Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   PhytoExtractum Kratom Powder for Sale   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Concentrates   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | Next > | Last >
OfflineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244]
    #23596199 - 08/31/16 01:41 AM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

amp244 said:
Yes, if you were already paying $5,000 for a health plan, and you no longer have to, then abso-fucking-lutely, you'd be $5000 in the plus.



And that is my point. 

Quote:

amp244 said:
If you are assuming the insurance to be a sunk cost indefinitely, then the subsidy value would be equivalent to the cost of replacing the plan. But just giving people access to shit without ownership rights isn't increasing wealth per say. Putting money back into the pocket (like when a family NO LONGER HAS TO PAY $5000 a year in insurance) increases wealth and purchasing power.



And that is also my point.

Quote:

amp244 said:
Unfortunately for your argument the majority of the families getting full subsidies were already on Medicaid and/or weren't purchasing insurance so the subsidies didn't increase a god damn thing.



It's the same argument.  If the Government provides subsidies, people can save the money they would otherwise have paid for health insurance.

Quote:

amp244 said:
Absolutely no money was freed up and no purchasing power was gained. How can you say that adds wealth?



If I get to keep an extra $5,000/year, I'm $5,000/year wealthier.

Quote:

amp244 said:
These people are staying poor no matter how much "free shit" you give them to dump down a drain.



No one claimed they would become "wealthy".  Simply wealthier than they would have been paying out of pocket.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAlyssa
consecrated woman ✝️
Female
Registered: 11/25/14
Posts: 1,517
Last seen: 6 days, 7 minutes
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244]
    #23596300 - 08/31/16 03:04 AM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

amp244 said:
First off, the gov't taxes people to pay for shit that is supposed to help it do its prescribed functions. Mandating healthcare is not one its prescribed functions.



The Constitution says it's supposed to "promote the general welfare". Who's to say universal healthcare isn't part of that? I'm definitely not a fan of Obama, but I don't mind Obamacare, since I'm not paying for it anyway, lol. Even in principle I don't mind it, it's not a reason why I don't support Obama.

Quote:

amp244 said:
2nd off, industry and the free markets innovate,



Mind-bogglingly massive amounts of useless shit is produced at the expense of people. We've done enough innovation already, it's the distribution that's the problem. Fairly distribute what we've got and you have utopia, no new innovation needed. Humanity has passed that stage in its development.

Quote:

amp244 said:
welfare states vegetate. If everyone thought as you did about productivity and government relief, we'd all be living in loin cloths under the stars getting in touch with the celestial plane. While this may be a fulfilling lifestyle for some, it may not be for others. In our present society, you are free to move to Alaska or other remote areas of the world, and live completely free form government intervention, off the grid, and with no 'miserable job' if you so choose.



See above. The only thing that would need to be produced if the government redistributed all the resources would be food, which if everyone were dedicated only to that would require very little work on the part of any individual. The infrastructure would need to be maintained, but this also would require very little work for each person if distributed equally.

Quote:

amp244 said:
Ironically, you wouldn't be able to enjoy your pampered lifestyle as you do today if everybody tried to be like you, subsisting completely off of the charity and labor of other people.



I'm subsisting completely off of the labor of other people, but not off of their charity. If the government didn't force them to pay taxes and weren't forced itself (by the threat of civil unrest as you pointed out) to provide a welfare state, no one would give me a dime. A beggar on the street relies on charity, a welfare checkster does not.

Quote:

amp244 said:
The Alyssa Clone Society, or ACS as it will henceforth be referred, where nobody works (because fuck that shit, right?) would actually force people to work or die. If nobody is working and providing you with food, shelter, clothes, etc., then it would follow naturally that you would have to obtain these things yourself. And while food may indeed grow on trees, it takes labor to gather it. You would have to work, or die.

Where do you think the food that you buy with government stamps comes from? How do you think it gets to the grocery store? Do grocery stores live in the forest? When the cold air stops coming through those vents in your apartment, does the landlord say 'Abracadabra!' to fix it?



If useless production ceased, the amount of work that would need to be done by any individual would be minimal as I said earlier in this post.

Quote:

amp244 said:
People have to work in order for you to live your lifestyle. The more people like you there are, the harder those people have to work to support themselves. I support a free society, with laws designed to provide all able bodied people with the ability to fully support themselves. Those with physical disabilities should be subsidized. Those who are simply not capable of becoming productive members of society will be subsidized to a much lesser extent and live a life that is in no way superfluous or comfortable. Able bodied people on welfare need an incentive to be productive, support themselves and stop this universal plunder.



Damn, that's rough. I'm far more caring than that. If I ran the government, I would establish a base income which if anyone didn't earn would be supplied by taxpayer money. The billionaires would be paying for it.

Quote:

amp244 said:
Everything you get for "free" is taken by force(law) from someone else. This is a violation of property rights. If you take groceries out of my car while I'm inside at the gas station because I make more money than you, you have committed a crime. You have stolen my property. What then is the difference when this plunder is legalized via the various welfare programs? My property, is stolen from me in both cases, the only difference being that in the one instance you are physically stealing it, and in the other you are standing idle on sidelines. Can you see the injustice in this? Do you see how hypocritical it is to decry of injustice and advocate socialism?



The only injustice is that the rich aren't being taxed enough, so the middle class and poor are having to pick up far too big a part of the tab for everything the government does, not just welfare. Like I said, a base income for everyone is what we need. You only would pay taxes on what you earn by working, and if it isn't a lot you still wouldn't pay any taxes.


--------------------
I'm Alyssa.
I'm consecrated to the Immaculate Heart.
I don't want her to have to look at adultery to save my privileged living cells, so please keep it PG-13.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleamp244
Sporocarp Stretching


Registered: 08/05/08
Posts: 1,336
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #23597251 - 08/31/16 12:14 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

amp244 said:
Yes, if you were already paying $5,000 for a health plan, and you no longer have to, then abso-fucking-lutely, you'd be $5000 in the plus.



And that is my point.



Read on. Don't just quote the first sentence when the rest of the paragraph further addresses, and disagrees with, your point as it applies to the effects of Obamacare. 

Quote:

Quote:

amp244 said:
If you are assuming the insurance to be a sunk cost indefinitely, then the subsidy value would be equivalent to the cost of replacing the plan. But just giving people access to shit without ownership rights isn't increasing wealth per say. Putting money back into the pocket (like when a family NO LONGER HAS TO PAY $5000 a year in insurance) increases wealth and purchasing power.



And that is also my point.



Looks like you've given yourself two self-assuring pats on the back. Read on. You're almost there.

Quote:

Quote:

amp244 said:
Unfortunately for your argument the majority of the families getting full subsidies were already on Medicaid and/or weren't purchasing insurance so the subsidies didn't increase a god damn thing.



It's the same argument.  If the Government provides subsidies, people can save the money they would otherwise have paid for health insurance.



Falcon, everything you would need for clarification is found in the above quote, but I'll try harder. The people who could afford a $5000 plan before, don't qualify for subsidies now. The people who do qualify for subsidies, couldn't afford such plans before. It is important to understand that PEOPLE CANNOT SAVE MONEY THEY NEVER HAD TO BEGIN WITH.

If I've been homeless for 10 years, have $0 and a health plan, I can't put money down on a house. I can't buy a bottle of shampoo to wash myself with. I'm just as fucking wealthy as I was before. Giving someone a plan doesn't increase their unrestricted purchasing power (see amp's wealth definition below).

Quote:

Quote:

amp244 said:
Absolutely no money was freed up and no purchasing power was gained. How can you say that adds wealth?



If I get to keep an extra $5,000/year, I'm $5,000/year wealthier.



Only if you get to put $5000 back into your pocket that otherwise would not be there. You have to have been already spending exactly $5000/year, every year, in order for your statement to be true. Its a very simple concept man. It shouldn't be this hard to get it. If you were not spending $5000 a year before, you can't spend it elsewhere now. Look at how much money someone has to make to qualify for a $5000 subsidy. Its not enough to afford health insurance, that's the whole fucking point of the subsidy. Your whole argument is based on the assumption that all of these people where expending $5000/year on health insurance before their subsidy, which would disqualify them for the subsidy. [Crazyemojismashingfacewithhammer]

Quote:

Quote:

amp244 said:
These people are staying poor no matter how much "free shit" you give them to dump down a drain.



No one claimed they would become "wealthy".  Simply wealthier than they would have been paying out of pocket.



This is why I went in with the $20,000,000 "fairy tale". To illustrate that your logic is flawed. Sure, you can argue that I'm $20,000,000 wealthier than I would be if I went into debt to pay for a health plan I couldn't afford. If you want to bring in the concept of negative wealth that would exist if I hypothetically was paying, or borrowing to pay, for a health plan I couldn't afford. As a matter of fact, I'm going to take it a step further. I get for free, what I value at $30trillion in fresh breathable oxygen everyday! I consider myself $30trillion wealthier than I would be had I "been paying out of pocket" lol. I can lead you to water man, but you gotta do the drinking.

The problem is that you still don't know what wealth is. It is a concept you have struggled mightily to grasp throughout our acquaintance, yet full comprehension has eluded you. You can't see the forest for the trees in a lot of instances. You are missing the big picture. I will share my definition of wealth, which may help clear things up in your mind. All of the definitions of wealth that I have come across I have found to be incomplete or incorrect.

Wealth The extent of power, authority, and ability that one has, to command the labour, or the produce of labour, of others, without restriction.

In other words, your wealth is measured by the extent that you can get people to do shit for you, or get people to give you shit that they have produced, without restriction to whom or to where you direct your focus. If I give a poor man money, he can take it anywhere and spend it, so long as it has value. He can command the labor of others, at his discretion, and on his accord. Give him access to a health plan, or any asset that he can't sell, and see that there is no sudden increase in his unrestricted purchasing power. He has gained no wealth.


--------------------
How to Convert a Normal 24-hour Light Timer into a Short Cycle Repeating Timer


"Monopoly, besides, is a great enemy to good management, which can never be universally established but in consequence of that free and universal competition which forces everybody to have recourse in it for the sake of self-defense." -Adam Smith


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleamp244
Sporocarp Stretching


Registered: 08/05/08
Posts: 1,336
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244]
    #23597265 - 08/31/16 12:21 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

And Alyssa, you are going to have to give me some time to address that shocking anti-liberty ideology. I don't think you are a troll, like a lot of the people on your ratings page say, I just think you underappreciate freedom in human discourse. You are EXACTLY what the "evildoers" want. People begging for safety at the expense of their freedom.


--------------------
How to Convert a Normal 24-hour Light Timer into a Short Cycle Repeating Timer


"Monopoly, besides, is a great enemy to good management, which can never be universally established but in consequence of that free and universal competition which forces everybody to have recourse in it for the sake of self-defense." -Adam Smith


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAlyssa
consecrated woman ✝️
Female
Registered: 11/25/14
Posts: 1,517
Last seen: 6 days, 7 minutes
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244]
    #23597271 - 08/31/16 12:22 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

amp244 said:
If I give a poor man money, he can take it anywhere and spend it, so long as it has value. He can command the labor of others, at his discretion, and on his accord. Give him access to a health plan, or any asset that he can't sell, and see that there is no sudden increase in his unrestricted purchasing power. He has gained no wealth.



Why is it always a male when an example is given? Oh, that's right. We still live under patriarchy. The default for everything relating to the individual is a male. Fuck that, I give examples with females.


--------------------
I'm Alyssa.
I'm consecrated to the Immaculate Heart.
I don't want her to have to look at adultery to save my privileged living cells, so please keep it PG-13.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAlyssa
consecrated woman ✝️
Female
Registered: 11/25/14
Posts: 1,517
Last seen: 6 days, 7 minutes
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244]
    #23597275 - 08/31/16 12:22 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

amp244 said:
And Alyssa, you are going to have to give me some time to address that shocking anti-liberty ideology. I don't think you are a troll, like a lot of the people on your ratings page say, I just think you underappreciate freedom in human discourse. You are EXACTLY what the "evildoers" want. People begging for safety at the expense of their freedom.



OK, take your time, no rush.


--------------------
I'm Alyssa.
I'm consecrated to the Immaculate Heart.
I don't want her to have to look at adultery to save my privileged living cells, so please keep it PG-13.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244]
    #23597735 - 08/31/16 02:33 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

amp244 said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
If I get to keep an extra $5,000/year, I'm $5,000/year wealthier.



Only if you get to put $5000 back into your pocket that otherwise would not be there.  You have to have been already spending exactly $5000/year, every year, in order for your statement to be true. Its a very simple concept man.  It shouldn't be this hard to get it.



I get it.  That's exactly what I've been saying this whole time.

In summary:

1.  If the Government pays for something I would have paid for myself, I am wealthier as a result of them providing it (if that something is worth more than the taxes I pay).
2.  If the Government pays for something I wouldn't have purchased, then I'm no wealthier, but I'm certainly better off (health insurance is better than no health insurance, education is better than no education, etc).

I get both points very clearly.  I'm not sure if you get the first point or not.  Do you?


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCrumist
Stranger
I'm a teapot User Gallery

Registered: 11/02/13
Posts: 781
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244] * 2
    #23598495 - 08/31/16 06:30 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

In my opinion, broadly held, that our healthcare sucks. We spend most government money on
healthcare as a % of GDP for the purpose of treating a tiny fraction of our population
than most nations do to treat every citizen.



Fixing this issue (of which Obamacare was a modest first step towards) will increase
welfare and wealth across the board in addition to being the decent and humane thing.

This means young healthy people have to chip in like everyone else, just as they contribute to
social security. As I understand it, this is the only proven way so far. I would have been
open to some of the novel approaches brought up, but the ACA debate broke down in a bad way.

That fine for being uninsured sucks, no doubt. But as do all payroll deductions.


--------------------
'I am all for resources being allocated to the widowed single mother of 3, lost husband over seas fighting for our country. I am for vets getting mental health access and resources following war. I am not for free money cause a woman can't close her legs or some chump with low testosterone no going to work cause "i'm sad."' -finalexplosion
Nice knowin ya'll! https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23904704/vc/1#23904704


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleamp244
Sporocarp Stretching


Registered: 08/05/08
Posts: 1,336
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #23599341 - 08/31/16 10:18 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

amp244 said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
If I get to keep an extra $5,000/year, I'm $5,000/year wealthier.



Only if you get to put $5000 back into your pocket that otherwise would not be there.  You have to have been already spending exactly $5000/year, every year, in order for your statement to be true. Its a very simple concept man.  It shouldn't be this hard to get it.



I get it.  That's exactly what I've been saying this whole time.

In summary:

1.  If the Government pays for something I would have paid for myself, I am wealthier as a result of them providing it (if that something is worth more than the taxes I pay).
2.  If the Government pays for something I wouldn't have purchased, then I'm no wealthier, but I'm certainly better off (health insurance is better than no health insurance, education is better than no education, etc).

I get both points very clearly.  I'm not sure if you get the first point or not.  Do you?



Yes I do. Its the very point that I was addressing in my entire post above. Nobody is in that position. I made an entire post about that. We were talking about Obamacare, and your point number 1 above is not a circumstance Obamacare created. I said Obamacare didn't raise anyone's wealth. You made point one above. I addressed it. You didn't get it. I addressed it more thoroughly. Now we are here, and I am explaining to you that your point has already been addressed, and you just keep reiterating it like an Alzheimer's patient.

I like how you quote one sentence from a post that completely ripped your argument apart and try to spin it off like you got me...


--------------------
How to Convert a Normal 24-hour Light Timer into a Short Cycle Repeating Timer


"Monopoly, besides, is a great enemy to good management, which can never be universally established but in consequence of that free and universal competition which forces everybody to have recourse in it for the sake of self-defense." -Adam Smith


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDouglas Howard
Stranger
Registered: 03/26/15
Posts: 1,678
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244]
    #23599517 - 08/31/16 11:10 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244]
    #23599609 - 08/31/16 11:52 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

amp244 said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
In summary:

1.  If the Government pays for something I would have paid for myself, I am wealthier as a result of them providing it (if that something is worth more than the taxes I pay).
2.  If the Government pays for something I wouldn't have purchased, then I'm no wealthier, but I'm certainly better off (health insurance is better than no health insurance, education is better than no education, etc).

I get both points very clearly.  I'm not sure if you get the first point or not.  Do you?



Yes I do. Its the very point that I was addressing in my entire post above. Nobody is in that position. We were talking about Obamacare, and your point number 1 above is not a circumstance Obamacare created. I said Obamacare didn't raise anyone's wealth.



Good, we're aligned.

So what you're saying is that no one on Obamacare who qualifies for a subsidy was paying full price for health insurance before, and therefore no one's wealth is going up (only their health?)  Yes, you did say that above:  "The people who could afford a $5000 plan before, don't qualify for subsidies now."

Did you know that many people ARE saving a lot of money with Obamacare?  If you understand #1 above, then you have to agree those people who are saving money got an increase in their wealth as a result.  :shrug:


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleamp244
Sporocarp Stretching


Registered: 08/05/08
Posts: 1,336
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: Alyssa]
    #23599722 - 09/01/16 01:40 AM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Alyssa said:]
The Constitution says it's supposed to "promote the general welfare". Who's to say universal healthcare isn't part of that? I'm definitely not a fan of Obama, but I don't mind Obamacare, since I'm not paying for it anyway, lol. Even in principle I don't mind it, it's not a reason why I don't support Obama.



There are also the 5th and 14th amendments which protect a citizen's life, liberty, and property... So sure, promote the general welfare, but don't step on my LLP, ya dig?

The Declaration of Independence also boldly states that governments are created to protect Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not the exact opposite.

Quote:

Quote:

amp244 said:
2nd off, industry and the free markets innovate,



Mind-bogglingly massive amounts of useless shit is produced at the expense of people. We've done enough innovation already, it's the distribution that's the problem. Fairly distribute what we've got and you have utopia, no new innovation needed. Humanity has passed that stage in its development.



A.) You, with nothing by choice, have no authority to tell others who've worked their entire lives to "fairly distribute" what you and they have got. Why would someone work, if 100% of the produce of their labor is stripped immediately from them? We are back again to the ACS, where no one wants to work because, fuck that shit, so everyone dies. That aint no way to be livin', being dead is lame, girl! :p

B.) We've done enough innovation? I assume you've been in contact with the Almighty Goddess, and she has made you privy to this information? Remember the Ancient Egyptians considered themselves to have reached the pinnacle of society, as they ran around in loin cloths with their genitals (male and female) flopping about.

We still use non-renewable resources for fuel, when the entire universe is covered in ambient energy. We still have power lines running all over the damn place, burning oil, coal, and uranium. We still can't space travel and shit, there is so much shit that we can't do today, that we will do tomorrow. We could be inter-stellar and shit, nah-mean?. You gonna tell little Timmy that NASA is closing the inhabit Mars program? That's a drag gurl-frand!! :wink: 

Quote:

The only thing that would need to be produced if the government redistributed all the resources would be food, which if everyone were dedicated only to that would require very little work on the part of any individual. The infrastructure would need to be maintained, but this also would require very little work for each person if distributed equally.



And back to the ACS fallacy: Who the fuck is going to do any of the work, when there is no benefit to do it. Who has to empty the septic tanks? Clean the rest stop toilets? Fly the airplanes? Put out the fires? Risk their life arresting the perpetrators? Some of these jobs can't just be filled by anyone. They take years of training. How do you enforce equality of treatment if the natures of all the tasks to be completed are so different?

Who's job is it to decide who has to perform which task? What makes that person less prone to being "evil"? Evil gravitates towards positions of power, certainly the position of the person deciding all of this shit would be extremely vulnerable to corruption. If the ACS was feasible, the chance for Stalin style shit to go down would be as high as it could possibly be. You don't want Stalin style shit to go down, real talk, boo boo.
Quote:



I'm far more caring than that. If I ran the government, I would establish a base income which if anyone didn't earn would be supplied by taxpayer money. The billionaires would be paying for it.



The ACS fallacy… Nobody would perform the necessary labor to support society. Toilets would overflow, nobody would make gasoline, power-lines would be downed with no repair, fires would extinguish themselves, etc. Until, of course, you take that inexorable Stalin approach.

Quote:


The only injustice is that the rich aren't being taxed enough, so the middle class and poor are having to pick up far too big a part of the tab for everything the government does, not just welfare. Like I said, a base income for everyone is what we need. You only would pay taxes on what you earn by working, and if it isn't a lot you still wouldn't pay any taxes.



The government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. There is plunder associated with welfare programs, but they aren’t much compared to defense spending. There are two sides to the equation there, Revenues + Borrowed Funds = Expenditures. You lower the expenditures, you need less revenue + borrowed funds.

Quote:

Quote:

amp244 said:
Ironically, you wouldn't be able to enjoy your pampered lifestyle as you do today if everybody tried to be like you, subsisting completely off of the charity and labor of other people.



I'm subsisting completely off of the labor of other people, but not off of their charity. If the government didn't force them to pay taxes and weren't forced itself (by the threat of civil unrest as you pointed out) to provide a welfare state, no one would give me a dime. A beggar on the street relies on charity, a welfare checkster does not.



I am writing you a short story for this. You will have to allow me more time to craft it, before I post. But the semantics lesson on charity was enlightening. You are right, people certainly aren't voluntarily donating for you to live your pampered lifestyle.


--------------------
How to Convert a Normal 24-hour Light Timer into a Short Cycle Repeating Timer


"Monopoly, besides, is a great enemy to good management, which can never be universally established but in consequence of that free and universal competition which forces everybody to have recourse in it for the sake of self-defense." -Adam Smith


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAlyssa
consecrated woman ✝️
Female
Registered: 11/25/14
Posts: 1,517
Last seen: 6 days, 7 minutes
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: amp244]
    #23599914 - 09/01/16 03:39 AM (7 years, 4 months ago)

We can't build a spaceship with the technology we have now? Are you sure? I thought it was a question of the government not wanting to spend the money on it. If we still need further innovation, we're pretty damn close already. We have a space station, all we need to do is make it move.

You don't know me enough to theorize about the ACS. I'm more than willing to do work if I think it's for a good cause (the harmonious cooperation of humanity, in this case). So if everyone were like me, we'd divvy up the tasks together and shit would get done. The capitalist system doesn't create a world anyone wants to work for, so we have to be paid if you want us to do a job.

You're right about LLP, so I guess I can't use the Constitution in my argument. We need to do something about that, because property is theft. It's only necessary in an ego-based system like capitalism. I can imagine paradise and there's no property because no one lets her/his ego control her/him.

Why do you think the government has a spending problem? I think it should be spending a lot more, like I said. The billionaires have all this money just sitting there, not being spent even by them. It should be put to good use. Take 50% of their assets and they've still got plenty to fuck around with. Hell, they'd still have plenty if the government took 90% (I think 50% is reasonable). I don't see why I'm not in a position to demand this, hardly anyone has as much as the people I want to tax the shit out of.


--------------------
I'm Alyssa.
I'm consecrated to the Immaculate Heart.
I don't want her to have to look at adultery to save my privileged living cells, so please keep it PG-13.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDouglas Howard
Stranger
Registered: 03/26/15
Posts: 1,678
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: Alyssa]
    #23600745 - 09/01/16 10:53 AM (7 years, 4 months ago)







Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDouglas Howard
Stranger
Registered: 03/26/15
Posts: 1,678
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: Douglas Howard]
    #23600752 - 09/01/16 10:54 AM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the freedom of communication and expression through mediums including various electronic media and published materials. While such freedom mostly implies the absence of interference from an overreaching state, its preservation may be sought through constitutional or other legal protections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_press


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDouglas Howard
Stranger
Registered: 03/26/15
Posts: 1,678
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: Douglas Howard]
    #23601019 - 09/01/16 12:37 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinehostileuniverse
Stranger
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/14/15
Posts: 8,602
Loc: 'Merica Flag
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: Douglas Howard]
    #23601941 - 09/01/16 05:19 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

"To promote the general welfare" does NOT mean to provide everyone welfare, that's absurd


--------------------
http://www.countdowntotrump.com





Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinestarfire_xes
I Am 'They'
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: hostileuniverse] * 1
    #23602052 - 09/01/16 06:00 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

Obamacare undergoing collapse, now what?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinehostileuniverse
Stranger
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/14/15
Posts: 8,602
Loc: 'Merica Flag
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: starfire_xes]
    #23602071 - 09/01/16 06:03 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

now we go to single payer, that was the plan all along


--------------------
http://www.countdowntotrump.com





Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinestarfire_xes
I Am 'They'
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
Re: A vote for Hillary... [Re: hostileuniverse]
    #23602119 - 09/01/16 06:16 PM (7 years, 4 months ago)

I she going to give a policy screech? :smirk:


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | Next > | Last >

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   PhytoExtractum Kratom Powder for Sale   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Concentrates   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Poll: Obama, Hillary Beat GOP in '08 lonestar2004 1,252 4 07/21/07 08:50 PM
by xFrockx
* The stupidity of voting for Hillary.
( 1 2 3 all )
shroomydan 3,591 55 09/20/07 04:10 PM
by BrAiN
* Meet the Next President: Hillary Clinton remains coy about run lonestar2004 662 0 09/22/06 09:07 AM
by lonestar2004
* Hillary Clinton
( 1 2 3 all )
trebbihm 3,424 42 02/12/07 05:55 PM
by Redstorm
* Why It Is Time To Decriminalize Drug Use RonoS 2,053 19 10/02/02 04:12 PM
by LSAuser
* what's wrong with hillary clinton?
( 1 2 3 all )
Bridgeburner 3,869 43 10/16/07 03:06 PM
by sander
* Hillary 2008 Already in Gear
( 1 2 all )
ekomstop 3,845 30 11/04/04 01:36 PM
by Innvertigo
* The wind at Hillary's back.
( 1 2 all )
lonestar2004 3,549 25 09/13/05 05:05 PM
by krishnamurti

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
12,539 topic views. 1 members, 4 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.011 seconds on 15 queries.