 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
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?
|
|
Bookmarks