Thread: Obama's getting it done son!

Originally Posted by plg6067

How could passive resistance gotten American Independence from Britain?! you kidding me?

Passive resistance made India independent from Britain!

Sure, thousands of indians were slaughter by the british, but when they continued to not fight back they won.

George III would have worried about how he looks on the world stage and given in to American independence because of colonial passive resistance? I definitely would not have counted on that.

Originally Posted by plg6067

Plus I really don't care about the early americans. They were just a bunch of indian killers who decided to go to war because of capitalism...

That is an enormous generalization.

The independence they won led to our current independence.

Originally Posted by plg6067

I also agree with ghandi when it comes to the nazis..

"I would like you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions...If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourselves, man, woman, and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them."

Unfortunately that is the the only part of the quote I can find, I am sure he said more but it seems people only care about the shocking parts...

He believed it is better to die as a martyr without blood on your hands than to kill or owe allegiance to evil. I agree.

That was a recipe for a fascist, Nazi, one government world of nothing but white people. When the majority of the human race is dead and the living are oppressed by fascists, what does it matter if the dead people acted undevoted when they died? There were much bigger priorities. The Nazis had to be stopped, and I am extremely glad they were.

If the americans just ignored the presence of the brits and just went on setting up their own government... I think there is not much the king could do. Britain didn't just give the Indians independence either, they jail them, they killed thousands, but they realized that it was impossible to jail them all....

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The independence they won led to our current independence.

Oohh I am so happy they killed people so they could lower their taxes... It was really worth it....... After they became free from the brits, they just stole more native american land... awesome!

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

That was a recipe for a fascist, Nazi, one government world of nothing but white people. When the majority of the human race is dead and the living are oppressed by fascists, what does it matter if the dead people acted undevoted when they died? There were much bigger priorities. The Nazis had to be stopped, and I am extremely glad they were.

I personally would rather be dead than be a nazi or kill people. That is just what matters to me....

Like ghandi I believe that it would not last, the good would prevail eventually.

Originally Posted by plg6067

If the americans just ignored the presence of the brits and just went on setting up their own government... I think there is not much the king could do. Britain didn't just give the Indians independence either, they jail them, they killed thousands, but they realized that it was impossible to jail them all....

There would have been an endless gunning down of people that would not have resulted in freedom. Ghandi pulled some good political strings with the right people at the right time. Don't assume that his methods are universally effective.

Originally Posted by plg6067

Oohh I am so happy they killed people so they could lower their taxes... It was really worth it....... After they became free from the brits, they just stole more native american land... awesome!

Lowering taxes was not the goal of the Revolutionary War. Refusing to be taxed without having any say so in the government was a big issue, but that was part of a much bigger picture of oppression. If you think lowering taxes is all that resulted from the Revolutionary War, you need to read more about it.

We Americans have done a great deal more with our freedom than steal land from Native Americans. You have probably enjoyed our economic stimulation, entertainment industry, and protection that have resulted from it. By the way, the Native American genes slipped into the white and black gene pools so much that a very high percentage of Americans are part Native. I am one of them.

Originally Posted by plg6067

I personally would rather be dead than be a nazi or kill people. That is just what matters to me....

Like ghandi I believe that it would not last, the good would prevail eventually.

The fighting was not done on behalf of just the people fighting. It was done on behalf of humanity itself. You and I are both enjoying the results of it right now.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The fighting was not done on behalf of just the people fighting. It was done on behalf of humanity itself. You and I are both enjoying the results of it right now.

You do realize that the current financial crisis is partially a direct result of 10 billion tax dollars a month going into an illegal and mismanaged war that nobody other than Bush and his following of drunken imbreds wanted?

Yes, the native american genes are now wide-spread, and it's partially because of intermarriage, but mixed-racial marriages and breeding has only become widespread in the past 60 years. The reason that the native american genes were so widespread is because of the early widespread rape of the native women.

Why do you keep saying economic stimulation? Do you not watch the news, or do you only watch Bill O'Reilly? Just because the US has more money than the entirety of Europe does not make us more prosperous. One of the measures of how good a country is doing is the gap between rich and poor, which we have the highest (of the democracies,) the amount of unemployement and poverty (which we have the highest of) and the quality and ease of life. You and I have easy lives as we have good jobs and are healthy. Go to a trailer park in the south, go to the ghetto of The Bronx, think they're living the sweet life? Go to a McDonalds and look at anyone who eats there more than once a week, think they're really happy in their skin-tight sweatpants and heavy breathing because they got winded eating their 800 calorie big mac and large soda?

Pure, unabridged capitalism is about greed and the exploitation of the weak minded. The people who eat at McDonalds several times a week are addicted to it, yes, you can get addicted to saturated fat. Their very good at advertising, and advertising prays on the weak minded. It's not as much their own faults as people think it is. People tell them to tune out the advertisers, or to get some will power. A physical addiction like that is not so easy to overcome, I became addicted to caffeine in college. Went through a withdrawal period of 5 days of brutal migraines. They were born less intelligent than myself and you, they shouldn't be prayed on because of that.

As athiests we believe in the survival of the fittest, but as liberals (and you said you have some liberal beliefs) we also believe in humanitarianism. McDonalds is a money hungry evil corporation that prays on people. Heart disease cam come from fatty foods as easily as it can from smoking. To me McDonalds is no better than the Tabacco conglomrate

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You do realize that the current financial crisis is partially a direct result of 10 billion tax dollars a month going into an illegal and mismanaged war that nobody other than Bush and his following of drunken imbreds wanted?

You know I disagree with that. The finanacial crisis is mainly the result of the politically correct lowering of loan standards.

On top of the fact that a ton of Republicans are rich and sophisticated doctors, lawyers, business people, etc., a lot of the Democrats in Congress voted for authorization of the war. That includes Hillary Clinton and John Kerry. It is amazing how Democrats completely overlook that now. It is a fact.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Yes, the native american genes are now wide-spread, and it's partially because of intermarriage, but mixed-racial marriages and breeding has only become widespread in the past 60 years. The reason that the native american genes were so widespread is because of the early widespread rape of the native women.

A lot of that happened, but a lot of the sex was consentual. My great grandparents who were Natives did not have my grandparents because of rape, for example.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Why do you keep saying economic stimulation? Do you not watch the news, or do you only watch Bill O'Reilly? Just because the US has more money than the entirety of Europe does not make us more prosperous. One of the measures of how good a country is doing is the gap between rich and poor, which we have the highest (of the democracies,) the amount of unemployement and poverty (which we have the highest of) and the quality and ease of life. You and I have easy lives as we have good jobs and are healthy. Go to a trailer park in the south, go to the ghetto of The Bronx, think they're living the sweet life? Go to a McDonalds and look at anyone who eats there more than once a week, think they're really happy in their skin-tight sweatpants and heavy breathing because they got winded eating their 800 calorie big mac and large soda?

It just means that our rich are really successful, not that our poor are relatively unsuccessful. Are you bothered by the successes of others? Our unemployment is not as bad as that of most of the countries in Europe, and our "poor" people are fat and have cell phones, stereos, and X Boxes. Americans have major opportunities to come out of "poverty" too. People who really, really want to be successful here and put out major effort generally are successful.

Why are we the economic powerhouse of the world, why do we lead in business and technology, and why are we able to lead the world in foreign aid? Did you ever catch where I have said that we give more than HALF of the world hunger relief food? How do we do that? It is our success that allows us to do all of that.

Do you listen to nobody but Keith Olbermann?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Pure, unabridged capitalism is about greed and the exploitation of the weak minded. The people who eat at McDonalds several times a week are addicted to it, yes, you can get addicted to saturated fat. Their very good at advertising, and advertising prays on the weak minded. It's not as much their own faults as people think it is. People tell them to tune out the advertisers, or to get some will power. A physical addiction like that is not so easy to overcome, I became addicted to caffeine in college. Went through a withdrawal period of 5 days of brutal migraines. They were born less intelligent than myself and you, they shouldn't be prayed on because of that.

I love McDonalds. Do you think they should be banned?

As I have told you, I believe in laws concerning capitalism. Unitl you can tell me that distribution of grades is a good idea, don't tell me that capitalism is a bad idea. How do you feel about distribution of cross country times? What effect would such a thing have on efforts and outcomes?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

As athiests we believe in the survival of the fittest, but as liberals (and you said you have some liberal beliefs) we also believe in humanitarianism. McDonalds is a money hungry evil corporation that prays on people. Heart disease cam come from fatty foods as easily as it can from smoking. To me McDonalds is no better than the Tabacco conglomrate

The government should help people who honestly cannot help themselves. I believe in disability payments and so forth. I just think that success should be encouraged and rewarded instead of punished. It is what is fair, and it results in the best performances. Good economic performances end up benefitting the system as a whole.

I agree that McDonalds is like a tobacco company, but I am a big believer in freedom and personal responsibility. McDonalds, Marlboro, Budweiser, and marijuana and even heroin companies should be allowed to trade and prosper. They should not be allowed to pin people down and force their products on them, but consentual trade of the products should be allowed. Freedom is a virtue.

You also remember George Bush, Dick Cheney, and the CIA flat out lying to congress about the weapons of mass distruction while the UN inspectors said that they weren't?

People can't control themselves though. And advertisers pray on that. Once they get them hooked with advertising, it becomes a physical addiction. That's the problem. You love McDonalds, sounds like you have been brainwashed. How can you possibly like that? Fat tastes disgusting until you have a dependancy on it. Some McDonalds still use trans fats. Trans fats can be as addictive as nicotine. You know that nicotine has NO taste. Humans have no receptors for it in either our tongues or our noses, it's put there for no other reason than to addict people. Light cigarettes have fiber glass in them for no reason other than to cut you so the nicotine gets in you faster. What's different between the cigarette conglomerate CEO and a drug dealer? I know what it is. $100 million dollars of donations tot he Republican party.

You know you just crapped all over your republican economic idea right? You say that the rich are super sucessful and the poor aren't. Shouldn't the rich create more jobs and better pay for their employees, which creates prosperity across the range? Of course it doesn't, anyone who knows history knows that. Conservatives forget that greed is one of the major forces of people, even though they happen to be the majority of the CEOs.

I still don't understand how you think that the financial crisis isn't part of the $11 trillion dollars that were spent on a stupid war. I don't get it at all. Where the fuck do you people think that the military's money comes from? How do you not realize it comes directly out of our economy? Yes, the republican congress taking down all the red tape and letting banks loan to people who shouldn't have loans caused the banks to collapse, but but a reduction of the average person of $37,000 dollars stopped spending. A strong economy is when people spend, take their money and putting it into the military and haloburten destroys the economy.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You also remember George Bush, Dick Cheney, and the CIA flat out lying to congress about the weapons of mass distruction while the UN inspectors said that they weren't?

The U.N. inspectors had such good psychic ability that they could detect the nonexistence of weapons? How did they do that? Not finding something proves its nonexistence? Going on intelligence from the Clinton Administration, the Senate (Democrats included), the CIA, and five other governments is "lying"?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

People can't control themselves though. And advertisers pray on that. Once they get them hooked with advertising, it becomes a physical addiction. That's the problem. You love McDonalds, sounds like you have been brainwashed. How can you possibly like that? Fat tastes disgusting until you have a dependancy on it. Some McDonalds still use trans fats. Trans fats can be as addictive as nicotine. You know that nicotine has NO taste. Humans have no receptors for it in either our tongues or our noses, it's put there for no other reason than to addict people. Light cigarettes have fiber glass in them for no reason other than to cut you so the nicotine gets in you faster. What's different between the cigarette conglomerate CEO and a drug dealer? I know what it is. $100 million dollars of donations tot he Republican party.

I was "brainwashed" into liking McDondalds? What I remember is eating their food when I was about two years old and loving it.

So, what exactly are you proposing? Do you want to ban tobacco and transfat?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You know you just crapped all over your republican economic idea right? You say that the rich are super sucessful and the poor aren't. Shouldn't the rich create more jobs and better pay for their employees, which creates prosperity across the range? Of course it doesn't, anyone who knows history knows that. Conservatives forget that greed is one of the major forces of people, even though they happen to be the majority of the CEOs.

The more money the rich have, the more people they are going to hire. Do you deny that?

The fact that greed is one of the major forces of people is the principle behind capitalism and a fact totally overlooked by socialism. Are you trolling?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

I still don't understand how you think that the financial crisis isn't part of the $11 trillion dollars that were spent on a stupid war. I don't get it at all. Where the fuck do you people think that the military's money comes from? How do you not realize it comes directly out of our economy? Yes, the republican congress taking down all the red tape and letting banks loan to people who shouldn't have loans caused the banks to collapse, but but a reduction of the average person of $37,000 dollars stopped spending. A strong economy is when people spend, take their money and putting it into the military and haloburten destroys the economy.

There was a tax increase?

Why do you ignore Barney Frank and Maxine Waters' pressure to lower loan standards? That is the main problem at the root of the mess. Do you even acknowledge its existence? AIG and other companies at the top of the economy suffered tremendously because people who should not have gotten loans in the first place could not pay back their loans. When the top falls, the whole system starts crumbling, hence the bailouts. Right?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The U.N. inspectors had such good psychic ability that they could detect the nonexistence of weapons? How did they do that? Not finding something proves its nonexistence? Going on intelligence from the Clinton Administration, the Senate (Democrats included), the CIA, and five other governments is "lying"?

Uh... during the Clinton administration there were WMDs in Iraq, they didn't finish dismantling them until 1998. What other governments were those? Every other government agreed with the UN, which was the reason that no one fully backed the US in the war.

I was "brainwashed" into liking McDondalds? What I remember is eating their food when I was about two years old and loving it.

a 2 year old is weak minded, doing really good advertising on a weak minded person is essentially the definition of brainwashing

So, what exactly are you proposing? Do you want to ban tobacco and transfat?

Um... trans fats are illegal. And yes. People always bitch that using corn for ethanol will create a food shortage. Corn and Tobacco thrive in the exact same climate. One is essentially poison, the other is alternative energy. I don't see the dilemma.

The more money the rich have, the more people they are going to hire. Do you deny that?

No, as I've said many times, the rich do not create jobs, their companies do, and the companies have a completely separate tax code. And no, having more money creates more low paid jobs and higher revenues, most of which goes into the salaries of the top 5% of the company. Conservative philosophy on business taxes is like playing chess and thinking one move ahead, whereas liberal business philosophy is like playing chess and thinking 5 moves ahead.

Higher taxes on the corporations creates tax breaks for the middle class (which ist he driving force of the economy). The middle class will then spend more, which goes back into the companies, which then increases their revenues, which in turn creates more jobs. No one is denying that companies having more money creates jobs, but giving it to them, while taxing the middle class more steeply creates a bottleneck.

The fact that greed is one of the major forces of people is the principle behind capitalism and a fact totally overlooked by socialism.

And capitalism. Trickle down economics does not work because of it.

There was a tax increase?

College students paid taxes for the first time in American history. The federal tax rate jumped 14% in Bush's 2nd term and the debt continued to skyrocket. Did you forget that or did you watch Fox the whole time and never heard of it? You do realize that the national debt will eventually have to be paid off right? Obama will raise taxes. Don't blame him though, every liberal in the world told you that a runaway military budget would eventually cause a tax hike. Who does it is irrelevant, it's paying for Bush's war, it's Bush's tax hike. You keep dodging this question: Where do you think the military's money comes from?

Why do you ignore Barney Frank and Maxine Waters' pressure to lower loan standards? That is the main problem at the root of the mess. Do you even acknowledge its existence? AIG and other companies at the top of the economy suffered tremendously because people who should not have gotten loans in the first place could not pay back their loans. When the top falls, the whole system starts crumbling, hence the bailouts. Right?

Ever heard of the Community Reinvestment Act? It was passed by the Clinton administration and it gave loans to poor people... with a low interest rate, so that it could be paid off. And people below a certain point could not qualify, or would be helped by the government. Bush's congress kept the part about giving loans to poor people, but took away the interest rate cap, the government aid, and the restrictions of who qualified. Barney Frank supported the bailout, he doesn't know shit about economics. Bailouts don't work, but neither do placing high interest rates on people who can't afford them.

Originally Posted by plg6067

If the americans just ignored the presence of the brits and just went on setting up their own government... I think there is not much the king could do. Britain didn't just give the Indians independence either, they jail them, they killed thousands, but they realized that it was impossible to jail them all....

That's not the reason Britain granted India independence. They did so because of post-war economic reasons. If not for the war, it is quite possible that India could still be a British colony.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Uh... during the Clinton administration there were WMDs in Iraq, they didn't finish dismantling them until 1998. What other governments were those? Every other government agreed with the UN, which was the reason that no one fully backed the US in the war.

How do you know he had dismantled? He never demonstrated the destruction of all of the weapons, which he was required to do under the ceasefire. How do you know he dismantled?

Some of the other countries were countries that refused to help us because they have douche governments when it comes to fighting necessary fights. I think the other five were Israel, Britain, China, Germany, and France.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

a 2 year old is weak minded, doing really good advertising on a weak minded person is essentially the definition of brainwashing

I didn't have my driver's license or a bike then. My parents took me, and I wanted to go back again and again because the food tasted awesome. That is not brainwashing. It is the selling of a desirable product. It is why they are so enormously successful.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Um... trans fats are illegal. And yes. People always bitch that using corn for ethanol will create a food shortage. Corn and Tobacco thrive in the exact same climate. One is essentially poison, the other is alternative energy. I don't see the dilemma.

McDonalds is selling their trans fat foods illegally?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

No, as I've said many times, the rich do not create jobs, their companies do, and the companies have a completely separate tax code. And no, having more money creates more low paid jobs and higher revenues, most of which goes into the salaries of the top 5% of the company. Conservative philosophy on business taxes is like playing chess and thinking one move ahead, whereas liberal business philosophy is like playing chess and thinking 5 moves ahead.

They own the companies. It is their money. The more money they have in their pockets/banks, the more new businesses they can create. Have you noticed how people who get rich acting or playing sports very often start their own businesses? Why might that be??????????? In the cases of corporations, which are owned by shareholders, the more money the ownerS make, the more they stimulate the economy.

So, if the rich had less money, they would pay their employees more money?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Higher taxes on the corporations creates tax breaks for the middle class (which ist he driving force of the economy). The middle class will then spend more, which goes back into the companies, which then increases their revenues, which in turn creates more jobs. No one is denying that companies having more money creates jobs, but giving it to them, while taxing the middle class more steeply creates a bottleneck.

I want taxes on the middle class to be lowered too. The same principles apply.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

And capitalism. Trickle down economics does not work because of it.

Why is the United States such a success story?

Why did the Soviet Union collapse?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

College students paid taxes for the first time in American history. The federal tax rate jumped 14% in Bush's 2nd term and the debt continued to skyrocket. Did you forget that or did you watch Fox the whole time and never heard of it? You do realize that the national debt will eventually have to be paid off right? Obama will raise taxes. Don't blame him though, every liberal in the world told you that a runaway military budget would eventually cause a tax hike. Who does it is irrelevant, it's paying for Bush's war, it's Bush's tax hike. You keep dodging this question: Where do you think the military's money comes from?

Bush is not much of a fiscal conservative. Didn't Keith Olbermann tell you that?

The military's money comes from taxes, which we should have. That does not mean we can't cut your socialist nonsense and lower taxes.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Ever heard of the Community Reinvestment Act? It was passed by the Clinton administration and it gave loans to poor people... with a low interest rate, so that it could be paid off. And people below a certain point could not qualify, or would be helped by the government. Bush's congress kept the part about giving loans to poor people, but took away the interest rate cap, the government aid, and the restrictions of who qualified. Barney Frank supported the bailout, he doesn't know shit about economics. Bailouts don't work, but neither do placing high interest rates on people who can't afford them.

I don't know why you keep trying to attack me with Bush. He is a fucking dildo. He is not even a fiscal conservative. Drop it about Bush. But... he did not create the problem. He apparently did make it worse.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

How do you know he had dismantled? He never demonstrated the destruction of all of the weapons, which he was required to do under the ceasefire. How do you know he dismantled?

Some of the other countries were countries that refused to help us because they have douche governments when it comes to fighting necessary fights. I think the other five were Israel, Britain, China, Germany, and France.

No, they had governments run by intelligent people and knew that spending money on a stupid war is a stupid idea.

I didn't have my driver's license or a bike then. My parents took me, and I wanted to go back again and again because the food tasted awesome. That is not brainwashing. It is the selling of a desirable product. It is why they are so enormously successful.

The human body is evolutionally repulsed by large amounts of fat. It only tastes good once you're already addicted to it. It's desirable because it's addictive, not because of it's taste.

McDonalds is selling their trans fat foods illegally?

McDonalds doesn't sell trans fats in places where it's banned: http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/ne...fats-from-menu

They own the companies. It is their money. The more money they have in their pockets/banks, the more new businesses they can create. Have you noticed how people who get rich acting or playing sports very often start their own businesses? Why might that be??????????? In the cases of corporations, which are owned by shareholders, the more money the ownerS make, the more they stimulate the economy.

No, the more the people spend the more they stimulate the economy. You're talking about the effect, not the cause.

So, if the rich had less money, they would pay their employees more money?

If their employees don't get tax breaks, how will they buy things which is the companies revenue?

I want taxes on the middle class to be lowered too. The same principles apply.

You supported a war that put the country 11 trillion dollars in debt, you can't have both.

Why is the United States such a success story?

You do realize that the biggest economic growths in the last 100 years were during FDR, JFK, and Clinton, while the biggest economic declines were during W, Reagan, and Nixon right? Three of the presidents I mentioned were tax and spend liberals, three of them were trickle down economics and big military. Lets see if we can match then up.

Why did the Soviet Union collapse?

They had a runaway military budget and a pure communist rule that caused the working class and the upper class to be poor, which created little wealth, and therefore no money to support their insane military budget.

Bush is not much of a fiscal conservative. Didn't Keith Olbermann tell you that?

Name one Republican in the past 100 years that was a fiscal conservative. The word "Conservative" when talking about republican politicians does not mean financial conservative. It did at one time, but now it refers to their backwards religious views. Every republican supports a huge government and will spend as much money on the military as they want with no regards to where the money comes from.

The military's money comes from taxes, which we should have. That does not mean we can't cut your socialist nonsense and lower taxes.

Then how do you plan to pay for it? The idea that future generations will pay for it is just stupid. The amount of money that was spent in Iraq alone could have sent every single American to college, given every single American 30 years worth of health care, or created millions of jobs and depleted the country's carbon footprint if it had been invested in alternative energy.

You do realize that the biggest economic growths in the last 100 years were during FDR, JFK, and Clinton, while the biggest economic declines were during W, Reagan, and Nixon right? Three of the presidents I mentioned were tax and spend liberals, three of them were trickle down economics and big military. Lets see if we can match then up.

I just wanted to add that this does not prove capitalism fails, it proves capitalism thrives. Capitalism isn't about spending money you don't have, it's about gaining money from investors, using that money to help your corporation grow and rake in more profits for you and your investors, and repeating this process over and over again eventually building something big and strong.

Assuming you wanted to prove UM's ideas about capitalism wrong by responding to his input, I'd say you're wrongly correlating political ideals with economic systems.

No, who said capitalism is wrong? Capitalism is strong, I believe (correctly) that in order to work it has to be controlled, UM believes (incorrectly) that is should be unrestrained.

Under FDR, JFK, and Clinton the government itself acted in a capitalistic way by investing in public works projects, which created thousands of jobs. The people who are looking for jobs aren't college educated white collars worker that corporations will hire, they are uneducated, blue collars works and will only be hired for building things. during FDR it was roads and bridges (New Deal), under Kennedy it was steel and materials (for the space agency,) and under Clinton it was a combination of utilities and some alternative energies.

Trickle down economics is not capitalism, it's capitalism without restraint. Tax and Spend is not socialism, it's capitalism with restraints.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

The human body is evolutionally repulsed by large amounts of fat. It only tastes good once you're already addicted to it. It's desirable because it's addictive, not because of it's taste.

That is a major generalization. Lots of people love fat. People eat it in the first place because it is desirable. They get addicted to it because it is desirable. Are you claiming that people don't like the taste of it at first but eat it any way? Are you claiming you know better than I do whether or not I like the taste of McDonalds' food? I love the taste of it. Fact.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

McDonalds doesn't sell trans fats in places where it's banned: http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/ne...fats-from-menu

That's freedom for you.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

No, the more the people spend the more they stimulate the economy. You're talking about the effect, not the cause.

The more money a person has, the more money the person spends. Do you honestly deny that?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

If their employees don't get tax breaks, how will they buy things which is the companies revenue?

You're preaching to the Pope.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You supported a war that put the country 11 trillion dollars in debt, you can't have both.

You can if you cut the real garbage. Besides, such large scale wars of ours are rare, as they should be. This is an isolated revolutionary event taking place. Your socialist programs are not.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You do realize that the biggest economic growths in the last 100 years were during FDR, JFK, and Clinton, while the biggest economic declines were during W, Reagan, and Nixon right? Three of the presidents I mentioned were tax and spend liberals, three of them were trickle down economics and big military. Lets see if we can match then up.

That does not answer my question. I asked you why the United States is such a success.

Congress makes laws, not presidents. Besides, Republicans suck too. You are preaching to the Pope again. I just think Republicans don't suck AS bad economically as Democrats. Both factions of the Republicratic Party suck. You don't have to keep telling me that one of them does. Why do you?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

They had a runaway military budget and a pure communist rule that caused the working class and the upper class to be poor, which created little wealth, and therefore no money to support their insane military budget.

What' the problem with pure communist rule?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Name one Republican in the past 100 years that was a fiscal conservative. The word "Conservative" when talking about republican politicians does not mean financial conservative. It did at one time, but now it refers to their backwards religious views. Every republican supports a huge government and will spend as much money on the military as they want with no regards to where the money comes from.

You are such a Republicrat!!!!!!! Get this black and white thinking out of your head! I AM NOT A FUCKING REPUBLICAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Then how do you plan to pay for it? The idea that future generations will pay for it is just stupid. The amount of money that was spent in Iraq alone could have sent every single American to college, given every single American 30 years worth of health care, or created millions of jobs and depleted the country's carbon footprint if it had been invested in alternative energy.

I already told you I believe in cutting a lot. Did you see where I said I believe in taxes? I am seriously questioning whether you are reading my posts. Are you? If not, I don't want to continue this. I can talk to a brick wall without even getting on the internet.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Capitalism is strong, I believe (correctly) that in order to work it has to be controlled, UM believes (incorrectly) that is should be unrestrained.

I told you several times in this thread and several times in others that I don't believe that. This is ridiculous. Are you a troll?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

That is a major generalization. Lots of people love fat. People eat it in the first place because it is desirable. They get addicted to it because it is desirable. Are you claiming that people don't like the taste of it at first but eat it any way? Are you claiming you know better than I do whether or not I like the taste of McDonalds' food? I love the taste of it. Fact.

No, it's a matter of deception. Tell a child something tastes good enough times, no matter how badly it tastes, they will say they like it. Kids are suggestible, and when they eat it they tell themselves that they like it. Autosuggestion is just as powerful as external suggestion.

That's freedom for you.

For someone who believes in paying for health care, you should be more grateful for that.

The more money a person has, the more money the person spends. Do you honestly deny that?

You missed the point entirely. Trickle down economics doesn't give people more money, there is no trickle down. It's like communism, a great idea that fails miserably in practice.

You can if you cut the real garbage. Besides, such large scale wars of ours are rare, as they should be. This is an isolated revolutionary event taking place. Your socialist programs are not.

My "socialist" programs are in practice all over the world and have never lead to a national downfall. Unlimited military power however has brought down the most powerful countries over and over again.

That does not answer my question. I asked you why the United States is such a success.

Because every 4 years we get a new president. The conservatives create an enormous debt and build up the military, the liberals pay the debt off and create a surplus and cut the military down. The US is such a success because the liberal governments get more done than the conservative ones. 2 steps forwards for 1 step backwards will result in progression.

Congress makes laws, not presidents. Besides, Republicans suck too. You are preaching to the Pope again. I just think Republicans don't suck AS bad economically as Democrats. Both factions of the Republicratic Party suck. You don't have to keep telling me that one of them does. Why do you?

The red tape for the ways banks lend money was taken down in 2002, a red president and a red congress.

What' the problem with pure communist rule?

It doesn't work. Greed consumes people, same problem as capitalism. Oddly enough, the solution lies with a combination of both. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

You are such a Republicrat!!!!!!! Get this black and white thinking out of your head! I AM NOT A FUCKING REPUBLICAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I never called you one. I called the congress and president that you supported republican. I always call you conservative. You can stop telling me that people around you call you liberal. You live in Mississippi, extreme conservatives calling you liberal makes you a moderate conservative.

I already told you I believe in cutting a lot. Did you see where I said I believe in taxes? I am seriously questioning whether you are reading my posts. Are you? If not, I don't want to continue this. I can talk to a brick wall without even getting on the internet.

You believe in cutting taxes for both rich and poor and everyone in between though. You can't run a government with not enough taxes. Someone has to pay off the 11 trillion dollar national debt. The middle class is the force behind our economy. The upper class create jobs... but the amount that they are taxed does not cause cutbacks, people not buying their products does. Taxing the middle class causes people to buy less, so the corporations have less money, so people loose their jobs.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

No, it's a matter of deception. Tell a child something tastes good enough times, no matter how badly it tastes, they will say they like it. Kids are suggestible, and when they eat it they tell themselves that they like it. Autosuggestion is just as powerful as external suggestion.

So I was mindfucked into thinking I thought it tasted good when I actually thought it tasted bad? Why didn't that work with broccoli?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

For someone who believes in paying for health care, you should be more grateful for that.

No way. Whether or not I eat trans fat is my decision, not the government's.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You missed the point entirely. Trickle down economics doesn't give people more money, there is no trickle down. It's like communism, a great idea that fails miserably in practice.

I didn't miss anything. You left out what results in more spending. The more money people have, the more they spend... and the more money other people get, and the more they spend... and the moe money other people get... etc. Business expansion results in job expansion and company effectiveness/inventiveness. It works.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

My "socialist" programs are in practice all over the world and have never lead to a national downfall. Unlimited military power however has brought down the most powerful countries over and over again.

We are the most successful country in the world.

I don't believe in "unlimited" military power.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Because every 4 years we get a new president. The conservatives create an enormous debt and build up the military, the liberals pay the debt off and create a surplus and cut the military down. The US is such a success because the liberal governments get more done than the conservative ones. 2 steps forwards for 1 step backwards will result in progression.

The United States is the only country with liberals in the government? Or are you saying we have the most liberal government? Both are false. It must be something else, which is our world's highest level of capitalism.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

The red tape for the ways banks lend money was taken down in 2002, a red president and a red congress.

That was a problem, just like the problem the red tape should have been there to stop.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

It doesn't work. Greed consumes people, same problem as capitalism. Oddly enough, the solution lies with a combination of both. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

But the capitalist component needs to be far stronger than the socialist component. That is the secret of our success.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

I never called you one. I called the congress and president that you supported republican. I always call you conservative. You can stop telling me that people around you call you liberal. You live in Mississippi, extreme conservatives calling you liberal makes you a moderate conservative.

Tell me what is "moderately conservative" about supporting the legality of all drugs, American flag desecration, gay marriage, interracial marriage, prostitution, polygamy, the end of dry counties, the end of strip club zoning ordinances, 100% separation of church and state, abortion, and pornography.

I supported some of Bush's policies, clearly not all of them. I didn't even support most of them. I am a free thinker, not a cult member.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You believe in cutting taxes for both rich and poor and everyone in between though. You can't run a government with not enough taxes. Someone has to pay off the 11 trillion dollar national debt. The middle class is the force behind our economy. The upper class create jobs... but the amount that they are taxed does not cause cutbacks, people not buying their products does. Taxing the middle class causes people to buy less, so the corporations have less money, so people loose their jobs.

They should all get tax cuts, and lots and lots of government crocks of shit need to go away. Also, tax reductions can result in a better economy that results in more tax revenue even though the percentages are reduced.

That's enough you two.

We're supposed to be talking about weed here.

Originally Posted by Xei

That's enough you two.

We're supposed to be talking about weed here.

Those damn hippie pot smokers should have their Godless asses locked up with all of the flag burning queer hookers.

Anyone got a lighter, need to light this blunt.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Those damn hippie pot smokers should have their Godless asses locked up with all of the flag burning queer hookers.

I have a picture of me somewhere burning a flag

*raises hand* I like to chew the fat on steaks. The juices taste good to me, but I dont swallow the fat itself

mcdonalds...well...I eat there once in a while, I much prefer taco bell though~~

OMG back to weed

I have never tried it, but seeing as it's the topic of this thread (or is supposed to be )...

sorry if this has already been posted, and I'm sure it's been mentioned near one hundrd times, but...

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...ize_marijuana/

Time to pull California out of the recession... with pot!

Originally Posted by WakataDreamer

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...ize_marijuana/

Time to pull California out of the recession... with pot!

Guess who flat out said he is opposed to doing that. Barack Obama.

I dont see how Obama has anything to do with this. This has been a slow movement for the past several years....