Welcome to Thunderdome

Knowing how to wield a penis almost makes it a bonus.

GORDON wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:41 pm Knowing how to wield a penis almost makes it a bonus.

That was Perry Ferrell's opinion years ago before hooking up with a dude, and was surprised just how wrong he had been.

I really hope this is parody, but it's not. It's just a longtime D upset that his team lost their echo chamber.

It's hard to see how the whining isn't about some people not being censored, any more. It's kinda ..... Insidiously evil?

Well, I mean... he's 84.

He's got a lot of life experience, so he should know better.

Leisher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 2:33 pm He's got a lot of life experience, so he should know better.

I feel like that curve drops off somewhere around 75 +/- as people go senile.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 2:38 pm

Leisher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 2:33 pm He's got a lot of life experience, so he should know better.

I feel like that curve drops off somewhere around 75 +/- as people go senile.

How old is our current president again? And how old was the last one?

Leisher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 2:56 pm

TheCatt wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 2:38 pm

Leisher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 2:33 pm He's got a lot of life experience, so he should know better.

I feel like that curve drops off somewhere around 75 +/- as people go senile.

How old is our current president again? And how old was the last one?

I'm not arguing. I don't know why those people ended up there.

I wasn't arguing either. I agree with your point and just extended to show how the two parties have given us worst case scenarios as options lately.

I genuinely am super proud of my votes for Johnson and JoJo. Fuck the establishment!

From a Twitter user's bio:

#neverrepublican #VoteBlueToSaveDemocracy

Do you think she understands what democracy means or how irrelevant it is when you only vote for one party in a two party system, "no matter what"?

Also, Robert Reich has a very appropriate last name...
He probably would have loved getting people to rat out their Jewish neighbors.

Leisher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 8:02 pm He probably would have loved getting people to rat out their Jewish neighbors.

He's more of a Democratic Socialist. Not even a Socialist.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 8:16 pm

Leisher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 11, 2022 8:02 pm He probably would have loved getting people to rat out their Jewish neighbors.

He's more of a Democratic Socialist. Not even a Socialist.

Democratic Socialists are just Socialists trying to make their horseshit more appealing.

Also, I was just implying that he is an absolute trash human being. He is easily one of the most divisive people on Twitter. Every post is either spewing hate or full of misinformation.

I don't love him. I guess most of my perception of him is rooted in his time from the Clinton administration.

I don't see him as a threat to anything though. Not enough influence or power

TheCatt wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 12:08 pm I don't see him as a threat to anything though. Not enough influence or power

Him? No. The combined sum of the same message from all of the paid shills/propagandists and their followers? Yes.

At some level, I don't disagree with them. And neither do you given your anti wall street comments. Wealth and income inequalities are issues that need to be addressed. I'd still like to see how much would be fixed just by having a higher minimum wage.

But when it delves I to socialism and antiwork, etc, count me out

TheCatt wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 2:02 pm And neither do you given your anti wall street comments.

I am very much anti-"this" Wall St. (The original intention of Wall St. was fine.) and out of control government spending. It's the later that puts me at direct odds with the Robert Reichs of the world. Well, that and the fact that I'm not stirring up division and encouraging hatred.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 2:02 pm Wealth and income inequalities are issues that need to be addressed.

To a point, yes. I still think humanity is at a stage where need haves and have nots. We're not mature enough as a species to continue growing without financial purpose.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 2:02 pm I'd still like to see how much would be fixed just by having a higher minimum wage.

A conversation for elsewhere.

Leisher wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 3:43 pm I still think humanity is at a stage where need haves and have nots

Sure, but do we need abject poverty + $100 Billionaires.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Mon Dec 12, 2022 5:03 pm Sure, but do we need abject poverty + $100 Billionaires.

Honestly, yes.

First, human nature is a real thing. Some people work harder. Some people want more. Some people are smarter. Trying to equalize those things means holding down our best and brightest because there's no way to improve those traits in all others.

Second, you need human beings to want and need. That is what drives us as a species. "Necessity is the mother of invention."

Third, go ahead and draw the line at both ends of your spectrum. Now show me where everyone on Earth will finally be happy with the lines you've drawn. We all know that no such line exists. In fact, more people will be unsatisfied with your line than satisfied.

Now caveat to that: I 100% think every person and corporation needs to pay the taxes they are required by law to pay. I believe all loopholes need to be eliminated when found. I want our government to be properly funded so it is able to provide what the country needs. However, I also don't think people should be paying ridiculous tax rates because the government is poorly managed and wastes money. If the government continues to allow tax loopholes, that is THEIR fault, not some billionaire's. If the government runs out of money, that's THEIR fault and we need to let them fail so the people suffer. Why? Because then the people can vote in a new government...or kill the old one. The whole "my life and country sucks because Elon Musk has too much money" argument I see is the height of selfishness and stupidity. AOC wore a several thousand dollar dress to the Met Gala that said, "Eat the rich", was a bartender before becoming a Senator, now is a multimillionaire after being elected, and drives an expensive Tesla. She's now facing ethics violations. She's also a fucking icon to the morons who make such arguments. Do billionaires make their fortunes through other people's work? Absolutely, but there's an argument that without the billionaires' funding those people have no opportunity to work. Do billionaires fuck over people as much as governments? Not even close. Sorry, this was a mini side rant.

Fourth, the second you draw those lines, the second you start taking money from people you deem to be too rich and give it to those you deem too poor, you're in a socialist system and history does not favor you. What is the difference between taking money from a billionaire and saying, "You have too much, others need this more" versus doing the same thing to someone in the middle class? We know there IS a difference, but really, there is no difference.

Do I want people to suffer? Of course not. However, I very much believe in human nature and reality. The reality is that if you make too easy, humanity stagnates and begins to fail. Look around the U.S. right now and tell me I'm wrong.

People need adversity to thrive.

The government have no interest in making sure money gets spent wisely. Quite the contrary . The people in the government are the one who benefit from it being spent unwisely.

The government spends at least ten times as much as, as you put it, "provide wht the country needs.". The rest is them doing favors for each other.