Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted  Edited by TheSadBandit
7 hours ago, rapperdan said:

you guys remember the irish?

I'm so pissed they never even considered to join our culture of the americas.

after all look at these apes.

saint-pattys-day.png

 

you guys ever think we should you know accept immigration as something we are well built upon.

also will we ever come up with maybe a new insult or reasoning?

I have concluded that from what it seems americans are well scared of the unknown so we just call it apes aka a penis extra small syndrome may aswell just say your granny is a tranny to all immigrants.

you guys know whats even more odd?

this dude 696px-Rudy_Giuliani.jpg and so many others atm who are fighting against the exact reason they are here tbh I do wonder what his grandparents would say to him if they where still alive.

long story short I don't think the chinese where not humans the irish the blacks the italians and what now the muslims?

 

all in all I swear I question what is wrong with society as a whole.

fyi if you think immigrants are bad when are we going to give this land back to the natives and leave, because I sure as hell know that any person who is against immigrants atm is not a native american and is a descendant of immigrants

I'm against illegal immigration, not legal immigration, if someone goes through the due process of becoming an American citizen, then I am all for them being here, but if they aren't going to be tax-paying citizens, then they should be deported.

 

As for the Native American part, they also pay taxes, if they live on the Federal land they were given for their tribes, they only pay Federal taxes (they are exempt from State tax), but if they live off that piece of land, and they live elsewhere in the state, the pay both Federal and State taxes. So even then, the Native Americans are tax-paying citizens.

 

If you want to play the immigrant game though, technically the first humans ever (Hominins, or however it's spelled) lived in Africa 7 million years ago, and they didn't emerge into Europe until 5 million years later (2 million years ago). Then sometime after that, they crossed the Beringia land bridge, which was the strip of ice that used to connect present day Alaska with present day Russia, and the first "Native Americans" were created that way. Throughout history each tribe would fight for power, which lead to 3 big civilizations being known in today's history, the Aztecs (Mexican area), the Mayans (Guatemala area), and the Incas (Peru & Argentina area). They would kill each other for power of the Americas, and they would use spears and pointy rocks to kill each other, but it's survival of the fittest, so the Aztecs would always beat the smaller tribes around them, conquering them. How is that kind of conquering any different than the one the Spanish, English, and rest of Europe did to America? It's not, just because they were more developed, and had more experience winning wars in the Eastern Hemisphere doesn't mean that they did wrong. That was like 500 years ago, stop basing things that happened 400-500 years ago in today's culture, as we are not killing Native Americans who "rightfully owned the land" when they killed other Native Americans for that land. If you're going to use that term of "Native American land" please tell me how many tribes of Native Americans lived on that land, and how many fought for that land, because they weren't all peacefully living in the jungle, minding their own business. 

 

Edit: added a little bit about "immigrants" in the US.

Edited by TheSadBandit

Former Gmod Prop Hunt Admin

Former Media Team Team Leader

Former Media Team GFX Member

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Posted  Edited by DOOMSlayer_
8 hours ago, Aquaticfilly0 said:

Maybe Obama's were harder to accomplish, because they were worth more time?

 

You do know he went 'bankrupt' 3 times so he didn't have to pay the people who invested in him back, right? He may be rich, but that doesn't make him any smarter. And global warming? It is currently affecting the world. If he was a smart guy, he would acknowledge this, and try to make a change. Rather, he is bombing countries, talking about cake after, not remembering which place he bombed, and is taking responsibility for the North and South coming together.

 

"He went bankrupt 3 times." He has owned over 500 businesses that didint go bankrupt, thats a 99% success rate. Would like to see another rich guy with that many companies and that few failures. nobody is perfect. Also would like to pivot this point to how smart he is. He was able to manage a multi-billion dollar company with only a few failures. He also has stated in his book The Art Of The Deal that a tactic he uses is to look in a way dumber than he actually is so his opponents would underestimate him. it obviously worked on Hillary Clinton, who thought that she was far ahead of him, when in reality she wasnt at all.

Edited by DOOMSlayer_

 

 

 

L9frmI0.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


29 minutes ago, DOOMSlayer_ said:

"He went bankrupt 3 times." He has owned over 500 businesses that didint go bankrupt, thats a 99% success rate. Would like to see another rich guy with that many companies and that few failures. nobody is perfect. Also would like to pivot this point to how smart he is. He was able to manage a multi-billion dollar company with only a few failures. He also has stated in his book The Art Of The Deal that a tactic he uses is to look in a way dumber than he actually is so his opponents would underestimate him. it obviously worked on Hillary Clinton, who thought that she was far ahead of him, when in reality she wasnt at all.

Honestly, I see a lot of points that people have put that are addressed on only the Liberal media sites, Buzzfeed, CNN, etc., I'd say I'm a Trump Supporter, but I also have a broad understanding of what the media says about everything, and have come to the conclusion that Liberal media only wants to make Trump look bad, not even idolizing him slightly for all the good shit he has done, but instead, after almost 1 year of presidency, still call him an idiot for things that he does, and make him seem like a piece of shit he's not. 

 

14 hours ago, Jerry Hat Trick said:

Trump vacillates so much, that its hard to take him seriously.

Some may see it as being elusive & hard to pin down, but I seriously believe he is an idiot in over his head & might very well get impeached.

He won't get impeached. At least not like *cough* Bill Clinton *cough* husband of Hillary Clinton, the wife on the 42nd President of the US, who was in fact impeached. Also, I would suggest you read more conservative media sites as well, and maybe follow Trump on Twitter to keep updated as to what he does, because he really isn't an idiot that's over his head like Liberal media states. 

 

I myself, I see both sides, and I choose the one that's best fitted, because today, you can't base yourself off the words of one media source, or media sources that are leaning toward one political party.


Former Gmod Prop Hunt Admin

Former Media Team Team Leader

Former Media Team GFX Member

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


15 hours ago, Jerry Hat Trick said:

Trump vacillates so much, that its hard to take him seriously.

Some may see it as being elusive & hard to pin down, but I seriously believe he is an idiot in over his head & might very well get impeached.

Impeached for what exactly? You can't impeach someone just because you don't like them. Also Impeachment ≠ Removal from office.


 

 

 

L9frmI0.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


14 hours ago, Xy said:

Mostly the rich, which is problematic, to say the least. Just because you reduce taxes doesn't mean the government is less expensive to maintain. But why should he care? He doesn't have to drive on our roads, use social services, food stamps, or anything that our tax dollars pay for. But this isn't something trump is to blame for, as it probably would've happened the same way with Clinton, someone who is so out of touch that she carries fucking hot sauce in her purse to seem hip.

Sorry to respond to this so late. You're slightly right, reduce in taxes doesn't mean the government is less easy to maintain, but tax cuts is better for the people living in the country. Thanks to the tax cuts, more jobs have opened up, which means more people to have jobs, which means less people out of poverty, and less unemployed people. If 250 million people were to pay 14% tax, and all 250 million people were to make 20,000 yearly, it's the same as 350 million people paying 10% tax, with the same wage. The difference is that people would go from having $17,200 after paying taxes to $18,000, which gives people more pocket money, which means more money for people to spend, which then means more money in the "system". If you learned in economics, the more money in the system, the better it is for economy, and that's what Trump is doing, he is cutting the tax percentage, but at the same time, that creates jobs, and more people to pay taxes, and he has made it so that no money has been lost. He has also cut on useless government projects that had lots of tax dollars invested in it, like Obamacare for example, and replaced it with the AHCA, which just makes it so healthcare isn't free, because we don't live in a socialist society, because that doesn't work. As for the tax cuts, it gives 350 million people $800 more pocket money, if you did the math right, and you said that all the people spent half their money earned, and saved the rest, in total for a year, 250 million people would have $2,150,000,000,000 ($2.15 trillion) to spend, that is with the taxes right now, but with the tax cuts that Trump has done, $2,250,000,000,000(2.25 trillion) to spend, which is a $100 billion increase into the cash flow system, which is what has created all these jobs, and having that extra $100 billion in the market means expansion and evolution, and it means the unemployment rate would decrease, also decreasing the amount of money needed for government services such as welfare, and decreasing the number of people that are in need of these services. This statistic I gathered using the lowest minimum wage, so it's as if everyone in the US made $20,000 yearly, and if the people only paid income tax, but you get the point, there will always be an increase of money in the market because of these tax cuts, which in reality benefit our country. 

 

Something you might note, in a free healthcare society, doctors would become slave to the government, and in socialism people don't have the desire to succeed, instead they have the desire to stay average. Different from capitalism that is truly survival of the fittest, it pushes people to try to become the best they possibly can so they don't starve, which pushes both evolution, and the wanting of succeeding. Of course, we have some socialist things, like welfare, that uses our tax dollars to give to those who are seeking a job, and trying to contribute to society, but their cards weren't dealt right for them. But if they are willing to put the work in, they will get out of the Food stamp life they live, as those services aren't meant to keep someone alive for the entirety of their life.

 

In a society where all our "needs" are given to us, we would pay a large number of taxes, which would mean less money in the market, because people wouldn't spend as much, which leads to less jobs, and less people there to pay for taxes, and more people depending on the tax money in order to "survive", because there aren't any jobs available, and people would be laid off. The thing about a society in which everything is given to you for free (socialism), is that you can succeed in doing it, but only until you run out of someone else's money, which is why during the Obama presidency it was easier and cheaper to import goods from China, which were poorly made, and cheaper to produce and import, than creating them in America. Importing those goods from China instead of producing them here in America means less jobs for Americans, and for people who thought that stopping the import of Chinese goods would lead to automation, although it is cheaper, companies rely on the money they give their employees to survive, since it's all a vicious cycle, the more money someone has, the more inclined they are to spend it, which means there is more money in the flow, and the government is happy, and the people are happy. The moment you raise taxes, people are going to stop spending as much, which means there is less money in market, which means that people aren't going to be spending as much, because the government would be taking more money than needed, and that is when there are less jobs, and there are more people on the streets and wanting these government services. 

 

It's why a free market economy is so good, but at the same time is bad. It's good because people would have no government intervention in the purchase or sale of goods, and it would be up to the people to maintain the country, so if a road is fucked up, it's up to the people who navigate on that road to fix it, which would make the need for the repair of that road much faster, and that's how the money is kept in the market. The bad thing about free market economies is that there is no such thing as social security, or pension, or a place for people who retire, because people would either have to save their own money, or work to death, which is why some socialist services are essential to keeping a country stable, so that the government can help those who truly need the help and can't participate in the market.

 

(I learned all of this in economics, both High School and University)


Former Gmod Prop Hunt Admin

Former Media Team Team Leader

Former Media Team GFX Member

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


4 hours ago, TheSadBandit said:

I'm against illegal immigration, not legal immigration, if someone goes through the due process of becoming an American citizen, then I am all for them being here, but if they aren't going to be tax-paying citizens, then they should be deported.

 

As for the Native American part, they also pay taxes, if they live on the Federal land they were given for their tribes, they only pay Federal taxes (they are exempt from State tax), but if they live off that piece of land, and they live elsewhere in the state, the pay both Federal and State taxes. So even then, the Native Americans are tax-paying citizens.

 

If you want to play the immigrant game though, technically the first humans ever (Hominins, or however it's spelled) lived in Africa 7 million years ago, and they didn't emerge into Europe until 5 million years later (2 million years ago). Then sometime after that, they crossed the Beringia land bridge, which was the strip of ice that used to connect present day Alaska with present day Russia, and the first "Native Americans" were created that way. Throughout history each tribe would fight for power, which lead to 3 big civilizations being known in today's history, the Aztecs (Mexican area), the Mayans (Guatemala area), and the Incas (Peru & Argentina area). They would kill each other for power of the Americas, and they would use spears and pointy rocks to kill each other, but it's survival of the fittest, so the Aztecs would always beat the smaller tribes around them, conquering them. How is that kind of conquering any different than the one the Spanish, English, and rest of Europe did to America? It's not, just because they were more developed, and had more experience winning wars in the Eastern Hemisphere doesn't mean that they did wrong. That was like 500 years ago, stop basing things that happened 400-500 years ago in today's culture, as we are not killing Native Americans who "rightfully owned the land" when they killed other Native Americans for that land. If you're going to use that term of "Native American land" please tell me how many tribes of Native Americans lived on that land, and how many fought for that land, because they weren't all peacefully living in the jungle, minding their own business. 

 

Edit: added a little bit about "immigrants" in the US.

tbh I do feel like we might be on somewhat of the same stance on that while I may be more inclined to the whole mass citizenship concept that others have proposed at times and well tbh I view it as a way for all the illegal immigrants to become legal in one foul sweep and inturn start paying taxes themselfs while also living a better life another thing that I know is that sadly I feel without almost all of them who work illegally america in my eyes it's self would collapse in around it's self and lose it's number one producer spots of things like corn and other farming products and without there labor I feel as though america it's self could not compete unless the government would be willing to shell out billions to every farm out there and in all honesty I don't see that happening to where all farms across the us can upgrade to automation of said farms because we can look at it this way we either provide and keep this low paying job and give them housing on a farm or we go with automation of all our farming jobs and nobody would get a job but the very view updating said automation.

3 hours ago, CrusTi said:

As someone who hated trump for the longest time, has see a different side to him. Hes not THAT bad and he is better then other presidents we have had, so im cool with him.

also if he can end the korean war every bad thing he has done in my eyes will be made up for. fyi here is the date of when this war started "The Korean War was a war between North Korea and South Korea. The war began on 25 June 1950" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Achievements

1 hour ago, TheSadBandit said:

If 250 million people were to pay 14% tax, and all 250 million people were to make 20,000 yearly, it's the same as 350 million people paying 10% tax, with the same wage.

Except not everybody has the same wage, some people are in poverty, and they shouldn't have to pay the taxes that the upper 1% of our society doesn't want to pay. The upper 20% are able to contribute back more than the lower 80%, so they should.  Some people make way too much money, in fact, some people have enough money to single-handedly end world hunger. If that isn't problematic to you, I don't know what is.

 

1 hour ago, TheSadBandit said:

He has also cut on useless government projects that had lots of tax dollars invested in it, like Obamacare for example, and replaced it with the AHCA, which just makes it so healthcare isn't free, because we don't live in a socialist society, because that doesn't work.

Yes, because things like the "environmental protection agency" are useless.

 

(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/02/12/trump-budget-seeks-23-percent-cut-at-epa-would-eliminate-dozens-of-programs/)

 

Yeah, healthcare isn't free, but nor is the military, and people have no problem with us spending 597 billion dollars a year on that (more than anywhere else in the world).

 

1 hour ago, TheSadBandit said:

This statistic I gathered using the lowest minimum wage, so it's as if everyone in the US made $20,000 yearly

Which is not enough to live on, also not realistic, because not everyone makes 20k a year.

 

1 hour ago, TheSadBandit said:

Something you might note, in a free healthcare society, doctors would become slave to the government, and in socialism people don't have the desire to succeed, instead they have the desire to stay average.

Full socialism isn't the answer, but if you look at the activities of our rich elite (buying politicians, tax evasion, and other fun things) capitalism doesn't work either.

 

1 hour ago, TheSadBandit said:

Different from capitalism that is truly survival of the fittest

Survival of the fittest at the cost of others. There are people who are homeless right at the same time as a billionaire is eating breakfast in their private jet, simply because they can afford to do so. This reminds me of a monarchy, the poorest wondering how they will secure food for the day, while the monarch is safe and well fed behind his castle walls.

 

1 hour ago, TheSadBandit said:

But if they are willing to put the work in, they will get out of the Food stamp life they live, as those services aren't meant to keep someone alive for the entirety of their life.

Lovely idea, but you can't get out of a food stamp life without getting a well-paying job. You'll be pressed to find one of those without a college education, which costs a lot of money. It's simply not an option for most people. Minimum wage is not enough to survive on. Once someone enters poverty, there are likely to find themselves trapped, unable to escape.

 

1 hour ago, TheSadBandit said:

In a society where all our "needs" are given to us, we would pay a large number of taxes, which would mean less money in the market, because people wouldn't spend as much, which leads to less jobs, and less people there to pay for taxes, and more people depending on the tax money in order to "survive",

I like how "needs" is in quotes here. It implies things like healthcare and college education aren't required but are optional. Should the government pay for them? Yes, it's a much better option than spending billions of dollars bombing brown people in the middle east for oil.

 

1 hour ago, TheSadBandit said:

and it would be up to the people to maintain the country, so if a road is fucked up,

Again, a nice idea, but the people who can afford to maintain (millionaires and billionaires) the country don't use the country's services, so they have no incentive to contribute into things like fixing roads and building schools. The average person has nowhere near the means to float the construction of a highway or a new school.

 

And yes, while one would think that more taxes means less going back into the market, you must also account for the things that people would not be paying for, like health care and college.

 

They taught you how economics should function in an ideal world, however, this isn't an ideal world. Also, just because you took a class in university doesn't mean you and you alone know about the "wonders of the free market." Implying that I know nothing about economics because I have a different philosophy than you is stupid.

 

 

(Anything that I didn't address I either agree with or don't care to address)


71CFA5EE-923C-4740-ACF4-508B753C9AD7.png.92a0d40c0fa7773f71fea2453f581d16.png

(signature made by @Kaylode)

Previously known as Xy.

 

Twitter ❤️Ko-Fi ❤️Github

 

 IMG_0248.jpg

 

ben_mixed_opinions.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Jerry Hat Trick said:

You can easily say that he won't get impeached, but the reality is - he's under investigation for a lot of shit.

I don't particularly hate him, but he's a fucking idiot. I don't feel the need to defend that statement, as he has proven it time & time again.

 

I used to be extremely on the Left. These days, I am somewhat more conservative. As for your suggestion that I read more "conservative" sites,  you might be amazed at some that I read daily.

 

I will make this concession - he is not a typical "diplomat", and uses stronger language. But nothing will really change under his Administration.

 

Impeachment is so unlikely to happen, it's laughable. Trump could probably murder a person and not be impeached. If he hasn't already been impeached, then there is no chance of him being impeached. The muller investigation is likely going to be fruitless in that regard (even if it yielded the goods, who really doubted it to begin with? Nobody would even mention his power to pardon himself if there was truly nothing he'd use it for).


71CFA5EE-923C-4740-ACF4-508B753C9AD7.png.92a0d40c0fa7773f71fea2453f581d16.png

(signature made by @Kaylode)

Previously known as Xy.

 

Twitter ❤️Ko-Fi ❤️Github

 

 IMG_0248.jpg

 

ben_mixed_opinions.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I feel like Trump is doing a good job for what he can do. What he can do is basically worthless though. Looking at it as a whole, I don't see what he has done that has benefited everyone. Trump didn't even win the election, Hillary did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Just now, Aquaticfilly0 said:

I feel like Trump is doing a good job for what he can do. What he can do is basically worthless though. Looking at it as a whole, I don't see what he has done that has benefited everyone. Trump didn't even win the election, Hillary did.

Trump won the election. The popular vote doesn't determine the outcome of the election (although in a fair system, it might)


71CFA5EE-923C-4740-ACF4-508B753C9AD7.png.92a0d40c0fa7773f71fea2453f581d16.png

(signature made by @Kaylode)

Previously known as Xy.

 

Twitter ❤️Ko-Fi ❤️Github

 

 IMG_0248.jpg

 

ben_mixed_opinions.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Just now, Aquaticfilly0 said:

Not the people's votes. The people in majority voted Hillary.

That would be the popular vote.


71CFA5EE-923C-4740-ACF4-508B753C9AD7.png.92a0d40c0fa7773f71fea2453f581d16.png

(signature made by @Kaylode)

Previously known as Xy.

 

Twitter ❤️Ko-Fi ❤️Github

 

 IMG_0248.jpg

 

ben_mixed_opinions.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


1 minute ago, Aquaticfilly0 said:

Idk man, I feel like Trump is just an idiot. With the whole Russia thing as well. I'm not much of a Political person, especially with my age. 

Russia is a distraction.


71CFA5EE-923C-4740-ACF4-508B753C9AD7.png.92a0d40c0fa7773f71fea2453f581d16.png

(signature made by @Kaylode)

Previously known as Xy.

 

Twitter ❤️Ko-Fi ❤️Github

 

 IMG_0248.jpg

 

ben_mixed_opinions.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, rapperdan said:

tbh I do feel like we might be on somewhat of the same stance on that while I may be more inclined to the whole mass citizenship concept that others have proposed at times and well tbh I view it as a way for all the illegal immigrants to become legal in one foul sweep and inturn start paying taxes themselfs while also living a better life another thing that I know is that sadly I feel without almost all of them who work illegally america in my eyes it's self would collapse in around it's self and lose it's number one producer spots of things like corn and other farming products and without there labor I feel as though america it's self could not compete unless the government would be willing to shell out billions to every farm out there and in all honesty I don't see that happening to where all farms across the us can upgrade to automation of said farms because we can look at it this way we either provide and keep this low paying job and give them housing on a farm or we go with automation of all our farming jobs and nobody would get a job but the very view updating said automation.

 

Ok so I think we agree on something here, I'm 100% against illegal immigrants, except in certain cases. 

 

We can agree that certain illegal immigrants should be made legal and start paying taxes, I am all for all these immigrants becoming legal and doing that. What I am against is illegal immigrants living in America their whole life, making money, and not paying taxes, even if it's a low-paying job, if they it was easier to make them citizens, or give them a visa to work on the farm, or something along those lines, where they are documented in some way, and they have a background check done on them, and stuff like that, then I am all for that. 

 

I am not for the idea of having a bunch of undocumented immigrants who could or could not be criminals getting jobs, instead documenting them and keeping a watchful eye on them, making sure that their work is legal.

 

43 minutes ago, Xy said:

I personally don't agree that the government should be spending as much money as it does "fixing" the environment, somewhere on this post I made a comment about Mt. Vesuvius and the impact it had on Pompeii, and the world. I'll just simply summarize it here, the volcano erupted and created more pollution that the entirety of the Industrial era (the most polluting era of the world), and that all went up into our atmosphere. That volcano erupted on Pompeii in 74AD, over 1900 years ago.

 

43 minutes ago, Xy said:

Except not everybody has the same wage, some people are in poverty, and they shouldn't have to pay the taxes that the upper 1% of our society doesn't want to pay. The upper 20% are able to contribute back more than the lower 80%, so they should.  Some people make way too much money, in fact, some people have enough money to single-handedly end world hunger. If that isn't problematic to you, I don't know what is.

It's why I used approximately the lowest recorded minimum, full-time job wage. 20k per year is no-where near enough to provide for a family, and you're right, there are people making a whole lot more than 20k per year, and that just raises the number on both sides, I didn't want to get too mathematical on that one point, just because the number itself with the lowest minimum wage is high already, throw in all the wages higher than that, and that number easily increases dramatically. As for ending world hunger, there is no end to that, as there is no such thing as world peace, if you "end" world hunger, people will just procreate some more, and create more hunger, which is the case in Africa, the reason they have so many children per family is due to lack of education, same in India, and all those countries with lots of poverty (same in parts of Nicaragua, where I'm from). More food = more happy people = more people fucking each other = more kids. It's the sad truth.

 

43 minutes ago, Xy said:

They taught you how economics should function in an ideal world, however, this isn't an ideal world. Also, just because you took a class in university doesn't mean you and you alone know about the "wonders of the free market." Implying that I know nothing about economics because I have a different philosophy than you is stupid.

I mean I never implied that you knew nothing of the subject, I just said that all the points I said are based off 2 economics classes that I took, having nothing to do with the credibility of anything you said. I don't see the free market being the perfect way to live life either, as you mentioned below. I agree with that idea of yours.

43 minutes ago, Xy said:

Again, a nice idea, but the people who can afford to maintain (millionaires and billionaires) the country don't use the country's services, so they have no incentive to contribute into things like fixing roads and building schools. The average person has nowhere near the means to float the construction of a highway or a new school.

 

 

43 minutes ago, Xy said:

Yeah, healthcare isn't free, but nor is the military, and people have no problem with us spending 597 billion dollars a year on that (more than anywhere else in the world).

With Obamacare, as Americans we didn't have the "strongest" or "best" healthcare out there. The difference with spending money on the military and healthcare is different. We have the strongest military in the world, and Trump has shown that, he isn't afraid of using the military power to it's true potential as Obama was. 

 

43 minutes ago, Xy said:

I like how "needs" is in quotes here. It implies things like healthcare and college education aren't required but are optional. Should the government pay for them? Yes, it's a much better option than spending billions of dollars bombing brown people in the middle east for oil.

And college is optional, I would be completely fine with the idea of Trump making it so State Colleges were free, as are public school systems, and at least people would have an Associate's Degree instead of a High School diploma, and if they want to seek further education than that, they can go. I am not for the idea that the government should spend billions of dollars on healthcare, because then it would decrease the quality of the healthcare, people wouldn't be as careful with their health, as they wouldn't have the financial incentive to do so, and if emergency rooms and doctors are free due to free healthcare, they become overused, and doctors become slaves to the government basically. Overused emergency rooms, for example say you need surgery on your knee because you broke it in 8 places due to a sporting accident, you're in a lot of pain, but you can't get the knee surgery because some woman decided she needed to have a kidney removed because it was hurting her, even though her kidney was fine, that would leave you in distress, and wondering why a perfectly fine woman, with working organs is having a kidney removed, but it's because it's free. Now if we provide free and paid healthcare, and the free healthcare is only admitted in certain facilities that are government run, and the paid healthcare is admitted in any facility, that is a different story, because then you can leave people who will abuse of the system in the government-run facilities, and those who don't want to deal with that bullshit can go to a privately owned facility, where they can choose who they serve and who they don't.

 

Anyways, anything I didn't mention is probably because I summed it up in here. I agreed with a lot of the stuff you said too.

 

 

26 minutes ago, Aquaticfilly0 said:

Idk man, I feel like Trump is just an idiot. With the whole Russia thing as well. I'm not much of a Political person, especially with my age. 

Don't focus on what only Liberal media sites say, which they all say he's an idiot, if you were to expand your media sources to both Liberal and Republican media sources, you would see the good things he does too, not just the bad. Also if you want to check what he does on a daily basis, he updates the Twitter basically daily I think. I had to remove notifications because I would them in class.

 

1 hour ago, Jerry Hat Trick said:

You can easily say that he won't get impeached, but the reality is - he's under investigation for a lot of shit.

I don't particularly hate him, but he's a fucking idiot. I don't feel the need to defend that statement, as he has proven it time & time again.

 

I used to be extremely on the Left. These days, I am somewhat more conservative. As for your suggestion that I read more "conservative" sites,  you might be amazed at some that I read daily.

 

I will make this concession - he is not a typical "diplomat", and uses stronger language. But nothing will really change under his Administration.

 

I can agree he isn't a typical "diplomat", but I feel like @DOOMSlayer_ said it perfectly, he uses his "idiot" phase to make his opponents seem a lot more retarded. You can read up on how "idiotic" he is here, although I believe someone who's an idiot couldn't possibly pull off certain things like this, and what DOOMSlayer said, where the Liberals literally walked into a "trap", where their true colors were shown.

 

To finish off my points, because I've written like 4 essays already, I agree with a lot of stuff that you guys have said, while others brought subjects that I wouldn't've thought about, and I like how people of different political theories came together and agreed with different things that other people said. Although politically different, we are all one community, and in my opinion, your political view doesn't change my idea of you, if you're a Bernie Supporter, a Trump Supporter, a Hillary Supporter, a whatever supporter, if you can pull facts out to help you, I respect that. I respect you even more if you cite both kinds of media sources, just because it shows that you aren't a human being that is based off of one political view, but instead you chose your political theory off what you think is best for you. Anyways, I would like to thank everyone that "participated" in this, if you want to keep the discussion going, be my guest, but I think I've posted enough to get my point across.

 

As for posts, I've gone ahead and liked any posts that have an opinion on them, because I am thankful for the good conversation and debates that we made.


Former Gmod Prop Hunt Admin

Former Media Team Team Leader

Former Media Team GFX Member

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


49 minutes ago, Aquaticfilly0 said:

Idk man, I feel like Trump is just an idiot. With the whole Russia thing as well. I'm not much of a Political person, especially with my age. 

The whole Russian Ordeal is completely BS. Nowadays, with all the hysteria surrounding him, he could probably have someone killed and could get away with it


 

 

 

L9frmI0.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Posted  Edited by DOOMSlayer_
7 minutes ago, Jerry Hat Trick said:

Allow me to rephrase.

Trump is an idiot politically. Can you refer to previous experience? Diplomatically, he is an idiot.

He handles allies as clumsily as he does enemies.

IDK his talks with Japan and China went pretty well. He ran for nomination under the Reform Party in 2000. Ill admit he isn't nearly as savvy in diplomatics and politics as some other good presidents, but It seems like he has done more good than bad for the country.

Edited by DOOMSlayer_

 

 

 

L9frmI0.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


2 minutes ago, DOOMSlayer_ said:

IDK his talks with Japan and China went pretty well. He ran for nomination under the Reform Party in 2000. Ill admit he isn't nearly as savvy in diplomatics and politics as some other good presidents, but It seems like he has done more good than bad for the country.

yah I was saw a nobody party vermin supreme has some great political exp.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Achievements

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...