220. 1
  2221. 1
  2222. 1
  2223. 1
  2224. 1
  2225. 1
  2226. 1
  2227. 1
  2228. 1
  2229. 1
  2230. 1
  2231. 1
  2232. 1
  2233. 1
  2234. 1
  2235. 1
  2236.  @ohhah1255  1. of course the system is broken because of the shitty rules and the lack of rules. who put those rules in? the people that are in power now. so what do you expect out of them? do you really expect them to all of a sudden make good rules that dont benefit themselves? "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" is a saying that is generations old, and there are politicians in government that are generations old. because they have no interest in making good rules to benefit people. so how do you fix that? you have to replace the people in charge of fixing it that are unwilling to do so with people who are willing to do so. simple example for you, you want to raise taxes on people making more than 100,000 per year. which politician is going to vote to make that a law when all of them make over 100k per year. or another example. you want to eliminate lobbyists, which politician is going to vote for a law to eliminate lobyists when all of them make money off lobyist? 2. when i said society has had it for thousands of years, i was referring to graft and bribery for leaders. as for capitalism, as a nationwide system it is reletively young considering we are only a few centuries out from feudalism, but some form of capitalism still existed on a small and limited scale, examples of it exist with the spice trade and the silk trade dating back thousands of years, although it was never incorporated as a national system. 3. i agree, i cant blame a person for being materialistic, its in most peoples nature, and no matter how well intentioned a person may be, i can only recall 3 instances of people not being materialistic, maybe 4. Budha, Jesus, Mother Theresa and Ghandi. its not something you can change realistically, its in our nature, its in every animals nature to a certain extent. we fight over resources, animals also fight over resources, they may be different resources but its still resources. 4. i believe the working people that pay into the system should have a voice in how the system is run, but i would never advocate for socialism, i grew up under a socialist regime and i would never wish that horror on anyone. its not a matter of changing the government or the system, its a matter of changing the people in the system so that the system works for the people again. currently the system works for the elite only, while the people get nothing but scraps, and thats the fault of the politicians running the system. a. start taking out the politicians that are in government right now that are not working for the people. b. get new politicians that are loyal to the people to start passing new laws such as term limits and tax reform and campaign finance reform and lobby reform. c. start actually prosecuting politicians that overstep their boundariesor flagrantly break the law by creating a new branch of government outside of the scope of congress or the executive, perhaps under the judicial branch like a special DOJ answerable only to SCOTUS with a mandate to only prosecute crimes by congress or the executive branch.
    1
  2237. 1
  2238.  @ohhah1255  ok, let me re-iterate as i was mistaken before, i was born in Pre-perestrika and grew up in pre and post, so i have experience in both, as well as my family who lived and are still living either pre or post. as for reading studies or articles, you can read them to your hearts content, doesnt mean they are honest especially if they were written by bias men with an agenda using info suppllied by biased men with an agenda. the 30 million figure is the figure of Russians put into gulag camps, the death rate itself is a debated topic because no one is ever going to get the real numbers, same for a lot of other genocides, no one is going to get the real numbers and so they are guestimations at best, but considering that the engineered famine under Stalin resulted in 7-10 million deaths estimated, the number of deaths you give as 3-12 million is way too small. but i digress, i know a capitalist country like the US conspires to kill millions of its own people outright. now as for socialism allowing workers to reap the benefits and profits of their labor, please tell me how much an average FoxCom worker in socialist China earns compared to the owners of FoxCom? perhaps those suicide nets around the building are there for the owners in case they decide to jump off the building because they are distraught at not becoming rich because they had to give most of their money away to their workers? i appologize, i was being sarcastic there and maybe took a jab when i shouldnt have, my appologies. but still, you can not deny the oppresion that exists under a socialist or communist regime because of a lack of freedoms and upward mobility. capitalism doesnt prevent pluralism in economics. there are laws in place to safeguard us so we are allowed pluralism. there is nothing stopping you or anyone else from entering the economic stage and exerting your power, from a local small scale to a large scale. on the small scale, you vote with your dollar by doing business with store A and refusing to do business with store B. on a larger scale, you can start up your own business and be successful and become rich and exert your influence upon the market, there is nothing stopping you from doing that. recent examples are people like Bezos and Gates and Dell. Bezos founded Amazon as a small little website and worked on it to make it grow into an international powerhouse. Gates quit college and joined with a group of friends to create a large and influential company. Dell used a $100 loan from his grandmother to create a computer powerhouse company. lets look at Steve Jobs, dropout from college, created a company that is known around the world, all he was armed with was a simple saying, "the customer doesnt know what he wants, its my job to tell the customer what he wants". perhaps those ideas are too complicated for most people, so lets go simpler, a simple guy couldnt afford to get his kids a pet, so he glued some googly eyes to a rock, and then started selling those rocks to other people, last i heard he was a millionaire living in the lap of luxury. a guy i personally know is a truck driver, retired of course, he started when he was young, but he worked at it and now has a fleet of trucks running for him making him money. i get to drive his lambo once in a while if he is feeling extra nice and I ask nicely. all of these examples are possible under both capitalism and socialism or communism, except for one specific difference, under capitalism, it is yours, under socialism, the government can step in anytime and take it away from you without reason or rhyme. an example is the game Tetris, world famous and in the top 3 most played games in the world. the inventor is a Russian. he earned $0 from his creation, it all went to the government. something that he created on his own was not his. would you prefer to live and work in a system where your labor is not your own? whats the incentive of working extra hard to create anything new, other than the threat of prison or worse? ever notice that most of the innovations in the private industry (not government/military) were developed in a capitalist system? you stated that Russia didnt develop light industry, that is true, but mostly because the people were not incentivized to create it, after all, what would a person benefit from working extra hard to make a new factory when they would not benefit from it? would you be willing to work extra on your time off for free to create a new product just to give it away to someone else? im not talking about volunteering for community service of some type, but work yourself to the bone to create a better computer, and then give it away for nothing, or at least just to cover your own costs?
    1
  2239. 1
  2240. 1
  2241.  @ohhah1255  no plurality in capitalism? how many different gasoline companies can you name? how many different tobbaco companies can you name? how many different computer companies, car manufacturers, phone manufacturers? something as simple as a can of beans is sold at a wide variety of stores (plurality) and is manufactured by a wide variety of manufacturers (plurality) and grown on a wide variety of farms (plurality). just because 70% of businesses fail in their first year doesnt mean the laws are against them, it just means they were crappy businesses, you cant expect to open up a burger joint serving crappy overpriced burgers on a block with 10 other crappy burger joints some of whom serve better and cheaper burgers and expect to succeed. if you fail at your business then you didnt have a good enough business model to make your business succeed. sorry that idea eludes you like a great idea for a business eludes you so you have to blame laws. point out a single law that says anything of the sort such as "any small business must fail blah blah blah" or "no new small business can open here blah blah blah". there are no such laws. as for the gamestop debacle, i made money on it, made pretty good money on it, and i got out of it. so what if they whined, they were not capitalists protecting capitol, they were rich elites protecting their investments, you think that kind of stuff doesnt happen under socialism or communism or any other type of ism? go to China and try to screw with their system like that, see what the hell happens to you you whine like a stuck pig "capitalism wah wah wah" while ignoring that the rich around the world keep getting richer while the poor keep getting poorer all while living under whateverISM they feel like living under. you ignore that its not capitalism thats the problem, because capitalism gives people more of a chance to get ahead in life, its the rich elite thats the problem, and they want you concentrating on something other than them, because if you start contenctrating on them then they are in trouble, but if they distract you with something else then they can go on doing whatever they want and you arent a problem to them. so here you are, running around "capitalism wah wah wah" like a dunce ignorant of reality itself, like a useful idiot. the gamestop debacle happened because those people figured out that its not capitalism thats the problem, its the elite, and thats who they targeted, the elite.
    1
  2242. 1
  2243. 1
  2244. 1
  2245. 1
  2246. 1
  2247. 1
  2248. 1
  2249. 1
  2250. 1
  2251. 1
  2252. 1
  2253. 1
  2254. 1
  2255. 1
  2256. 1
  2257.  @yossarrian  same can be said about you, you are a bootlicker for a group that convinced you that what you want should be handed to you and let others pay. its simple communism/socialism. the really bad part is that you have been convinced its great by people who murdered millions of their own followers. i actually agree that healthcare for all is a noble idea, and i wish we could give it to everyone freely, i dont like to see people suffer needlessly because they cant afford something like healthcare. but i also look all over the world to see how such a system works. i grew up under such a system, and its non implementable with a finite and rare resource such as healthcare. doctors are a rare breed, and specialists are even rarer, and if you divide such a rare resource among a large population then everyone gets an insignificant piece that amounts to nothing. in the UK, they ration healthcare, especially to older people. in fact, there is an episode where the UK health system refused to provide healthcare to a 2 year old boy because it was so rare and expensive, and then the courts stepped in and forbid the family from leaving the country to get the needed healthcare somewhere else. needless to say the boy died. in Germany, taxes are higher because they offer healthcare to everyone free, so the taxes have to pay for it. in Canada there are higher waiting times for non emergency healthcare than in some other countries. the rarer the resource, the higher the cost, and the less people can get of it. if a doctor can only service 1 patient per hour then he can only service 40 patients in a week and making it a right is not going to solve that problem. solving the healthcare problem doesnt mean just give it to everyone for free and poof, magically all your issues go away, it just simply means more people will get lower quality of care. you need to look at the underlying problems of why healthcare is the way it is, for example, i will use the US as an example because i am more familiar with the US system. why are prices so expensive? 1. doctors spend hundreds of thousands and years upon years studying to get a medical degree, and then tens of thousands paying for malpractice insurance. 2. pharma companies spend billions on research and development of drugs, most of that is funded by the taxpayers through government grants anyway. 3. medical equipment companies sell their products at extreme prices most likely due to unnecesary regulations, as an example, a wheelchair costs around $300 while a folding lawnchair costs about $50, the only real difference is wheels. solution. 1. institute a government program equivalent to the GI bill but specifically for medical professionals. offer to pay full medical college tuition in exchange for a number of years of service. when that potential doctor graduates, he goes directly into the military as a non combat medic / doctor for 4 years. once that is complete, 10 years of medical service in a government health facility serving underprivileged / poor people without medical insurance. the pay would be minimal to the doctor as he would be a government employee, but it would be enough to live on. after 10 years the doctor completes his contract to the government and can move onto private practice. this would eliminate high fees by doctors since those doctors wouldnt be in debt for half a million in medical school costs. and the bonus is more doctors would start being trained and schooled. how many kids out there want to be doctors but cant afford school? 2. start taking big pharma out of the equation. all government medical facilities would be allowed to use generic medicines for their patients, and all those government generics could be produced in government labs. any new medicine developed, the patents would exempt the government from creating a generic for use in gov institutions, so instead of getting Viagra, you get Govagra, or Govynol, or whatever. this would help lower the price for medicines themselves. 3. start up production facilities for medical equipment specifically run by the gov for gov facilities use only, so something as mundane as a wheelchair would cost $100 instead of $300. with just these 3 implementations, you can create a secondary medical system to cover those in need, as a secondary safety net for lower cost, for people that dont have insurance for whatever reason. there are problems with every healthcare system out there, and we need solutions for them to make them better, simply giving everyone a shitty product doesnt make it better. build a better house instead of giving everyone a crappy house and claiming its a solution to the crappy housing out there.
    1
  2258. 1
  2259. 1
  2260. 1
  2261. 1
  2262. 1
  2263. 1
  2264. 1
  2265. 1
  2266. 1
  2267.  @sndspderbytes  yea, CA is the 5th largest economy in the world, so what does that mean exactly? does it translate into safer streets? does it translate into better schools? does it translate into more prosperity for more people? does it translate into a higher standard of living for the common people? no, it translates into schools ranked 49th place, it translates into homeless camps and human feces all over the streets, it translates into higher taxes and lower standard of living for the common people. all that 5th largest economy means that a few wealthy people set up businesses that make alot of money for the top 1% while everyone else struggles to get by. if your 5th largest economy translated into anything good then CA would not be suffering from a net population loss for almost 10 years running due to people leaving the state. as for NY, who cares who lived there, its still a chithole and getting worse by the minute. Trump was smart enough to leave. if NY is such a great place, then please explain the recent news reports about how their real estate market is collapsing, and how their rental market is collapsing and how the crime is spiking. Republican mayors in large cities, they are rare, but i can name 2 off the top of my head, Indianapolis and Miami. so lets compare. i dont recall those 2 cities making national headlines about how they are going bankrupt like Detroit, or how the murder rate is spiking like Chicago or NYC or how their real estate or rental market is collapsing like NYC or how their overall crime is spiking like L.A. or the various other stories out there. why is it that Indianapolis or Miami dont make national headlines on a practically weekly basis with horror stories like democrat run cities? im positive that Ind and Miami have their own problems, but they seem to stay out of the national spotlight because their problems are not so severe.
    1
  2268. 1
  2269. 1
  2270. 1
  2271. 1
  2272. 1
  2273. 1
  2274. 1
  2275. 1
  2276. 1
  2277. 1
  2278. 1
  2279. 1
  2280. 1
  2281. 1
  2282. 1
  2283. 1
  2284. 1
  2285. 1
  2286. 1
  2287. 1
  2288. 1
  2289. 1
  2290. 1
  2291. 1
  2292. 1
  2293. 1
  2294. 1
  2295. 1
  2296. 1
  2297. 1
  2298. 1
  2299. 1
  2300. 1
  2301.  @f3tsch906  oh you are right, my mistake, she didnt call for camps, she called for "LISTS". would those be Schindler style lists or Hitler style lists? the calls for camps came from other high ranking democrats, including David Atkinson (National Democratic Party official). and i never claimed anyone was calling for killing republicans, but Trump supporters, yes. and im on here to listen to all sides, and who cares what Tim Poole does his videos for, doesnt make them less valid or less right, why is RN on here making videos, for his health? as for Waters? find a democrat who supports such actions? how many democrats came out denouncing her speech? how many republicans have already been attacked and harassed in restaurants? THATS HOW MANY. and no, of course i dont support this nutjob who calls for executing people, do you? are you going to denounce Waters for her comments about finding people who worked for Trump and confronting them and pushing them out? are you going to denounce AOC for wanting to make Nazi style lists? are you going to denounce the high ranking democrats who called for re-educating 75 million people in camps? are you going to denounce the democratic PAC founder who called for EXECUTING people in the street? seems like you already made excuses for them, "oh tim poole makes videos for money, no one follows Waters." blah blah blah, you make excuses for bad behavior because you like that behavior. you claim i listen to people who make wild assumptions and saying outright lies, yet i come on here and listen to RN and several other left leaning personalities, are they lying? i would assume RN is not lying, and that behavior should be called out and pointed out and shunned. can you say the same? have you called it out? no you havent, you made excuses for it, seems you are more of an extremist than me.
    1
  2302. 1
  2303. 1
  2304. 1
  2305. 1
  2306. 1
  2307. 1
  2308. 1
  2309. 1
  2310. 1
  2311. 1
  2312. 1
  2313. 1
  2314. 1
  2315. 1
  2316. 1
  2317. 1
  2318. 1
  2319. 1
  2320. 1
  2321. 1
  2322. 1
  2323. 1
  2324. 1
  2325. 1
  2326. 1
  2327. 1
  2328. 1
  2329. 1
  2330. 1
  2331. 1
  2332. 1
  2333. 1
  2334. 1
  2335. 1
  2336. 1
  2337. 1
  2338. 1
  2339. 1
  2340. 1
  2341. 1
  2342. 1
  2343. 1
  2344. 1
  2345. 1
  2346. 1
  2347. 1
  2348. 1
  2349. 1
  2350. 1
  2351. 1
  2352. 1
  2353. 1
  2354. 1
  2355. 1
  2356.  @Uller1967  yea, i guess you have a point, shutting down a pipeline has no bearing on the price of the goods coming through that pipeline, Biden going on TV and begging OPEC and other countries to increase production of oil because our gas prices are going up too fast was a comedy skit or something right? its almost as if he was saying that less oil means higher prices so we need more oil. you want sources? Al Jazeera / BBC / NPR all did stories where they cited Taliban field commanders direct statements which were "we will press forward with our attack because we feel no need to abide by any agreements made with an enemy that doesnt honor their promises or agreements to us". maybe if you pull your head out of CNN's butt you might hear other news stories. on inflation, i know exactly how inflation works, prices go up on everything, but nowhere near the double and sometimes tripple digit percentage points. the media is reporting the severe SPIKE in prices across the board, with multiple news organizations reporting that we are hitting 40 year records in inflation. but perhaps you can stop deflecting and minimizing the situation and give sources of any news media reporting that lumber has gone up 600% year over year from any previous year. only an idiot like you would say that 20-50% price spikes are normal. what agreement did Biden break? the effing agreement that was brokered with the Taliban, Al Jazeera / BBC / NPR reported on it. as to whether its a poor comparison or not, its still a comparison, breaking a treaty is still breaking a treaty, stop being a NAZI and trying to justify it as not a bad thing, its the same thing NAZIS did in the 30's and 40's, they justified their horrible acts as "not as bad so they were ok" and here you are doing the same thing.
    1
  2357. 1
  2358. 1
  2359. 1
  2360.  @Uller1967  Perhaps YOU need reality explained to you. 1.Trump actively lied to the American people about the severity of COVID and it's potential for spread – this is a stupid argument, handling something is different from making a statement about something, just like you fixing a flat tire compared to you talking about fixing a flat tire, in one the problem gets handled, in the other its just an idiot making hot air (YOU). 2. He actively mocked people for wearing masks – again stupid argument, se point 1 IDIOT 3. He actively intimidated states to open schools for in-person learning – kind of like whats going on in Chicago where the DEMOCRAT mayor is doing the same to the teachers union. Democrats agree with Trump on this matter and they agree you are an IDIOT. 4.He attempted to keep a cruise ship from docking in California to 'keep the numbers low' – kind of like democrat governors setting up checkpoints in their states to not allow cars from other states to come in? DEMOCRATS agree that it’s a good move to block infected people from coming in and they agree you are an IDIOT. 5. He discouraged COVID testing to 'keep the numbers low' – I didn’t hear about this, but please, point to your source that shows that Trump ordered states to not test for covid, if you cant, then that makes you a LIAR. 6.He lied about having it under control – considering that the death toll was 10 times LESS than what the medical community (EXPERTS) and what the DEMOCRATS and what the news outlets were saying was going to happen, he sure as hell had it under control. 7.he lied about it going away 'with the warmer weather' – most areas loosened restrictions during the warmer weather citing decreasing case counts, so yea, EVERYONE says you are a liar and an idiot, but again, see point 1, making a statement is not equivalent to handling a situation. 8.He was ridiculously stupid about the use of 'disinfectents or very powerful light' as any possible treatment for covid – see point 1 again, asking questions is not equivalent to handling a situation. But please, next time you go to the hospital for any treatment, demand that they don’t use any ridiculously stupid disinfectants when it pertains to you. 9.He lied that he was F-ing INFECTED when he debated Biden and then went on to infect a huge portion of his staff – if he lied about being infected, then please point to your source that shows the truth, the truth being that he knew he was infected. If you cant then that makes YOU the liar. 10. He lied about the severity of his own illness after catching COVID – I don’t remember seeing any stories where Trump was intubated for 2 months in a hospital anywhere, in fact, I don’t remember where Trump even had to spend an extended amount of time in a hospital. You are a liar and an IDIOT. 11.He had hospitals and states competing with each other for PPE – point to your source. 12. He stopped having COVID briefings of his own altogether – you mean the briefings that the media decided to boycott and not cover? Why should he have briefings to the people where the media doesn’t want to report on them to the people. 13.muzzled Fauci from speaking to the media – the same Fauci that LIED on everything he has said? So you think that a liar like Fauci should be allowed to spread his lies to the media constantly? Fauci – wear masks Fauci – don’t wear masks Fauci – wear 3 masks Fauci – 2 weeks to slow the curve Fauci – natural immunity is better than vaccines Fauci – natural immunity is not as good as vaccines (after payout from vax companies) Fauci – you need one dose of vaccines (so my stonks can go up) Fauci – you need a booster shot for the vaccines (so my stonks can go higher) Fauci – you need more boosters (STONKS TO THE MOON) Fauci – its not “gain of function” because io changed the definition so ALL those other scientists are now lying. Fauci should have been dragged out on the front lawn of the white house and publicly EXTERMINATED. 14. Then he failed to secure enough doses and had ZERO plan to get it into the arms of Americans – that is a blatant lie, according to a Forbes article dated 12/23/2020, the federal government had contracts in place securing 200 million doses from Pfizer and Under Operation Warp Speed, the government has contracts with Johnson & Johnson, Novavax and AstraZeneca for more than 500 million doses. https://www.forbes.com/sites/elanagross/2020/12/23/trump-administration-reaches-deal-for-100-million-additional-doses-of-pfizers-vaccine/?sh=241f54483a13 some points of operation warp speed support pharmaceutical companies for R&D of seven different vaccine candidates simultaneously and certain therapeutic compounds[2] support several vaccine manufacturers for rapid scale-up of manufacturing capacity[2] support organization and facilitate simultaneous FDA review of Phase I-III clinical trials on several of the most promising vaccine candidates[2] facilitate manufacturing vaccine candidates while they remain pre-approved during prefinal clinical research to prepare for rapid deployment, if proven to be safe and effective[2][17] coordinate with the Department of Defense for vaccine supply, production, and deployment around the United States, and track every vaccine vial and the injection schedule for each American receiving a vaccination[2][18] so according to operation warp speed under trump, we had secured 700 million doses of vaccines and had the department of defense involved in distributing it to everyone. YOU ARE A LIAR. 15.He prevented Biden's transition team of being able to hit the ground running because he was STILL pushing the lie that he won the election and that there was fraud – I don’t see how him making accusations about the election was preventing Bidens team from hitting the ground running considering that Biden still took office on 1/21 and was handed 700 million contracted doses and the military set up and ready to distribute those doses. 15. Jesus he did almost everything wrong other than Operation Warp Speed, which ironically the company to brought a vaccine to market first, didn't even take a dime of that funding. – jesus all you complain about is Trump said words wah wah wah. Every single point you made was stupid, debunked, and countermanded even by DEMOCRATS. Now STFU & GTFO & GFY.
    1
  2361. 1
  2362. 1
  2363. 1
  2364. 1
  2365. 1
  2366. 1
  2367. 1
  2368. 1
  2369. 1
  2370. 1
  2371. 1
  2372. 1
  2373. 1
  2374. 1
  2375. 1
  2376. 1
  2377. 1
  2378. 1
  2379. 1
  2380. fine, i'll defendt it. 1. bill 1, The Access to Baby Formula Act will grant the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) the authority to waive certain requirements so that vulnerable families can continue purchasing safe infant formula with their WIC benefits during extenuating circumstances, such as a public health emergency or supply chain disruption. The bill will also ensure that WIC participants are better protected during a product recall. A. this bill would allow low income families greater latitude in what formulas they can purchase. the problem is THERE IS NO FORMULA to purchase. so you tell me, whats the point of allowing someone to buy more of something that is out of stock? if you go to the store to buy chicken wings and they are out of chicken wings, does it mean that the store magically has chicken wings now on the shelf because you can buy more of them? NO. this is a feel good measure to make it look like democrats are doing something while in reality not adressing the problem itself which is A SHORTAGE. you dont fix a shortage by allowing people to buy more of something that there is none of. 2. bill 2, HR 7790 -- would provide $28 million in emergency funding for the US Food and Drug Administration. The emergency funding would be used to increase the number of FDA inspection staff, provide resources for personnel working on formula issues, help the agency stop fraudulent baby formula from entering the US marketplace, and improve data collection on the formula market, according to a release from the House Appropriations Committee. A. this bill would give $28 million from TAXPAYERS, thats those working moms trying to buy baby formula, and use it to hire more government workers. in fact, it would hire more of those inspectors that actually shut down baby formula plants. this would NOT alleviate the SHORTAGE we have. SHORTAGE, meaning, NOT ENOUGH of a product. that $28 million could have been used to buy formula from other countries and imported to the US, sure, it would be a drop in the bucket, but still better than politicians using it to hire their cronnie friends into high paid jobs in the government, notice i say politicians instead of naming one party or the other because they are all complicit. as for allowing people to buy more of a product that there is a shortage on, its a pointless feelgood measure, it would be a better bill if it allowed people to buy formula from outside the US. tell me you wouldnt look at someone as if though they were stupid if you went into a store to buy something and it was out of stock and the managers solution would be that he would hire more executives and allow you to buy more of the out of stock item? does it bring the item back in stock?
    1
  2381. 1
  2382. 1
  2383. 1
  2384. 1
  2385.  @spawniscariot9756  you mean the stuff the Mueller report didnt have anything in? the 7 guilty pleas that were NOT related to anything such as Russia collusion? the 5 prison sentences for crimes completely unrelated to Russia collusion? 1. being indicted means absolutely nothing, thats just a charge. a cop on a power trip can arrest you and charge you with a crime and the DA can indict you, that doesnt mean you are guilty. 2. the 7 guilty pleas from the investigation were for process crimes such as lying or making false statements or, the biggest guilty verdict and sentencing, Manafort, who was found guilty of money laundering 10 years earlier while working for the Podesta group, the same Podesta that ran Hilarys campaign. 3. the 5 prison sentences came from those 7 guilty pleas for crimes having nothing to do with Russia collulsion. 4. what was confirmed by the Intelligence committee? you are a little vague there. 5. Muellers very own statement to congress. “We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term, rather, we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. It was not.” so according to Mueller, was there sufficient evvidence? THERE WAS NOT. Mueller in his report did NOT even point out any instances of where collusion occurred. in fact, the house, led by Pelosi impeached Trump for "abuse of Power" and "Obstruction of Congress" but not for collusion. why not if there was so much evidence and the Mueller report said so? because YOU push the same garbage lie.
    1
  2386. 1
  2387. 1
  2388. 1
  2389. 1
  2390. 1
  2391. 1
  2392. 1
  2393. 1
  2394. 1
  2395. 1
  2396. 1
  2397. 1
  2398. 1
  2399. 1
  2400. 1
  2401. 1
  2402. 1
  2403. 1
  2404. 1
  2405. 1
  2406. 1
  2407. 1
  2408. 1
  2409. 1
  2410. 1
  2411. 1
  2412. 1
  2413. 1
  2414. 1
  2415. 1
  2416. 1
  2417. 1
  2418. 1
  2419. 1
  2420.  @daves2354  yes, it was all Trumps plan that Biden refused to stick to. its kind of like a recipe, if the recipe calls for baking a cake for 1 hour, and you decide to disregard the recipe and bake the cake for 3 hours, who fucked up the cake? you who didnt follow the recipe or the recipe maker? i never said anything good is always because of Trump and anything bad is someone elses fault. but you sure seem to have your blinders on trying to deflect blame from Biden for this massive blunder, a blunder which most world leaders are putting squarely on Bidens shoulders where it belongs. and yea, you are right, a 20 year old war that no longer even has an objective doesnt require 4 years to develop an exit strategy, because you are a great tactician. Obama had 8 years to develop an exit strategy, something that he campaigned on even, you might remember how Obama promised that he would pull us out of these foreign conflicts? where was Obamas exit strategy? he had 8 years to develop one, he developed none. Biden came in at the end of January, and developed his own exit strategy right away that would take 9 months, and so far, 7 months in and we have nothing but complete chaos. you are no judge for how long it should take and have no ground to stand on to criticize a man for doing it on his timeline. Trump got us out whether it took him 4 days or 4 years or 4 lifetimes is a moot point because he did what others were not willing to do, and it points to your TDS when you criticize a man for doing something that you yourself 100% agree with doing.
    1
  2421. 1
  2422. 1
  2423. 1
  2424.  @jackjohnson5672  yea, all those that profited politically or financially. how many times did congress work toward stoppiid Trump from doing anything as far as the military is concerned? he tried to pull all the troops out of Syria and congress was all up in arms about how he is not allowed to do that because aur allies and blah blah blah. same with Afghanistan, how many times did congressmen from both sides jump up screaming about our allies nad other excuses blah blah blah. funy how you have a problem with a guy who worked on ending a war while being obstructed, claiming he took too long but not a single ounce of criticism for the people obstructing him. military advisors and actors in the white house BRAGGED about how they were lying to the president on military operations, did you scream in objection to that or did you smile and cheer with joy at how Trumps plans were being foiled and sabotaged by the resistance from within? im guessing it was the latter right? you are part of the problem, and the blood of those dead people in Afghanistan are on your hands too, because instead of supporting a man in ending a war and saving lives, you cheered for the resistance that obstructed him. i supported Obama during his first election, BECAUSE HE PROMISED TO END THE WARS. i didnt give a fucking shit about the mans skin color or party affiliation, i cared about what he proposed to do, because i have kids, and i sure as hell dont want another age of Vietnam where our kids get drafted to go and die in another country for a pointless war. who did you support? did you support Trump in his efforts to end a war, or did you support the "resistance" that worked to block him at every turn? now you have this fiasco, orchestrated by the democrats, and im pretty possitive that in a year or less, they will be claiming that we need to send troops to save people over there again. im hoping that they do, because it is utter chaos over there, and i hope they institute a draft, and take your kids and throw them on a plane to go there and get their ass shot off. then you can sit there and ask yourself if it was worth supporting the party instead of the policy.
    1
  2425. 1
  2426. 1
  2427. 1
  2428. 1
  2429. 1
  2430. 1
  2431. 1
  2432. 1
  2433. 1
  2434. 1
  2435. 1
  2436. 1
  2437. 1
  2438. 1
  2439. ​ @pcnoad  well, interesting topic, but see, youtube and other platforms are recognized and protected under section 230 as public spaces and free speech does apply or should apply to them, but at the same time, youtube and other platforms and ISP providers are not required to give you any service. just like in the old days long before youtube and the internet and electricity, you had the right to speak publicly in the public square, but no one sent a carriage or a horse to escort you to that public square, its on you to get there. let's look at the 2A, you have the right to keep and bare arms, it says nothing about buying them or making them yourselves, same as freedom of the press did not require you to build your own printing press in order to print leaflets or pamphlets and utilize your right to freedom of the press, same as freedom of religion does not require you to build your own church in order to worship. the thing with freedom of speech is that no one is allowed to block you, at the same time, no one is required to listen to you. the right to a jury trial, the government sets and administers the laws, and therefore, it is the government that ultimately accuses you of breaking that law, and therefore it is incumbent on the government to prove your guilt, through a trial that they have to administer, a fair trial, meaning that you have to have adequate legal counsel and defense, a trial by a jury of your peers, meaning the government cant simply pound a gavel and claim without any evidence that you are guilty and lock you up for life, they have to convince 12 common people that you are guilty. now, lets take this example. if you have the right to housing, but you dont have a house, should you be provided a house? and who provides that house? do the taxpayers pay to build that house? if so, are the taxpayers paying more taxes in order to provide you with your right to housing? lets say that every taxpayer has to pay an extra $15 per month in taxes to provide housing, for a lot of people that is an hour or more of work, work that they dont get paid for since the government takes that money and taxes that they dont benefit from since the house goes to you specifically, would that not be akin to slavery? working to provide something to someone else without reimbursement?
    1
  2440. 1
  2441. 1
  2442. 1
  2443. 1
  2444. 1
  2445. 1
  2446. 1
  2447. 1
  2448. 1
  2449. 1
  2450. 1
  2451. 1
  2452. 1
  2453. 1
  2454. 1
  2455. 1
  2456. 1
  2457. 1
  2458. 1
  2459. 1
  2460. 1
  2461. 1
  2462. 1
  2463. 1
  2464. 1
  2465. 1
  2466. 1
  2467. 1
  2468. 1
  2469. 1
  2470. 1
  2471. 1
  2472. 1
  2473. 1
  2474. 1
  2475. 1
  2476. 1
  2477. 1
  2478. 1
  2479. 1
  2480. 1
  2481.  @Kelly_Ben  i undrstand, and for the most part i agree and disagree at the same time. for example, you want term limits but then claim that age should not be a factor. what happens when you get a good politician and they are only 40 years old, and after 10 years they are thrown out because of term limits? they havent even reached retirement age yet and they have already served their time and are not allowed to serve. and yes, i would agree with the mental acuity tests, that would be a good idea, have it like they do for drivers licenses in some states, after a certain age, it is mandatory that you get a vision test and a driving road test. so implement a metal acuity test every 6 months past a certain age, not just during election, because a person can be of sound mind when elected, but then over a short period of time lose their marbles. now for the whole problem of lobyists and politicians making money. instilling term limits is not going to solve the problem of lobby money and politicians getting rich. a lot of those politicians get rich off buying into corporations that they know will benefit from their policies that are coming up for a vote, they buy stocks, or they have their friends or family buy stocks, look at Pelosi, her husband is a banker i believe, tell me he has not made banking and stock decisions based off what his wife has been doing in congress, of course he did, and it benefitted her immensly. most sweepstakes have rules in place where family members of company employees are disqualified from winning in a company sweepstakes, its in the fine print, there should be some kind of rule like that too. get rid of the lobbyists, most lobbyists donate money to politicians campaign funds, and those funds are used to hire people to campaign on the politicians behalf. case in point, AOC, now this is not to bash on her or anything, im positive other politicians if not most have done or are doing something similar, but just pointing out AOC since it was an item in the news recently, her PAC or campaign finance group whatever, paid several hundred thousand for re-election and campaign research to a company, that company had on their payroll AOC's fiance. now, as i said, im not bashing her directly, i dont think she did anything wrong in that since its not against the law, but tell me that she did not personally benefit from channeling campaign funds to a company where her fiance worked and would most likely be a beneficiary of those funds? i cant think of other examples of that, but i am positive that other politicians have done that and are doing that too on both sides of the isle. get rid of those lobbyists mostly by eliminating the need for politicians to raise extravagant amounts of money for elections. how much did Obama spend on his 2008 run? was it like half a billion or some crazy amount that was historic and record setting? most of that money is spend on ads. have the FCC force all broadcast companies to run politicians campaign adds for free and equally in order to maintain their broadcasting license. force Youtube and Facebook to run politicians adds equally for free in order to maintain their 230 protected standings. have Youtube produce politicians adds for free or lose their 230 protections. the examples of lobbying in or politics are too numerous to list and the process of legalized money laundering of campaign funds has become common place. limiting terms to 10 years is not going to solve the problem of corruption, it will simply push politicians to get corrupted faster since there will be a time limit on how long they can make money off their position. eliminate the need for huge sums of money in politics, and that may not solve the problem completely, but it will aleviate the problem drastically. a politician is not going to go corrupt if there is no profit in it and plenty of risk involved.
    1
  2482. 1
  2483. 1
  2484. 1
  2485. 1
  2486. 1
  2487. 1
  2488. 1
  2489. 1
  2490. 1
  2491. 1
  2492. 1
  2493. 1
  2494. 1
  2495. 1
  2496. 1
  2497. 1
  2498. 1
  2499. 1
  2500. 1
  2501. 1
  2502. 1
  2503. 1
  2504. 1
  2505. 1
  2506. 1
  2507. 1
  2508. 1
  2509. 1
  2510. 1
  2511. 1
  2512. 1
  2513. 1
  2514.  @juresichj  half your list sounds like a reasonable list of quality items to have in a society, the other half sounds like a bunch of "gimme gimme freebie" nonsense. 1. end the war on drugs - i completely agree, its a useless war and has been from the start. if you want to put something in your body, put whatever you want in your body, its none of anyone elses business but your own. 2. pay stay at home mom (UBI) - no, at best i would say maybe pay one parent to stay at home, why is it have to be the mom? me being a single dad, i raised my daughter alone from the time she was 2 till she was 21. but still no, if you want to have a family, then work to have a family, why is it anyone elses responsibility to pay for your family? why is it YOUR responsibility to pay for anyone elses family? 3. affordable housing - i would agree with that idea, but it solves nothing if the underlying social problem of poverty is not solved. here in Chicago, we used to have those high rise ghetto slums, the city built up new affordable housing to move people of of those slums, nice townhouses. they moved the people out of those slums and tore them down. that was at least 10 or more years ago. right now, those affordable housing townhouses are the new slums, all tore down. its the quality of people living in there, if you have poverty it will blight the area. 4. fully fund college - no, why should i be forced to pay for someone elses education? i could understand maybe some degrees, such as doctors, or engineers, or even STEM degrees, but not all college. i seen a story a couple of days ago about a guy with a $300,000 student debt for a history preservation degree, another with $250,000 student debt in drama and theater degrees. and how many colleges offer paid courses for frivolous things such as "lesbian dance theory" or "underwater basket weaving". you want to pay for stupid things like that, go ahead, but remember, you are advocating for government waste of tax dollars. 5. after school activities - sbsolutely completely in favor of such things. if you keep kids involved and occupied in something, then there is a lower chance of those kids winding up on the street getting involved in something bad. make those programs somewhat educational. chess clubs, math clubs, science clubs, chemistry clubs, outdoors camping clubs. anything and everything under the sun. school just teaches kids about facts, after school activities can peak interests in kids that they didnt know they had. 6. fully fund daycare and preschool - no and yes, no to the daycare, yes to the preeschool. but the waters get muddied between the two to where you cant distinguish between them. but still, why should anyone be forced to pay for other peoples kids? 7. drug rehab - yes, fund drug rehab, end the war on drugs, start legalizing drugs, and start taxing them, and start using that tax revenue for rehab centers. Evanston IL implemented a new regulation, where tax proceeds from legal marijuana sales will be used for "reperations", meaning they will be used to help black people buy homes. i hate that idea for the simple reason that firstly, its a program that excludes anyone else from being able to apply simply based on their race, and secondly, that tax money should be used to help societal problems, such as drug addiction.
    1
  2515.  @ColeDaniels  you call me dense and you dont even understand the basics of the topic itself. yes, i hate that the money is spent in such a way, but i like the results, so i would not be opposed to to having my taxes spent on such a form of criminal rehab, in the same way that most people hate seeing an animal killed, but love going to get their burgers and buckets of fried chicken. the difference between alternative criminal rehab and UBI is that one is a program that instills corrective action with positive reinforcement which garners long term results, while the other is nothing more than a simple handout that builds dependence and doesnt provide success. its the same reason you see signs posted in zoos telling you NOT TO FEED THE ANIMALS. i would say you are dense for not understanding the difference between UBI and alternative criminal rehab, but i would say you are just willfully ignorant for even thinking that they are the same. now let me see, looking back, the last president we had before this one wanted to pull troops out of the middle east, and started to pull them out of Syria, and useless twits like you cried about "our allies blah blah", so you can stick your whole "got the government i wanted" where the sun dont shine. i supported Obama because he promised to end the wars, and instead we got more wars and expanded wars and, ohh yea, A FREAKING SLAVE MARKET IN AFRICA. thanks Obama. after 8 years of lies i decided to support a different man who promised to end the wars instead of the woman who worked in the OBAMA administration that gave us more wars, and for that i got called a racist by people who supported the current president that was so racist he authored the 94 crime bill so that his children and grandchildren wouldnt have to live in a racial jungle, AND even got called out on his racism in the debates by his current VP, who used that 94 crime bill to push her own brand of racism and throw black people in prison for extended sentences. the government i deserve is the one that would have stuck to the original agreed upon pull out date in Afghanistan with the Taliban instead of what the current administration did which is extend the date knowing full well that it would exacerbate the situation and extend our stay there. so let me ask you, WHO DID YOU VOTE FOR? who did you support? was it the current administration in power? because if so, then you have absolutely NO grond to stand on trying to lecture anyone about military spending. i can understand that needy people need help, but only an imbecile like you would think that throwing money at needy people will alleviate all their problems without getting to the root of the problem.
    1
  2516. 1
  2517. 1
  2518.  @rve420  lies of omission because i didnt mention that its easier to get guns in IN compared to IL? would you like to put your money where your mouth is? lets put your BS hypothesis to the test then. i live in Chicago, so come on down, you can pick the gun shop in IL where we can go and you can pick the gun in that shop that i must buy, then we can go to IN, and you can pick the gun shop in IN and the gun in that shop that i must buy. and then lets compare both sales and which one is easier. here is the deal, if i have to fill out less paperwork, or if i have a shorter waiting time from payment to have it in my hand or if i have to show less ID's in IN compared to IL, then i will pay you the value of those guns, but if i have a harder time in IN than in IL because i have to wait longer or i cant pick it up at the IN store or i have to fill out more forms or if i have to do more background checks, then YOU pay for those guns, sound fair? here is a little info for you. in IL i have to show my FOID & my drivers license and my resident alien card, and fill out a background check (and wait for clearance) and pay county taxes. in IN, i have to show my FOID and my drivers license, and my resident alien card, and fill out a background check (and wait for clearance) and pay taxes, AND PAY FOR A TRANSFER FEE to have it shipped to an FFL in IL where i will have to fill out a SECOND background check (and wait for clearance) and pay an ADDITIONAL transfer fee and pay more taxes to pick it up. i know because i have done it before. let me guess, you dont know jack about buying guns or about laws for buying guns do you? how about this, I PICK THE GUN SHOP IN INDIANA, becaue i know of quite a few that simply refuse to sell a gun to anyopne from out of state, nut just from IL, but anyone from out of any state.
    1
  2519. 1
  2520. 1
  2521. 1
  2522. 1
  2523. 1
  2524. 1
  2525. 1
  2526. 1
  2527. 1
  2528. 1
  2529.  @TronikXR  yes, your stupid does have no limits. considering the republicans only held the senate, you would make it seem as if though that was all that was needed. for 4 years you screeched about how the house holds the pursestrings so Trump can build this or do that, but now all of a sudden since the republicans had the senate then they should have done something, forget taht the house holds the pursestrings and the house is controlled by democrats. and no, no one ever claimed that covid was a hoax, that was debunked by pretty much everyone, considering that you are still beating that dead horse and pushing the blatant lie shows that you are either stupid or a liar, pick one. as for letting people die? kind of like when Cuomo the democrat governor of NY send covid patients to nursing homes and then hid the death numbers so they are actually investigating him for criminal charges? that kind of let people die? the Trump administration rolled out a vaccine in a year, sent out medical ships to help affected areas and coordinated with localities to the point that democrat governors were even sometimes thanking the president. but since you are SOOOOO smart, please explain how he should have acted to prevent a single death? as for the "baby" checks, may i remind you AGAIN, who holds the pursestrings? and the second round of checks Trump even called them out for being so blatantly small, even smaller tahn his small hands, to where he shamed ALL of congress and got them to promise to send out bigger checks, where are those bigger checks that congress promised? elect Biden and the democrats and they promised to send those checks out the next day. where are those checks that congres and democrats promised? i dont expect Biden to do more, but i do expect them to do SOMETHING, so far they have done NOTHING, in fact, less than nothing, because they havent sent out any checks and on top of it they went backwards on their $15/h promise too. so yea. name me which other administration rolled out a vaccine for any disease so quickly? none. swine flu rolled out in 2009, no vaccine from Obama even after 60+ million infected, thank god by sheer luck it was not deadly, but still, no vaccine, no border lockdown, not even a mention. AIDS rolled out in 1985, today there is still no vaccine after billions infected and hundreds of millions dead, no vaccine no nothing. Ebola kills how many every year, all we have is an experimental vaccine that came out in the last few years. you cant name a single thing you would have done to save lives that Trump didnt do, not a one. and i do remember news outlets reporting that the death toll would be around 2 million within the first year, but since it was only 300,000 or so, then 1.7 million lives saved. now go float yourself with your BS and lies.
    1
  2530. 1
  2531. 1
  2532. while i dont agree with the sanctions against Cuba, personally i dont think they have any reason to put sanctions on Cuba other than the US government needing some small punching bag to keep stepping on for amusement, claiming that these protests are against the sanctions or because of the sanctions is a lie, because if that were the case then these protests would have been going on for years now since these sanctions went into effect 30 or 50 years ago. and comparing these protests to the womens march is disingenuous, the womens march was targeted against ONE man that got elected to a government position, these protests in Cuba are directed at the government as a whole entity, not just a single individual. as for comparing socialism or communism to a dictatorship, no, thats also wrong, communism is no more of a dictatorship than capitalism or socialism. but the way the systems operate, communism and socialism make it easy for a dictatorship to rise, capitalism not so easy. and im not talking about the laws that are in the system, but the system itself. capitalism works on the principle of you get what you earn, for the most part, meaning if you work then you will earn for yourself, basically. communism on the other hand, you work for the community, or the society, basically everyone gets what you make. in such a society, eventually you need a dictator to rise up and force people to work to provide for the society. in capitalism, if you dont go work on the farm, then you starve. in communism, if you dont go work on the farm, then everyone starves, cant have that, so you are forced to work on the farm. its a very dumbed down explanation, but thats the working principle. the communist country i lived in, the government picked your profession for you, if they needed more farmers, then you grew up to be a farmer, if they needed more ditch diggers, then you grew up to be a ditch digger, unless you were deemed smart, they tested everyone, and the ones that were smarter than the rest went on to become doctors and scientists, but the average people went on to be farmers and ditch diggers and brick stackers and broom pushers, whatever the government needed to provide for society.
    1
  2533. 1
  2534. 1
  2535. 1
  2536. 1
  2537. 1
  2538. 1
  2539. 1
  2540. 1
  2541. 1
  2542. 1
  2543. 1
  2544. 1
  2545. 1
  2546. 1
  2547. 1
  2548. 1
  2549. 1
  2550. 1
  2551. 1
  2552. 1
  2553. 1
  2554. 1
  2555. 1
  2556. 1
  2557. 1
  2558. 1
  2559. 1
  2560.  @plants8564  i know it doesnt affect just the next generation, but future generations over a longer period of time. but for some people on here to blame the previous generation while ABUSING the benefits gained and excusing their own behavior is hypocrisy. one person commented that phones and computers have a value, as if though that excuses them from contributing to the problem. i see plenty of people complaining about pollution and global warming while hurriedly getting in line to buy the latest iPhone because the last year model they own is old and they need the newest one without a single though as to how much polution was put into the environment, and its a collective thing. the last phone i bought was right before 4th of July weekend this year, and that was to replace my Galaxy 5 that was so out of date that most apps no longer worked on it and it was held together with tape and wouldnt hold a charge for more than 5 minutes. my last computer i bought was last year, to replace my 2012 laptop that was finally on its last leg. most people who whine about pollution or climate change are the same hypocrites who contribute to it with blatant disregard and no second thought. activist who travel on airlines and have a greater carbon footprint than an entire city block lecturing others on how to be better stewards of the earth. next time you are out and about with your friends, ask them how often they replace their phone, or their computer. better yet, ask yourself that question and then figure out how much pollution is pumped out to create that phone. i understand a single person contributes an insignificant amount, but as a collective it is a large chunk. blaming companies for polluting as they try to satiate that hunger for the latest greatest gadgets that younger generations desire is disingenuous, as is blaming previous generations. i can understand if people want to whine about it, but those same people should take some responsibility for their actions in contributing to the problem.
    1
  2561. 1
  2562. 1
  2563. 1
  2564. 1
  2565. 1
  2566. 1
  2567. 1
  2568. not the first or last time Time has made questionable choices. 2019 - Gretta Thunberg person of the year. a kid too stupid to graduate high school touted as the foremost authority on climate change. 2012 - Barack Obama person of the year. im wondering if that was before or after he bombed Libya back into the slave age. 2008 - Barack Obama person of the year. definitely before he turned Libya into an open air slave market with bombings. 2007 - Vladimir Putin person of the year. he must have sent the KGB to talk to the panel. 2005 - Bill and Melinda gates persons of the year. must have been for their work with vaccines in Africa that sterilized kids. 2004 - George W Bush person of the year. guess they like war. 2000- George W Bush person of the year. they must really love war. 1999 - Albert Einstein person of the year. only 45 years after his death, i guess they finally got around to it. 1998 - Bill Clinton person of the year. i guess they like rapists too. 1992 - Bill Clinton person of the year. they really really like rapists. 1991 - Ted Turned person of the year. the guy who went on to say he would love to wipe out 95% of the worlds population because they are just useless eaters. 1972 - Richard Nixon person of the year. i guess they thought Watergate was a cool theme park ride. 1971 - Richard Nixon person of the year. thats before he opened the Watergate theme park ride. 1939 - Joseph Stalin. i think the millions that he starved would have objected if they could. 1938 - Adolf Hitler. yes, that Hitler, i guess in 1938 he was really cool and did nice things and did nothing wrong to the jews.
    1
  2569. 1
  2570. 1
  2571. 1
  2572. 1
  2573. 1
  2574. 1
  2575. 1
  2576. 1
  2577. 1
  2578. 1
  2579. 1
  2580. 1
  2581. 1
  2582. 1
  2583. 1
  2584. 1
  2585. 1
  2586. 1
  2587. 1
  2588. 1
  2589. 1
  2590. 1
  2591. 1
  2592. 1
  2593. 1
  2594. 1
  2595. @Tanner oh i understand, and i agree, gun ownership in Canada is for sports and hunting, and not for self defense, after all, Canada doesnt have the problems that the US has. but gun owners here in the US understand statistics, and its not that they want to fullfil some action movie hero complex or they think that everyone here is out to get them, thats your belief about people that has been conditioned in you through years of manipulative indoctrination and propaganda, and so thats how you view gun owners. but you dont sit down to even listen to anyones explanations or reasoning. in the US, according to FBI statistics, there are a little over 1 million home invasions per year, a home invasion is defined as an intrusion into a home while the occupant is present. now, of those 1 million home invasions, 60% of them are committed by 2 or more assailants, and 40% are committed by 3 or more assailants, and 80% of those home invasions escalate into more severe crimes such as assault, sexual assault or rape, or even attempted murder or murder. now what do you say to the 5'5" 95 pound girl who lives alone in a not so super great area of town because she cant afford to live in a gated community and have 24/7 armed security? what do you say to her when 2 or 3 guys break into her home in the middle of the night? do you tell her to throw angry slurs and the baddies? maybe she should go to Tibet and train in the mystic arts of ninjitsu for 50 years? or do you tell her that she should just lay down and take the gang raping she is about to receive because guns are bad and she shouldt be allowed a tool to help equalize her chances? she doesnt want to act out some action movie she seen, she just wants to be able to protect herself. you hear a lot of talk about how many people are hurt by guns, but everyone blatantly tries to ignore how many people are saved by guns, the CDC under the Obama administration did a study and concluded that anywhere from a minimum of 750,000 up to 3,500,000 crimes were stopped with the use of firearms, in most cases it was simply by brandishing the firearm. and yea, you do have a point, gun control and gun ownership can co-exist, but government control and rights can not. in Canada, you dont have the right to own a gun, so gun control can exist there, in the US you do have a right to own a gun, and government control over a right should not be allowed, no matter the right.
    1
  2596. 1
  2597. 1
  2598. 1
  2599. 1
  2600. 1
  2601. 1
  2602. 1
  2603. 1
  2604. 1
  2605. 1
  2606. 1
  2607. 1
  2608. 1
  2609.  @hizzlemobizzle  wow, everything you said has been a lie, with the exception of point 1. so its the SECOND highest inflation rate, and considering some economists have been saying that inflation went up to 28% and ive watched prices on eggs and ground beef and other stuff jump up tripple in price, that whole point can be argued. 2. adjusting for inflation you can shove that lie and you $5.10 where the sun dont shine, i work for a major freight brokerage and we keep track of fuel prices on a weekly basis, average national fuel price spiked up to $6.38 a gallon, and considering tht in Chicago we were paying $6.59 per gallon and in CA prices jumped up to $9+ a gallon and they were preparing for $10+ per gallon, YOU LIE. 3. greatest economic recovery? that is another LIE. we didnt add 13.2 million jobs, we RECOVERED those jobs from when democrats all over the country closed everything down and caused those jobs to go away. recovered is not added, if you lose 13 million and then you recover 13 million that does not mean you added anything, it just means you went back to square 1. funny how its the greatest economic recovery with 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth thats called a depression but somehow the white house decided to arbitrarily change the definition so we cant call it a depression anymore. 4. the cuban missle crisis was way before our time, and when Trump backed out of the "iran nuclear deal" i dont remember anyone crying about nuclear war except for democrats hating Trump, but right now EU leaders are warning of impending nuclear war, NATO leaders are warning of impending nuclear war, various countried not part of NATO are warning of impending nuclear war, the POPE riding around in his popemobile is warning of impending nuclear war, Russia is warning of impending nuclear war, NYC put out a public service announcement telling people what to do in case of a nuclear strike, i dont remember NYC putting that out during the whole "Iran nuclear deal" when we backed out, in fact, i dont remember ANYONE talking about an impending nuclear war during the iran thing and i dont remember any countries redying their populations and their civilian bunkers like some are doing now. so yea, looks like ive been more than you.
    1
  2610. 1
  2611. 1
  2612. 1
  2613. 1
  2614. 1
  2615. 1
  2616. 1
  2617. 1
  2618. 1
  2619. 1
  2620. 1
  2621. 1
  2622. 1
  2623. 1
  2624.  @maxmeggeneder8935  its not that you cant influence my opinion on the matter because of lack of arguments, its because you cant influence my opinion on the matter because of my real world experience. a brief history on me. i was born and grew up under a socialist system, in eastern Europe, behind the iron curtain, so i know enough about communism / socialism to understand it through actual lived experience. capitalism is the best system out there right now and thats a fact, and that fact is constantly reinforced by the amount of people who flee socialist states for capitalism ones and a lack of people fleeing capitalist states for socialist ones. socialism / communism breeds a culture of stagnation, because the people in it are unwilling to work harder to create a better product without any reward to it. here is an example. would you work 20 hours a day every day to create a company when you wont receive any of the benefits of that company other than a regular job? most people wont put in the extra effort to do anything out of the ordinary when there is no perceivable benefit to them. capitalism on the other hand rewards ingenuity and hard work with actual tangible rewards. most people are not as concerned with other peoples lives, thats most people, there are a few out there that put others before themselves, but for the majority of the human race, they are concerned with themselves, then their immediate family, then their circle of extended family, then their extended circle of friends and then after that the larger circle of people they dont know. as for a tiny minority who profit off capitalism, capitalism has raised more people out of poverty across the world than any other system to date. the problems you name with capitalism are inherent in all systems, you think socialism doesnt have those problems? you think the media is free and independent in a socialist or communist system? you think they dont push propaganda? how did Putin amass tens of billions of dollars in wealth? he didnt do it under capitalism. where do you think all those Russian oligarchs come from? you think they popped up out of the ground like daisies? every system has its flaws, and the flaws you claim to be inherent to capitalism and inherent to every system. the only difference is that in a capitalist system, you have a chance to get ahead, plenty of people do it every day. in a socialist system you dont have that chance unless you have connections. you are given your lot in life and that is that. an example is the creator of Tetris, the most widely sold and popular game across the world. guess who got all the profits from it, it wasnt him. in capitalism, if you create something, it is yours and you have the ability of profiting from it and being rewarded. in socialism, you dont profit from anything and whatever you create doesnt belong to you, it belongs to the state. you cant argue thats a better system than capitalism.
    1
  2625. 1
  2626.  @terrystevens3998  apparently you dont know what capitalism and socialism is, and you dare call anyone childish. perhaps you can read the definition of capitalism, the US is a capitalism economic state. and i lived under a socialist state when i was younger, but perhaps you are smarter than over 100 million Russians and the Russian government that called themselves socialists. A) America IS a fully capitalist system, the government does not hold any stock in any company or own any company, every single company in the US is owned by private individuals with the ability to freely exchange goods and services. you might be thinking its not a completely capitalist system because there are some social programs, common mistake uneducated people like you make. B) the system i lived under WAS a socialist system, as in the workers did not directly have control of the means of production, the state had control, and the state was the workers. what you try to describe is a fairytale fantasy on paper that doesnt exist. but perhaps you want to tell my how you know better than the 100+ MILLION socialist who lived under that system how they were NOT socialist and they were NOT living under a socialist system because you read a book one time and you think you know more than everyone else. and yea, i assign good things to capitalism and bad things to socialism becaue i lived under both types of systems so i speak from experience, and that is mostly how economic systems work. now i would love for you to point to a country that has socialism, and i mean socialism, not a couple of social safety nets powered by a capitalist economy, but socialist countries that have better upward mobility than capitalist countries, please point those countries out.
    1
  2627. 1
  2628. 1
  2629. 1
  2630. 1
  2631. 1
  2632. i wont condone what the cops did, i wont condone police or anyone else being thrown out on the street with no place to go. but people have to look at the other side of this too. who is the victim in all this? the family being evicted and the landord at the same time, both are victims. when you say the police should serve the people to give them justice, whose justice are we talking about? is the landlord not a person deserving justice? justice should have been given to the people by the government, instead of the governent destroying peoples livelihoods and jobs and giving no help whatsoever. say i rob you and steal all your money, and then use that money to buy food for my family? do you deserve justice? should the cops come and arrest me for stealing from you or should the cops protect me and give me justice because i am trying to feed my family? its not much different from this situation. should the landlord not be given justice for his property loss? justice is more complex than feelings, and while my heart goes out to the father and his children, who is ultimately to blame here? is the father to blame for not paying his rent like he should? is the landord to blame for wanting rent money for his property? or are the politicians to blame for instituting draconian rules that caused the father to lose his job making rent payments impossible and then not even giving the father any proper help or financial support? so far the lockdown has been going on for a little over a year, and we have had 3 checks from the government totalling $3200. no one in a civilized country can live off that for a year, thats a month worth of bills, maybe 2 months if you stretch it. justice should be given to the father, but its the politicians who owe that justice to the father and to all of us. they are the ones that make the laws that govern the cops actions, and they are the ones who install this lockdown on all of us that put this father in this position in the first place, and they are the ones who should be dealing with the fallout of their actions instead of wiping their hands clean of it like they did.
    1
  2633. 1
  2634. 1
  2635. 1
  2636. 1
  2637. 1
  2638. 1
  2639. 1
  2640. 1
  2641. 1
  2642. 1
  2643. 1
  2644. 1
  2645. 1
  2646. 1
  2647. 1
  2648. 1
  2649. 1
  2650. 1
  2651.  @Hugh_I  ok, so i asked you a serious question. 1. what are the side effects of the vaccine past 1 year, past 2 years, past 5 years, past 10 years. instead of answering that question, you want to talk about the "side effects" of COVID-19. i already know the "side effects of COVID-19, those range anywhere from absolutely no symptoms, to a mild fever to aches to harsh fever to breathing complications all the way up to death. i didnt ask for COVID-19 side effects, but i like the way you ended point 1 with a simple "probably has none". meaning you have absolutely no idea. so let me restate the question. 1. there is no available data on side effects of the "VACCINE" past 1 year, i would like to see what those side effects are 2 and 5 and 10 years down the line. 2. you claim it IS a vaccine, it is NOT. a CDC statement "The smallpox VACCINE protects people from smallpox by helping their bodies develop IMMUNITY to smallpox." THAT is a vaccine, it helps your body develop an IMMUNITY, and since this vaccine only lessens the symptoms, but does not give you immunity, then its NOT a vaccine. even if it only gave a small percentage of people immunity i would consider it a vaccine maybe, but NO manufacturer will make that claim and even the CDC wont make that claim. as far as it working like a vaccine, the flu shot works like a vaccine too, but yet its not called a flu vaccine, its called a flu SHOT. 2a. as for the flu being way deadlier, that would be an argument of semantics and how corona deaths are counted, none the less, the flu is still pretty deadly. 3. you managed to answer that question within its context at least, is it safe, for now, yea, i'll agree, it is safe. but you also said "see point 1" so lets look at point 1. is this vaccine safe 5 years or 10 years down the line. the reason why i ask this is simple. unlike most vaccines that have been produced using tried and true methods, this new vaccine was produced using new experimental techniques in DNA and RmNA sequencing, and so that makes me hesitant. regular vaccines are made by taking a virus and weakening it so it cant reproduce, and then exposing the body to that weakened form in a dose that is not enough to make a person sick, but enough to make the immune system develop antibodies. 3a. what if this vaccine causes the body to develop a side effect 5 years down the line that requires you to to be medicated for the rest of your life, kind of like too much sugar consumption can lead your body to develop diabetes to the point where you require insulin injections for the rest of your life. considering that this vaccine is being developed using new experimental RmNA technology that the manufacturers are being very secretive about and guarding closely, it is a possibility. now, as for your guaranteeing me anything, would you be willing to formalize that guarantee in a legal document? would you be so willing to mage guarantees on something that you dont know the effects of down the line? you could guarantee that a new vaccine made using tried and true tested old techniques wont have ill effects, but you cant guarantee that this vaccine wont kill you in 5 years.
    1
  2652.  @NeilTruick  well stated nicely put comment, i appreciate it. physician Edward Jenner pioneered vaccination processes in 1793, and his processes went on to be used to develop vaccination regimens all over the world. the Polio vaccine was developed in the 1930's using techniques that have been developed and refined over a period of 140 years. these new RmNA vaccines are being produced using techniques that had been refined over a couple of decades for completely different purposes not making injectable vaccines, and so they are called experimental. now, im not a medical profesional either, and i have NOT done research simply because there is NO data available to do any research on. i can easy look up data on GMO foods that have been produced over the past 10 or more years, because there IS data going back that far, but there is NO data on GMO vaccines going back farther than 12 months at most. making the claim that you have done research on something that barely came into existence is faulty, you decided to get informed up to current news. but if you did your research, then please, tell me what your research shows on the possible effects of the Phizer vaccine 5 years and 3 months after dose? you cant, understandable. can your research tell me the projected possible effects of the Phizer Vaccine 5 years and 3 months after dose? you cant do that either. if the J&J vaccine was made using standard techniques and NOT mRNA sequencing, then you could safely say that research would show that there should be no serious side effects 5 years and 3 months after dose. but dont tell me that injecting frankendrugs directly into my bloodstream that were developed with genetic manipulation is perfectly safe. (that statement is a generalizations and not aimed directly at you). now, for your last sentence, you are tired of trying to tell anyone what to do? which god on what plane of existance granted you the power and authority to tell others what to do? im being fasecious, and yes, i misspelled that word like i misspelled other words here. my point is, you are no one to tell anyone else what to do, same as i am no one to tell anyone what to do. the funny thing is, there are more people piled on the "telling people to take the vax" side than the side that is telling people not to take the vax, where do they get the authority or right to tell anyone what to do? i find it amusing that the "my body my choice" crowd is the loudest proponent of violating the "my body, my choice" stance when it suits them. i wear a mask when i go out, i consider it a minor inconvenience on the same level of wearing shoes or a shirt. but i dont feel i should be compelled to undergo a medical procedure simply for someone elses benefit, especially when that medical procedure is experimental to the point that no one can even guess to its possible outcomes.
    1
  2653. 1
  2654. 1
  2655.  @sanjabegovic729  yes, nuke got dropped once, and then dropped once again, and that was when only 1 country had nukes because no one else could retaliate in such a way. and even then, nukes were under army control, after the second drop, the president issued a decree that the army was no longer in charge of using nukes, that authority had to come from the president himself, and the nukes stopped being dropped. right now, plenty of countries have nukes. you think a crazy dictator like UN in NK will use a nuke? you think the neighboring countries around him will allow him to use a nuke knowing that any retaliation would take him out and also hurt them too unintentionally? China, who is an ally of NK wont allow NK to use nukes because even if one NK gets retaliated against, it will be a full scale nuclear retaliation, and it will hurt China just as much from the fallout, and all the neighboring countries too. you think if the Taliban gets a nuke they will use it? no matter how crazy their leaders are, their neighbors will prevent it, even their own people in the Taliban government will prevent it, because its one thing to have a conventional war, but its a whole different ball of wax when it comes to nuclear war. once you have a nuke, you are prevented from using it by your own people and by your friends in other nations, because everyone understands that a nuke is a weapon of last resort, and it leads to open warefare where your enemies are justified in using nukes against you on any occasion and any target.
    1
  2656. 1
  2657. 1
  2658.  @stayelusive  you make an excellent point that teaching everyone jobs skills would dilute the job market with more people having skills, although i do not believe it would be so bad. there are literally hundreds of thousands of fields to go into, and there are plenty of fields that are currently struggling to fill positions. of course you dont take everyone and teach them all computer skills, we learned that from the 90's where everyone went to college to be a computer engineer and when they all graduated the market dropped out from under them because there were so many qualified computer guys out there. but with so many different fields out there, its possible to train people in different job skillsets and pull people out of poverty for the long term, not everyone has to study computers and go for that computer job. 1. trucking industry right now is suffering a shortage of truck drivers. currently some larger carriers are offering up to $12,000 as a sign on bonus. 2. tanker trucking (slightly differnet skillset and qualifications) is also suffering a shortage of drivers to the point that they are warning of possible gas shortages for this summer, because therre isnt enough tanker drivers to deliver the gas. 3. electricians unions around the country are scrambling to fill positions as the average age of electricians is 57 years old and many are close to retirement which will translate into a shortage of electricians. 4. carpenters unions are working on hiring new people to replace an aging crew of carpenters that will soon be retiring. 5. plumbers unions have been suffering for years trying to get new plumbers and having trouble doing it because they cant get rid of the stink that people think that a plumber crawls through hip deep sewers filled with feces. 6. oil rig workers, during the shale oil boom in the Dakotas a few years back, oil companies were offering $60-$90k per year starting salaries for oil workers with no experience, and construction crews were overwhelmed with orders for new housing and backed up by 6 months because they couldnt get peopel to work. 7. emerging green energy companies. AOC is pushing her failed Green New Deal, but there is a nugget of gold in that pile of crap, green jobs, train people to maintain and repair renewable energy generators like wind turbines, i see those things popping up all over the place, and sure enough the 5 repair guys that do it wont be able to handle doing all of them. 8. auto and truck mechanics - this field is slowly shrinking in workforce numbers as not many new mechanics are coming in to replace aging retiring mechanics. those are just a few examples of a few fields that are strugling or rising, there are litterally thousands of fields that im not listing as strugling because i dont have knowledge of them and i dont have the governments resources to investigate all of them. i agree that most likely we will not be able to lift everyone out of poverty and get everyone trained and into good paying careers, but we can do it for the majority, and the ones that we cant, those are the ones where we can lift their minimum wage to a living wage, and any percieved costs of goods and services taht would be raised by the minimum wage going up would be easily absorbed by a larger population making better wages. i do not agree that that raising the minimum wage is a solution, because its not, we have seen this time and again. raising the minimum wage is a temporary solution to a persistent problem, and it will keep coming back unless you address the core issue of why people cant survive.
    1
  2659. 1
  2660. 1
  2661. 1
  2662. 1
  2663. 1
  2664. 1
  2665. 1
  2666. 1
  2667. 1
  2668. 1
  2669. 1
  2670. 1
  2671. 1
  2672. 1
  2673. 1
  2674. 1
  2675. 1
  2676. 1
  2677. 1
  2678. 1
  2679. 1
  2680. 1
  2681. 1
  2682. 1
  2683. 1
  2684. 1
  2685. 1
  2686. 1
  2687. 1
  2688. 1
  2689.  @jmb3608  pay their fair share? your idiocy is showing. corporations pay very little taxes due to loopholes placed in the tax code by both republicans AND democrats. if its only republicans then why is it that every time democrats are in power not a single one of them brings up a bill to end those loopholes? pay their fair share? i guarantee that rich people pay a hell of a lot more taxes than the middle class as a dollar amount, if you wanted to make everything fair, the rich would have a HUGE tax cut. according to Forbes Musk, Bezos, and Buffet paid 3.4% tax on $401 billion in wealth, that comes out to $13.4 Billion in tax. you cant line up 1,000 middle class people with a combined INCOME to equal $13.4 Billion, so explain what is fair about 3 people paying that much tax for the same government services that middle class people pay much much less tax for? its not fair, you just want to claim its fair because feelings. Buffet paid a true tax rate of 0.1% on $125 million income, coming out to $125K in taxes, point out the middle class person that paid that much in tax for the same government services? you cant. you want fair taxes, here is an example of fair taxes. 1. the military costs $750 billion per year, every single American (350 million) pays $2143 per year in tax to cover the military costs. 2. K-12 education costs $840 billion per year, every single American (350 million) pays $2400 per year in tax to cover the education costs. 3. law enforcement costs $115 billion per year, every single American (350 million) pays $328 per year in taxes to cover police. at this point i have already surpassed what people making $50k or less pay in taxes per year, and i havent included prisons, politicians payroll, roads and infrastructure, foreign aid, education grants past 12th grade, healthcare and a whole slew of other things. you ramble on about pay their fair share while advocating for the exact opposite and making rich people pay for your freebies you want. you sure as hell wouldnt go to a grocery store that charged you more for your groceries than other people simply because you earn more, but you advocate a system of taxes like that when it benefits you and claim its fair. and yea, i would agree that everyone would like a decent life, that doesnt mean that its my responsibility to provide them with that, and NO, the myth of the welfare queen is not an outdated myth, its a reality that you refuse to see because you were told not to look at it by people whose ass you lick and admire. if you are perfectly willing to pay for someones healthcare, please, send me your address so i can send you my healthcare bill, ok? ill send you a little solidarity sticker. my daughter would like to go to college, can i send you the bill since you are perfectly willing to pay for it? and yea, i use the freaking roads that i help contribute to fund, and i dont look down upon the people that use it and ask them to prove they helped fund it, its part of our infrastructure. 75% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck because they dont work to get the skills they need to get themselves into better paying positions, its not a companies responsibility to make sure you are content with your life, its your responsibility. but yea, force a company to pay someone with no marketable skills to do a job that is so mundane that a basic machine can do. pay a janitor his $15 an hour to push a broom that a basic Rumba can do for the cost of charging its battery. pay that burger flipper $15 an hour to do something that the new Flippy robot can do for the cost of keeping it plugged into an electric grid. Japanese make vending machines that can make and create burgers and pizzas, thats how mundane and low skilled the job is. but your whole idea is to destroy millions of Americans purchasing power becaue wah wah they need higher paying jobs. as for those 30 well known economists that claim Bidens build back better would be a boon? i would march those stupid aholes into the middle of wall street and put a bullet in each of their faces. we are in the first year of Bidens build back better program and so far we are getting gas prices surging, food prices surging, goods prices surging, record inflation across the board, supply chains snarled all over the country, 100+ ships parked off the west coast unable to unload, and Bidens big build back better plan call for Biden to tell people to "work more" at the ports and to bed foreign countries to produce more oil, because the pipeline he shut down was racist or some shit. i dont see my fellow citizens, i see a bunch of people applying force with demands that i pay for their stuff, as if though me paying for my ownstuff is not enough. you wouldnt call someone pointing a gun to your face taking your money from you a friend, no matter how good the cause was that they would support with your money.
    1
  2690. 1
  2691.  @jmb3608  yes, you are idiotic. you claim you are willing to pay for other peoples college education or healthcare but then refuse. then you claim you dont pay it for other people you just give your money to the government that pays it instead. its not that you advocate for paying for things, its that you advocate that others pay for things you like, it doesnt matter if those things are not for you, its that you volunteer others without any consideration to do what you like. you can call it progressive, you can rename it transsexual, you can even call it the feel good about butterflies tax plan, doesnt matter, it doesnt change the fact that you want to take more money away from people to spend on what you feel is good. Nazis took away Jews money and spent it on what made them feel good too. and who cares how much Bezos or any other billionaire has, who made you judge over what other people need? he worked to accumulate that wealth and its his to do with as he wishes. you dont like him having that wealth, then dont do business with his company and stop contributing to it, if the workers feel they are getting underpaid then they are free to go find another job, or hell, even start their own company and risk losing everything just to make it work. you sit and bitch about how much someone else has because you wont risk what you have. i understand if you dont mind seeing a part of your taxes pay for things, but why do you feel its your right to volunteer everyone elses taxes? and its not that you volunteer everyone elses taxes, you literally volunteer everyone else to pay higher taxes. as for your prices going up, thats your problem, Biden is not in charge over there, but with your pricess going up and inflation sinking in, you advocate for raising taxes too. genius, super smart even. hey people, i know your food prices have gone up, and you were barely making ends meet and now you are in a bind trying to figure out how to put food on the table, but lets raise your taxes and take away even more money from you so that we can drive you completely into starvation because compassion and other feel good words. its too bad you are already on the verge of starving, but lets ensure that you are pushed over that edge and for sure starve because someone over there wants free goodies wah wah. you are a typical idiot thinking you are doing a good thing by feeding one person while ignoring the 3 other people you starved by taking their food away to feed your charity case. its not hard for democrats to do anything, it not hard for republicans to do anything. democrats sure shoved Obamacare down everyones throat without a single problem or issue, that was easy, and then in the midterms they were backing away and distancing themselves and backpedaling like crazy because they knew what they did was wrong. republicans are the same, they have no problem passing what they want, they wanted wars in the middle east and sure as hell enough we got wars in the middle east and democrats like Sanders later apologizing for being "wrong" on the war. but when he voted for it, he sure as hell thought he was right. and no, im not suggesting that people be charged for taxes on an individual basis, but when you claim that people should pay their fair share and billionaires are paying way more than what they benefit from then you sound idiotic, because it already seems kind of fair. and the most idiotic part is that time and time again throughout history we have seen that companies will raise prices on their goods and services to make up for their losses. you can tax a billionaire to infinity, all he has to do is pass that cost on to the consumer and bang. Seattle raised their minimum wage to $15, and prices on goods went up. the Horizon oil rig dissaster, prices on fuel rose up and we are still paying for it. Gas company in the subburbs of Chicago messed up and contaminated 127 homes with mercury and had to pay $27 milli0on in cleanup, within a few months natural gas prices rose up to cover the companies expenditures. the list goes on and on. but the point is, you call it a progressive tax and claim that billionaires need to pay their fair share even though they are paying more dollars than others and you still claim thats not fair. and you missed the point i made about paying for groceries completely. as i said, would you go to a grocery store that charges you more for your groceries than another person simply because of your income? no you wouldnt. you wouldnt consider it fair that you have to pay 500 Franks for a loaf of bread when you noticed the woman in front of you pay only 3 Franks, you would question it because you would know that something is wrong, to say anything else would make you a liar. your comment "You didn’t really understand me well. It is not provide people with a decent life - ie do it for them - it is make sure that they get enough help to be able to provide for themselves and their family. Parental leave, for instance?" so thats the solution to ending poverty, parental leave is it? more vacation time for people with kids will solve their finantial woes and lift them into prosperity? yea, i understood your comment correctly, make sure they get enough help or provide it for them, makes no difference, its the same thing. today its people need healthcare and family leave and extra taxpayer money for childcare. tomorrow it will be more money for their college tuition to pay it off completely, and next week it will be give people money for food and housing. and by the time we are done every single need of each individual will be provided for and paid for by the people. back in 1800's we called those people slaves, in the dark ages we called them surfs. any age you look at it was wrong, but in todays day and age its people that willingly dont want to be responsible for themselves. as for people who work 2 or 3 jobs, thats on them. i know plenty of people that decided to take some responsibility for their own lives and lift themselves out of a situation like that. im not against helping lift people out of bad situations, but you are not proposing lifting anyone out of a bad situation, all you are proposing is leaving people in the shitty situation they are in and just giving them extra things, like they are zoo animals to be fed extra treats. no, i sure as hell wouldnt work a menial job flipping burgers, and ive done things to ensure that i dont have to, and i did it all on my own. my mother and father and me when i was 8 emigrated to the US from Eastern Europe, we came here with just 3 suitcases of clothes, no college educations, no money. somehow without any government help my parents got jobs, and worked. my dad died shortly after so my mom was stuck raising me and my newborn brother all by herself, with no college education. she managed to make it, but because she worked hard at it. me and my brother grew up, none of us are rich, we dont make millions or billions, we make enough to live within our means. and here you come along advocating that i should be pushed into poverty because compassion and shit. if your idea of compassion is for me to slit my own throat and fall behind simply to provide someone else a better life then you are right, i dont have compasion, and if you want to claim that i am hateful because im not in favor of destroying my life then so be it. but it is you who is hateful, hateful of other people that were willing to risk what they had and work hard to achieve their goals. Bezos didnt inherit his billions, everything he has he and his wife built from the ground up, and you hate him for that and want to take it away from them. you lack any compassion, because you want to raise peoples taxes, people that are stretched to the limit and living paycheck to paycheck and without any regard for their situation you want to throw them over the edge into poverty and claim that they lack compassion as i said before, you are like a person wanting to feed 1 person claiming you are good while completely ignoring the other 3 people you are starving because you took their food away to feed that one person. and yes, i do carry a gun, because our constitution allows us to, and i still shot less people than the antigun advocate Alec Baldwin. BOOM, mic drop.
    1
  2692.  @jmb3608  yes, i am for immigration, always have been and always will be, but dont sit there and equate migrant caravans who are trying to enter illegally to immigrants, its like claiming home intruders are actually guests. i emigrated here legally because my family had respect for the laws and customs and government of this land and wanted to be a part of it and contribute to it. people who enter illegally only want to exploit, because they show a disregard for the customs, the laws, and the government of the land. but i guess you dont care do you? you support their plight? you think illegals entering a country is a good thing? how nice of you to support a Koch brothers republican agenda that works towards increasing crime and keeping wages down for poor and lower middle class people, such an agenda disproportionately affects minorities and thats a fact. the fact that minority voting districts have turned against the democrats and cite illegal immigration as the main cause for them turning from the democrats shows that you are on the wrong side of public opinion. and yea, right now i support republicans, that hasnt always been the case. i was too young to do much about politics during Reagan, i thought Bush Sr. was a joke and a warmonger and am glad that he lasted only one term, Clinton came in and he was decent, i cant say he was the best, but certainly nowhere near the worst. i hated Bush Jr long before he got elected because i knew he would get us into wars, and thats exactly what he did. and when Obama came on the stage i thought he would be the exact opposite and i supported him. But no, Obama turned out to be a warmonger just like Bush, kept the wars going, started off some more wars, and just to add into a pile of shit he decided to bomb Libya back into the slave age and then introduce slavery into the US by FORCING everyone to buy health insurance from a private company. imagine, the first black president of the US (democrat) bringing SLAVERY back into the world. hows that refugee migration going in France? you know, the one where millions of refugees have been fleeing Syria because of the war there which Obama had a large hand is setting of? last i seen, the Eifel tower was surrounded by glass barricades and armed soldiers, wasnt like that last time i visited in the 90's. and right now, yea, i support republicans, i supported Trump in 2016 because the alternative was Hillary "we came, we saw, he died" warmonger Clinton. Trumps plan was to end the wars and work on the country, and every step of the way democrats in congress went against him. at one point they filed lawsuits and had a vote to block Trump from removing troops in Syria. how many historic peace agreements were made in the middle east from 2016 - 2020? was it 3 or 4 that Trump had a hand in and helped negotiate? i forget. in 2020 i also supported Trump, since he was running against Joe "lets help start slavery in Africa during the Obama administration" Biden. so yea, i supported a guy who didnt want wars, who tried to end the wars, republican or democrat it doesnt matter, thats my biggest issue, because i dont want to send my kid or my neighbors kid to die in a foreign land for no purpose other than to line some rich aholes pockets. but yea, if you hate the republicans, the current republicans, then i guess you are in favor of democrats, who have continued endless wars, started new wars, and brought SLAVERY back to the forefront. good job. you think its fair to charge people a fee based on how much they make but then backpedal and claim its not fair, you flip flop like a fish. you think its fair to charge people more based on what they make and give it to people who make less and then claim that the people who actually pay more than the people who pay less are not even paying their fair share (taxes). but when you apply that reasoning to any other form of transaction all of a sudden its not fair to the people who make less (groceries). i mean seriously, the question was simple, if you went to a grocery store and a loaf of bread cost you 500 franks but the woman in front of you paid only 3 franks, would you consider that fair or would you question it? i know you would question it, even if in the end you convinced yourself that it was fair because of your incomes, you would still question it, because at the very core of it it is unfair to charge one person a different price than another person for the same service or product based on factors solely inherent to the person. so dont call it a fair tax, its not fair charging one person more than another. it may be equitable, it may be right, but dont start mashing up and butchering words to fit a narrative. you want to talk about a coup? let me see, in 2016 democrats were claiming that the republicans were colluding with Russia to steal the election and even started investigations for it. we had 3 years of investigations that turned up nothing and 2 impeachments that were bogus. and yet the protesters on Jan 6th havent been charged with any crimes remotely even related to a coup or insurrection and the FBI themselves even put out a report where they denied that Trump or any republicans sent the protestors or encouraged them or anything of the sort. so why are you lying now? if the FBI did an investigation and said that the republicans did not send their brainwashed goons to the capitol, then why are you claiming the opposite? why are you lying? i figured you were a normal person, but come to find out, you are a racist because you support a Koch brothers agenda to flood illegals in that causes wages to be suppressed which disproportionately affects minority neighborhoods, and then you regurgitate lies that have been spoonfed to you that have been debunked by the FBI.
    1
  2693. 1
  2694. 1
  2695. 1
  2696. 1
  2697. 1
  2698. 1
  2699. 1
  2700. 1
  2701. 1
  2702. 1
  2703. 1
  2704. 1
  2705. 1
  2706. 1
  2707. 1
  2708. 1
  2709. 1
  2710. 1
  2711. 1
  2712. 1
  2713. 1
  2714. 1
  2715. 1
  2716. 1
  2717. 1
  2718. 1
  2719. 1
  2720. 1
  2721. 1
  2722. 1
  2723. 1
  2724. 1
  2725. 1
  2726. 1
  2727. 1
  2728. 1
  2729. 1
  2730. 1
  2731. 1
  2732. 1
  2733. 1
  2734. 1
  2735. 1
  2736. 1
  2737. 1
  2738. 1
  2739. 1
  2740. 1
  2741. 1
  2742. 1
  2743. 1
  2744. 1
  2745. 1
  2746. 1
  2747. 1
  2748. 1
  2749. 1
  2750. 1
  2751. 1
  2752. 1
  2753. 1
  2754. 1
  2755. 1
  2756. 1
  2757. 1
  2758. 1
  2759. 1
  2760. 1
  2761. 1
  2762. 1
  2763. 1
  2764. 1
  2765. 1
  2766. 1
  2767. 1
  2768. 1
  2769. 1
  2770. 1
  2771.  @Raizhen010  oh wow, you want to argue about whether a law is constitutional or not? can you cite where in the constitution a right to an abortion OR a right to ANY medical procedure is a guaranteed right? if you think that law is not constitutional then RvW is definitely NOT constitutional. but yes, that law applies to even peaceful protests as most of the forms of protests names in the law are generally peaceful, suck as picketing or use of a sound truck or even a parade. the mistake you make is thinking that justice is supposed to be democratic, its not, justice is supposed to be based on logic and reason supported by facts, not by mob rule. if you want justice to be democratic you can go ask rapists if rape crimes should be prosecuted, i guarantee that all of them will say that rape should be legal, there is your democratic justice winds up. but hey, im glad you support protests in front of judges homes, im sure you will feverishly support the right to protest when right wing religious zealots go and protest in front of liberal judges homes that are in support of RvW waving banners that say "remember what happened to abortion clinics in the 80's?". the same religious zealots that thought they were fighting gods war when they were blowing up abortion clinics and assassinating abortion doctors. you are signaling to those people that you are OK with ending the legitimacy of an impartial and uninfluenced court system by means of mob rule and intimidation and influence. dont cry when this escalates.
    1
  2772. 1
  2773. 1
  2774. 1
  2775. 1
  2776. 1
  2777. 1
  2778. 1
  2779. 1
  2780. 1
  2781. 1
  2782. 1
  2783.  @nunyabidnis3815  well, thats where you get the whole prepper thing wrong, let me guess, you probably got your whole idea of "prepper" as you describe from TV shows or something? im not trying to sound harsh or anything, im trying to be polite, so dont get me wrong, but where do you get the idea that preppers are constantly running a program of "how to shoot folks when things get bad, and they probably will"? i dont have those thoughts, when im at the store picking up any supplies or extra anything, my thoughts are to just pick up my stuff and should i pick up this stuff at this store or is it cheaper at the other store. i dont have any thoughts that things will probably get bad, because in the back of my mind i already know what to do if things get bad, and going to the store or being in large crowds will be the last thing i do. all the preppers that i know of dont think that way even, and none of us wish for things to get bad. most preppers that i know dont have "multiple" guns, because most preppers have plans to be mobile too if things get too horrible, there is a bug in plan and a bug out plan. if a nuke hits the city there is no bugging in, you have to bug out, what are you going to do with 7 riffles and 20 pistols, you cant carry that many. true some preppers collect guns, but then again, lots of people collect guns that dont fall into the prepper persona. most preppers have a couple of guns, for example, i have 6 guns for a family of 3 people, a riffle and a pistol per person, my brother has 5 guns for his family of 2, my brother in law has 3 pistols and a riffle and just recently got a shotgun, for a family of 5, several other preppers i know have 1-3 guns per person in their family and some specialize in 1 gun, i also have a prepper friend who has NO guns. as for dealing with people, there is not much difference between a prepper and an anarchist, both have a philosophy of "you do you and i do me, and leave me alone and ill leave you alone". most preppers dont go around thinking about how to clear out a large crowd with a gun and how to shoot folks, because its easier to just avoid large groups of folks and conserve resources rather than push a bad situation and loose, preppers are about preparing for if the government drops the ball or isnt fast enough to pick up the ball in an event, its about surviving an event and thriving post event, you dont really survive or thrive if your objective it to "shoot folks when things go bad" because folks sometimes tend to shoot back. lastly, you said you have ample supplies for hurricane season, that means you prepared as best you can for hurricane season, does that make you a prepper? yes it does, you prepared for an even that is expected in your area, and being a prepper, do you have too many guns and walk around the store contemplating how to shoot folks?
    1
  2784.  @nunyabidnis3815  ok, first, no appology is needed, but i thank you anyway. open and reasonable discussion is always welcome. now to the nitty gritty, what is a prepper, i would agree with your first analogy, "I am a person who appreciates basic survival & preparation of home economics". that is the basis of a prepper, someone who prepares for basic survival and home economics. a prepper can be that old granny that lived through the depression and knows the value of storing up food for a rainy day and knows how to can and preserve and how to pinch every penny to make her dollar go farther. she lives her life preparing for the next economic crash that could be as severe as the one from 1928. you stored up supplies and essentials for hurricane season, you "prepared" for an event, and in your geographic area, that event is hurricanes. a prepper prepares for certain scenarios so that those scenarios if they occur will not severely impact their standard of living, it may be harder to do things, but a prepper most likely will not be standing in line at a FEMA camp begging the gov for help, they might just to get extra stuff, but it wont be out of necessity. most preppers i know are prepping for a catastrophic event such as a limited nuclear war, because that is one of the more catastrophic events that can occur, and with that kind of preperation, you find that you are already prepared for much lesser events such as a local power outage like the one that occured iin TX during the winter, or a tornado like the kinds that hit tornado alley. for example, i'll use myself. i prep for a nuclear war, i know that a nuclear war will probably be unsurvivable, but if i have a small chance of surviving a nuclear war, then i have a much greater chance of surviving a snowstorm and a power outage lasting a couple of days. most of the equipment i have is multi use equipment, meaning i can use it for more than just prepping. i have a tent, for if i go camping, i have a good sturdy knife, for if i go camping, i have a fishing pole for fishing and snare traps for trapping and so on and so on. i have a decent supply of food in my house, but i also rotate it, meaning i eat the older food and restock it when i eat it, it just means my pantry of non perishable foods is bigger than most peoples, but in an event like Katrina, while my neighbors would be scrawling HELP on their roof because they dont have food or water and need rescue, i could still live and eat and survive just in case rescue doesnt come right away, and we seen Katrina, rescue didnt come right away, and the people that were rescued werent much better off after being rescued. so yea, i have a large stockpile of food, enough to last me and my family, and even help out a few neighbors in a Katrina event. i have the skills and the equipment needed to minimize the disruption on my quality of life in a Katrina type event. yes, true, i wouldnt have power, but i would have a a dry place to sleep, a fire to keep me warm, and food and clean water to eat and drink. i wouldnt have a laptop of course and i couldnt catch up on the latest eppisodes of my favorite youtubers talking about the new games that are coming out or the ones i play, but i sure as hell wouldnt be stuck in a FEMA camp begging for a daily MRE to eat. prepping is a fluidic lifestyle, you cant just simply make a plan of if a hurricane hits then i will drive 100.3 miles north and then walk 3029 feet west through the wilderness and make a right turn at the oak tree at blah blah blah location. you have to be adaptable to a fluid situation. what if the hurricane hits, do you stay and ride it out or do you evacuate? where do you evacuate to? what if thats not an option? what if you can only evacuate half way out of the disaster area? what do you do then? now, i used nuclear war as an example, most preppers will say they are prepping for a severe cataclism, but not because they want to survive it, but because it will cover more of the non severe events. for a nuclear war, i have my supplies and a bug out plan, i have maps to help guide me from major targets that i should avoid. will i survive it, probably not, but if its a Katrina style event, then i can use those maps to guide me out of the disaster area and get to somewhere not affected by it. i have gas masks with filters, we have seen incidents where some chemical plant explodes and people are told to close their windows and stay inside, i have gas masks so i should be better off, Union Carbide plant exploded in India and killed 50,000 people through suffocation? i have a knife and tent and some basic tools, so in a Katrina event if it takes me a couple of days to get to safety, i am better prepared for that trip, 3 weeks without food / 3 days without water / 3 hours without shelter / 3 minutes without air / 3 seconds without hope, thats basic life expectancy. if you are actively or semi-actively or subconsciously preparing for an event that would severely disrupt your lifetyle, then you are a prepper, and when i say disrupt your lifestyle, i mean where it would put you in a serious situation that could affect your ability to survive. you may be surprised, but if you go on youtube and look up some of the more prominent "prepper" channels, and watch a few of their vids, you may get a whole different take on things, you may notice that they almost never talk about guns, and ive heard 1 of them talk once about some type of combat tactics. most of them discuss skills, and food preservation methods, and if you watch enough of their vids, you will hear most of them mention more than once about building a community post event.
    1
  2785. 1
  2786.  @tonytomahawk5160  oh i see, you know some clan members from the Carolinas and you decided to call them preppers or something, good job. first off, i never mentioned anything about right wing or left wing or ANYTHING leaning any which way on politics, thats on you. second thing, you claim you left the conservative party 25 years ago because some guy you know was telling white fellons how to get guns still, and he had a youtube channel too? i dont think youtube would allow such criminal activity, and i dont think it existed 25 years ago. but you leaving the party 25 years ago because there was some dumb racist doing dumb things makes you dumb. i could understand you leaving the party because you didnt like their policies, or how they were shifting more and more towards the wrong side or how they were war mongering or whatever, but leaving a party because your neighbor is a dumb clansman, thats like people leaving the progressive party becaue their neighbor is a drug dealer and they associate that with democrats and progressives. now, your comment about confederates, i believe those were democrats who call themselves now progressive democrats or social democrats, good job going to the party of slavery. as for the feds ignoring anything, if you want to talk about the quiet parts, which is race in your opinion because you want to point out how the feds arent ignoring it and you already went on a racist tirade. so lets talk about the quiet part. FBI crime stats point out that blacks kill twice as many whites as whites kill blacks, even though blacks only make up 13% of the population, blacks commit over 50% of the murders and robberies and assaults and rapes in the country even though they are only 13% of the population. yea, there is your problem, that whole white supremacy and white rage that is responsible for half as many murders as that black rage and black supremacy, but you dont want to mention that now do you? now, point out that prepping channel that tells you how to break the law, i would love to see it and flag their vids and maybe even report them to the feds, i'll be fair with you and point out some actual prepping channels for you and DARE and CHALLENGE you to point out how they are biased in any way? The Angry Prepper. Canadian Prepper. Alaska Prepper Survival Lilly Ice Age Farmer City Prepping these are just off the top of my head, the first 2 are black guys and the 3rd one is a spanish guy.
    1
  2787. 1
  2788. 1
  2789. 1
  2790. 1
  2791. 1
  2792. 1
  2793. 1
  2794. 1
  2795. 1
  2796. 1
  2797. 1
  2798. 1
  2799. 1
  2800. 1
  2801. 1
  2802. 1
  2803. 1
  2804. 1
  2805. 1
  2806. 1
  2807. 1
  2808. 1
  2809. 1
  2810. 1
  2811. 1
  2812. 1
  2813. 1
  2814. 1
  2815. 1
  2816. 1
  2817. 1
  2818. 1
  2819. 1
  2820. 1
  2821. 1
  2822. 1
  2823. 1
  2824. 1
  2825.  @alex-qd6of  the current push for universal healthcare deserves to be poo-pooed because it amounts to the US taxpayer funding every other countries healthcare.i would be in favor for and in support of universal healthcare if it was designated for US citizens and residents, but the way universal healthcare is pushed right now its open for everyone no matter what. it spells doom to have a system were the few pay for the many and there is no checks and balances on how many are allowed to partake. example, universal healthcare would encompass illegal aliens and allow them to partake in the system while at the same time having absolutely no responsibility to help support that system with tax dollars to fund the system, and with the borders the way they are it is estimated that millions are entering the country illegally per year and some local jurisdictions setting up sanctuaries for them. i will poo-ppo a system that expects me to support it while allowing anyone to come in without having a reasonable expectation placed upon them to help support a system that they intend to benefit from. if you plan on creating a system that some people have to pay for then you should also work on securing that system so that it benefits the most people possible while at teh same time minimizes abuse of it as much as possible. right now what we have is the equivalent of you taking the doors off your house so that anyone can come in off the street and sit at your table and eat all your food but leaving only you responsible for buying the groceries. eventually tax payers will get fed up and start poo-pooeing your system if you expect tax payers to suppt the system with their taxes while at the same time inviting people to partake in the benefits of the system without holding them responsible for helping to support that system.
    1
  2826. 1
  2827. 1
  2828. 1
  2829. 1
  2830. 1
  2831. 1
  2832. 1
  2833. 1
  2834. 1
  2835. 1
  2836. 1
  2837. 1
  2838. 1
  2839. 1
  2840. 1
  2841. 1
  2842. 1
  2843. 1
  2844. 1
  2845. 1
  2846. 1
  2847. 1
  2848. 1
  2849. 1
  2850. 1
  2851. 1
  2852. 1
  2853. 1
  2854. 1
  2855. 1
  2856. 1
  2857. 1
  2858. 1
  2859. 1
  2860. 1
  2861. 1
  2862. 1
  2863. 1
  2864. 1
  2865. 1
  2866. 1
  2867. 1
  2868. 1
  2869. 1
  2870. 1
  2871.  @meebabeebadeembadeemdam6787  in most jurisdictions, if you kill a pregnant woman, you are charged with 2 counts of murder, 1 for the mother and one for the unborn child. all it would take is for a father to disagree with a mothers choice to abort and bring a case to court and drag it up to the supreme court where he has paternal rights and since killing an unborn child is murder if done this way then under the equal protections under the law section then it should also be considered murder if you kill an unborn child with a medical procedure. all it takes is a decent enough lawyer to argue that with enough funding from pro life groups to push it that far. as for the 2nd amendment, its interpretation is as it should be, there is no amendment in hte constitution that protect a companies or a groups rights, every single amendment protects an individuals rights. the right to free speech, the right to peacably assemble, the right to religion, the right to free press, the right to remain silent the right to be secure in your personal effects and so on and so on. every single right deals asa an individual right, and the 2nd amendment should be an individual right also. the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. its written just like most other rights, where those rights are enumerated as the rights of the people. most anti gun people try to argue that the first part about the militia is ignored, SCOTUS already ruled that membership in a militia is not a requirement, its like saying that to keep my door locked, the right of the people to have locks shall not be infringed. does that mean that if you are allowed to have a lock on your door then that door must remain locked always no matter what, and if you unlock it you lose the right to have a lock on that door? i can understand that you may not agree with people having guns, that is your choice, and if you dont want a gun that is also your choice, but if you ever decide to get a gun for whatever reason, the 2nd amendment is there to protect your right to have one.
    1
  2872. 1
  2873.  @meebabeebadeembadeemdam6787  yea, supreme court can do a lot of different things, i have yet to see any jurisdiction laws make it to the supreme court and be struck down when it involves the murder of of a mother and unborn child as being treated as a double homicide, those laws still stand. and no, there is no amendment that protecs a companies or groups rights, they may be applied to companies or groups, but they are specifically written for individuals. the 14th amendment was applied to establish corporate personhood does not mean the 14th amendment was written specifically for corporations. the 14th amendment was also applied to give abortion rights, but yet teh 14th amendment says nothing about abortions or any medical procedure or anything about corporations. the 1st amendment was only applied to companies only after the 14th amendment was applied to give corporations personhood, so in effect, the 1st amendment doesnt even apply to the corporation as a corporation but as an individual person. and no, i dont underestimate the power of SCOTUS, there could be a time where new justices could overturn any or every 2a precedent, there could be a time where the current justices could overturn 2a precedents, but i do agree with you that it is highly unlikely, precedent usually stands for a long time if not forever, the biggest precedents that have been overturned that i remember are slavery, segregation, gun ownership, and abortions. funny hting is, slavery precedent was overturned not by scotus themselves, but by an act of an amendment to the constitution that actually nulified that precedent, as SCOTUS primary responsibility is to interpret the constitution and interpret the constitutionality of laws themselves. before RvW the precedent was abortions are illegal, after RvW abortions are legal, and with this recent ruling, SCOTUS admitted that RvW is not a right for the federal government to decide and its a states issue, which i think is the correct ruling. there is nothing written in the constitution governing the right to any medical procedure including abortions, and the federal government should not have the power to install rights in an area that doesnt want them, especially when the federal government does not have the authority to do so.
    1
  2874.  @meebabeebadeembadeemdam6787  If the right or power is not written into the constitution, then the federal government has no authority to act on it as the 10th amendment clearly states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”. and in this case, SCOTUS ruled correctly that the abortion issue IS a states rights and not a federal rights issue. That is SCOTUS job, to inspect legal procedures and to ascertain the constitutionality of laws. There is nothing written in the constitution about medical procedures or abortions as delegating those powers to the federal government, and so the 10th amendment kicks in and delegates those powers to the states. Its not that SCOTUS should or should not rule on something based on if its written in the constitution or not, its that SCOTUS should rule on whether it is constitutional or not. As for unenumerated rights, there are very few unenumerated rights, and usually those fall under the purview of individual states, but your interpretation of unenumerated rights I think is flawed. You state that the written word and burning the flag are such unenumerated rights, but SCOTUS has ruled that the first amendment protection of speech encompasses those activities as speech is a form of self expression just like the written word or a piece of art or the act of burning the flag. SCOTUS ruled that speech is a form of expresion and those other forms of expresion fall under the freedom of speech correctly in my opinion, for example, a mute person can only express himself through the written word, does that mean his right of free speech is nonexistant since he cant speek? How about the whole “picture is worth a thousand words”? if a comic or a drawing is different from speech, does it lose its protected status? Is it OK to describe a comic but not show it? That is why they are in a protected class under speech, because it is recognized as speech in the most basic for of speech conveys an idea, the spoken word, or written word or an act of burning the flag can convey that same idea. Now, your quote from that case of “No right is more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law”. Does that convey that you have the right to a medical procedure, or does it convey that you can not be deprived of life or LIBERTY or property, without due process of law? The right to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restrain or interference of others, sounds more like the government cant arrest you and detain you without due process of law. That’s why we have Habeus Corpus which forbids any police department from holding you longer than 3 days without filing charges, that’s why we have a whole amendment written about a speedy trial. As for rights do not need to be written expressly into our constitution, correct, they don’t need to be written into our constitution, that’s why so few of them are written in, originally 9 amendments protected peoples rights, while the 10th amendment delegated those rights not specifically granted power to the federal government over were to be delegated to states themselves, that’s why before 1865 there were states that had slaves as a right and other states that didn’t have slaves as a right. If you want to talk about unenumerated rights, you can talk till the world ends, and every single person in the country will have their own view of what rights they should have. There are people who want to argue that education is a right, there are others that argue that housing is a right and healthcare is a right and some that are arguing that food and water is a right, that’s all happening right now. So lets say that unenumerated rights are actually rights without being enumerated and listed, how long until someone sues a food company into giving them free food because its their right, or maybe someone sues you for your house because they have a right to housing, or someone sues someone else to force them to do work they don’t want to do because it is their right? Think it cant happen? Someone sued a bakery for not wanting to bake a cake because they thought it was their right to force them to bake a cake. How long until we have people forcing others to do work that they don’t want to do because its their right? If I have a right to food and water and housing and healthcare, can I sue the local grocery store and the hospital and the mortgage company for violating my rights by not providing these things for me? As for the federal government not having the power to to install rights, yes, that is a textbook debate, where the federal government installed the civil rights act, but that is an extension of the equal protections under the law clause of the 14th amendment of the constitution, but to create a whole new right there is a legal framework to do that with, its been enacted multiple times, called a constitutional congress and amendment.
    1
  2875.  @meebabeebadeembadeemdam6787  laws and rights are 2 different things, the federal government can make a law governing a certain action, but it is limited in its power or ability to establish a right. if the solution to everything and anything is the 9th amendment and the supremacy clause, then there is absolutely no need for the 10th amendment because the federal government can simply pass a law to do as it pleases. can the federal government pass a law and enact the supremacy clause governing local town elections in the state of CA? how about if the federal government passes a federal law that states any and every election held in the US must follow the following guidelines? can the federal government dictate internal state affairs simply by passing a federal law and enacting the supremacy clause? no. there is such a thing as states rights, and the federal government is limited in its ability to interfere in states, and it is limited in its ability to dictate new rights. funny how the founders wrote amendments protecting stuff like, religion, speech, assembly, press, arms, and even some obscure rights were thought of such as life and liberty and pursuit of happiness and stuff like protection from illegal search and seazure and silence and even something as obscure as no quartering of soldiers. all of these things could be considered enumerated rights, but yet the founders thought of enumerating them specifically, perhaps the founding fathers didnt trust us with defining those things as unenumerated rights, or perhaps unenumerated rights should be extensions of enumerated rights, such as an example of burning the flag or written word as being an unenumerated right under the right of free speech? the thing is, i dont believe you can just come up with a whole new right and claim it as an unenumerated right simply because you believe it should be a right. there are large groups of people who believe that free college education should be a right, would that be an unenumerated right now? there are people who believe that healthcare should be a right, should that fall under the unenumerated right now? if you start making up rights and claiming they are unenumerated rights, then you can make up anything you desire as an unenumerated right, which should not be the case. now, as for RvW being codified into law, yea, you can codify anything into law, that does not mean that it can stand up to scrutiny, there are lots of federal laws ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS, and those laws somehow made it onto the books and were protected by the supremacy clause until someone challenged them and SCOTUS ruled those laws unconstitutional. as for RvW being codified as a federal law, any state can challenge it, and SCOTUS would rule it unconstitutional based solely on SCOTUS current ruling that the federal government has no power or jurisdiction over this right and it is a states rights issue, with that ruling alone the federal government can not make laws on a federal federal level in favor or against RvW, because that law could be challenged and ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS in violation of the 10th amendment alone.
    1
  2876. 1
  2877. 1
  2878. 1
  2879. 1
  2880. 1
  2881. 1
  2882. 1
  2883. 1
  2884. 1
  2885. 1
  2886. 1
  2887. 1
  2888. 1
  2889. 1
  2890. 1
  2891. 1
  2892. 1
  2893. 1
  2894. 1
  2895. 1
  2896. 1
  2897. 1
  2898. 1
  2899. 1
  2900. 1
  2901.  @john.premose  no, its actually what democrats want, whats democrats favorite saying about not letting tragedies go to waste? here is something for you to understand, 9 of the last 10 mass shooters left manifestos where they stated they chose their targets because they were unsecured easy targets. Nashville shooter passed up another target because "too much security". Colorado theater shooter wrote that he chose that particular theater because the airport was too secure and this was the only theater in close proximity to his house that forbit partons from concealed carrying weapons, making it a softer target. Buffalo grocery store shooter manifesto had an itemized list including targeting soft targets where CCW concealed carry was prohibited. Dylan Roof shot up a church, and his friends made police statements that said he was originally planning to shoot up the Charleston college but instead settled on the church because the college had too much security. Eliot Rodger's (2014 Isla Visto shooter) manifesto wrote out that he passed over several locations because of "security" such as cops with guns. the crime prevention research center did a study and showed that from 1950 through 2019, 94% of public mass shootings occured in "gun free zones", the washington post tried to fact check the study and found that from 2009 - 2016, 86% of public mass shootings occured in gun free zones. democrats have this data, and EVERYONE has been told by the shooters themselves what targets the choose, but democrats are the only ones trying to pass laws to curb peoples rights instead of looking at what is in front of them. do you understand that mass shooters pick easy targets and we should work on making those targets harder to hit or do you NOT understand that?
    1
  2902. 1
  2903. 1
  2904. 1
  2905. 1
  2906. 1
  2907. 1
  2908. 1
  2909. 1
  2910. 1
  2911. 1
  2912. 1
  2913. 1
  2914. 1
  2915. 1
  2916. 1
  2917. 1
  2918. 1
  2919. 1
  2920. 1
  2921. 1
  2922. 1
  2923. 1
  2924.  @zinaj9437  and that is what they will do, kick it down the road again, thats all they do. dreamers have been waiting for their dream for decades, and the closest they came was in 08 when Obama got elected and took office in 09 and had a supermajority. then BOOM, their dream was kicked down the road because enslaving the population to insurance companies and forcing people to buy healthcare insurance was more important. every time an issue comes up, it gets kicked down the road and people get measly crumbs. healthcare - pass Obamacare that forces people to buy health insurance and then spin it as if though the government gave everyone healthcare. good slave. dream act - forgete the whole dream act and push through DACA as an EO. we wont deport you, but we wont give you any rights either and keep you in limbo permanently. good slave. student loans - we wont give you loan forgiveness, we will just push out the repayment date for you, why pay now when you can pay later. good slave. defund the police - we wont defund them, just take a little money away and then use that money to install oversight committees to monitor them just like internal affairs departments. good slave be content with your crumbs. pandemic - we will shut down your jobs to protect you and give you $2000 for the whole year to compensate you for it. good slave. evictions - we wont fix the problem that we caused by shutting down your businesses, we will just push out the date that you get evicted. enjoy your crumbs good slave. tax the rich - sure, we will tax the rich in a way that they can pass those taxes on to you and then give them SALT tax cuts that ONLY benefit the rich. enjoy good slave.
    1
  2925. 1
  2926. 1
  2927. 1
  2928. 1
  2929. 1
  2930. 1
  2931. 1