Jump to content
Baseops Forums
disgruntledemployee

The Next President is...

Recommended Posts

How does my pointing out hat socialism and paradise don’t belong together allows you to assume I’m trying to act superior?

Then you continue on and agree with me.....what?

Now are you implying those countries are socialist? They aren’t. Like was previously pointed out if you want the government to run more aspects of citizens daily lives then they lose freedoms. And the government decides a lot of things for individuals in socialist countries. I like my freedoms. I seriously don’t get why people want our country to change into something it’s not because some other country may have it. Our country is amazing. Why wouldn’t you go there if you think it’s better instead of trying to change people and a system that doesn’t want to change?

I don’t care if it hurts or helps as a whole in your opinion. That’s just it, I don’t want you or others deciding what’s best for me.

Are their socialist countries in Europe? If so which ones?

Also (for negatory) no system is free from infallible humans. It just happens to be a better system because for the most part it is founded upon consensual agreements and freedoms. Which is a large reason it is completely unique in the world and another reason we live in the best country in the world.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Guardian said:

Also (for negatory) no system is free from infallible humans. It just happens to be a better system because for the most part it is founded upon consensual agreements and freedoms. Which is a large reason it is completely unique in the world and another reason we live in the best country in the world.

Antitrust judgments aren’t consensual and are often forced upon people and businesses who have acted within the bounds of the free market. The point is not that everything should be regulated, but some things should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does my pointing out hat socialism and paradise don’t belong together allows you to assume I’m trying to act superior?

Then you continue on and agree with me.....what?

Now are you implying those countries are socialist? They aren’t. Like was previously pointed out if you want the government to run more aspects of citizens daily lives then they lose freedoms. And the government decides a lot of things for individuals in socialist countries. I like my freedoms. I seriously don’t get why people want our country to change into something it’s not because some other country may have it. Our country is amazing. Why wouldn’t you go there if you think it’s better instead of trying to change people and a system that doesn’t want to change?

I don’t care if it hurts or helps as a whole in your opinion. That’s just it, I don’t want you or others deciding what’s best for me.

Are their socialist countries in Europe? If so which ones?

Also (for negatory) no system is free from infallible humans. It just happens to be a better system because for the most part it is founded upon consensual agreements and freedoms. Which is a large reason it is completely unique in the world and another reason we live in the best country in the world.

You seriously can’t see how making the comment you made can come off as superior? Can’t help you then.

Those are not socialist countries, but they have socialist tendencies that you guys keep pointing out for goodness sake. Come on man, do better.

As I have said many, many, many times, I’m not advocating for universal healthcare. How are you still saying things like, “why wouldn’t you go there if you think it’s better?” Quite honestly, you’re not putting your best foot forward here man.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 hours ago, brickhistory said:

An interesting day yesterday.  I learned (no thanks to Facebook or Twitter which continue to either slow or completely block any info on this.):

- That the now infamous Hunter laptop - public because he left it there and didn't pay an $85 repair bill - was subpoenaed for a grand jury by an FBI agent who specializes in child porn cases.

- That Guiliani turned over to Delaware police photos of underage girls from the laptop.  True, it is unknown to me if those images are of the gross, illegal kind.

- Emails to/from Hunter about inappropriate situations regarding underage girls.

- That a former business associate of Hunter's was removed from the general population of the prison he was incarcerated in yesterday.  Same guy who is, apparently, providing information about Hunter and others regarding some Indian casino tax scam.  The one where two of the three partners went to jail, but only Hunter wasn't charged.

- That the pictures of Joe and Hunter with Kazakh business partners of Hunter's puts paid to the Joe claim "of I knew nothing of his business dealings."  As did the numerous Air Force Two accompanied trips.  As well as the numerous pay-offs to "The Big Guy."

- That Joe Biden considers Poland and Hungary as "totalitarian regimes."

As a double hypothetical, if Biden wins, does he immediately pardon Hunter or wait until his last day as other Presidents did before helping out family?  It's certainly legal to do so, but I wonder if Kamala would like that?

 

I admit I'm not contributing to the healthcare in America theme running, but I also try not to tilt at windmills.  It has never ended well either in fiction or in real life.

You learned from where other than Fox News, NY Post, etc.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

 

You learned from where other than Fox News, NY Post, etc.?

From a variety of venues but let's just go with "anonymous sources."

I understand those are all the rage and most folks are good with them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seriously can’t see how making the comment you made can come off as superior? Can’t help you then.

Those are not socialist countries, but they have socialist tendencies that you guys keep pointing out for goodness sake. Come on man, do better.

As I have said many, many, many times, I’m not advocating for universal healthcare. How are you still saying things like, “why wouldn’t you go there if you think it’s better?” Quite honestly, you’re not putting your best foot forward here man.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I wasn’t trying to be superior. Just pointing out that socialism and paradise don’t equate.

Do better at what? I just asked you if they were socialist. And look to the Scandinavian countries Bernie likes to quote as being socialist or having social policy. They readily admit that they aren’t socialist and the policies of socialism they in acted in the past failed and they went back to a more free market economy.

I’m asking you very simple questions man. Sorry you can’t answer them and only point the finger back at me and claim I’m dumb for not seeing your unexplained points. Plus if you aren’t advocating for those programs, then why bring them up? Seriously. Answer some questions. Take them at face value. And don’t just assume I’m trying to be dumb. I’m not. Genuinely trying to understand why you are bringing this stuff up. And if you aren’t advocating for the stuff you are bringing up then what is your point. Having trouble following you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, slackline said:

I get it, you don’t want to subsidize the healthcare of fat people. It pisses me off as well. The military has destroyed my body, back and neck are 10 kinds of jacked, but I take care of myself. I believe a lot more people should and could do a lot of the same thing. I eat right, and I exercise a ton. That takes care of a lot of my issues and keeps my QoL higher than it would be. If I can do that, they can do that... to an extent. Food that is healthy is waaay harder to get for low income families. Not just the prices (healthy food is more expensive than garbage food) are messed up, but there’s the time aspect. People working multiple min wage jobs often times have very little free time, so popping in the microwave dinner is faster than preparing healthy food.

That doesn’t excuse a gross neglect of your own health on the part of many fat people. I’m simply making the point that it isn’t as simple as “fat people should all die of diabetes because they’re lazy” which seems like what you’re advocating (heavy on the sarcasm there in case you were unsure). Oh, and guess what, there’s tons of fat people in the military driving up our healthcare costs. Fix that problem for us while you’re on your high horse (again, sarcasm meter should be in the ON position).

BL: we can do better, and if fat people get to go along for the ride, so be it... Again, people other than fat people need healthcare.

Maybe it is more difficult to get healthy food. But there are a lot of things that are more difficult when you don't have money. One solution I advocate for is that EBT cards should not work in convenience stores or should be able to purchase "processed" items. They should be allowed to purchase raw produce only. Buying a chicken and some salad and rice is not more expensive than eating out for a whole family. It just isn't.

On the other note, I don't mind the sarcasm and I appreciate how direct we can be in this forum. I appreciate the fray. It's hard to have these conversations in person with large parts of the populace at this point.

17 hours ago, FLEA said:

Regarding the point to the government subsidizing rights. This is not entirely true. We do force attorneys to represent clients who can't afford one. This is done differently in different states but often times if you are fostered to practice certain types of law in a whatever district you go into a lottery, or the state just retains a defense team. Either way, I think you can see the point. 

That is true, but it's also a "right" you are given in response to the government attempting to take something from you - so in the case of the court/justice system, they are going to deprive you of one of your rights, it's only reasonable that they provide you with a "defense." So in that light, it is categorically different and the original point is still that the government doesn't subsidize your other rights, so why is healthcare elevated to a privileged status? Maybe I could see it if the government was causing your ill health, but in the majority of cases it is due to lifestyle choices.

1 hour ago, Negatory said:

Pure unbridled economic libertarianism has been demonstrated a failure dozens of times as far back as steel or railroads. If you think the free market always works in America - just because that’s how it “was founded” - I’ve got news for you.

I think one of the most persistent tropes that operates in our discourse is that we actually have a truly "free" market. Nothing could be further from the truth. So when I hear about all the failings of capitalism I just laugh. We have a very mixed economy. We have actual monopolies. Regulatory capture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture) is rampant. And there are all sorts of other factors in our economic system that work against free market principles. All that is to say that I dismiss arguments that point at what we currently have to say "look, capitalism doesn't work."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ViperMan said:

I think one of the most persistent tropes that operates in our discourse is that we actually have a truly "free" market. Nothing could be further from the truth. So when I hear about all the failings of capitalism I just laugh. We have a very mixed economy. We have actual monopolies. Regulatory capture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture) is rampant. And there are all sorts of other factors in our economic system that work against free market principles. All that is to say that I dismiss arguments that point at what we currently have to say "look, capitalism doesn't work."

I never came close to saying that. My point is literally in line with what you’re saying: you can have meaningful regulation and limit the free market and have it be our version of “capitalism.” 
 

But this point does require many people to concede that government intervention and limitations on the free market do not automatically equal socialism, and I feel like that’s the more common trope on this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Negatory said:

I never came close to saying that. My point is literally in line with what you’re saying: you can have meaningful regulation and limit the free market and have it be our version of “capitalism.” 
 

But this point does require many people to concede that government intervention and limitations on the free market do not automatically equal socialism, and I feel like that’s the more common trope on this forum.

Well you did reference "pure unbridled economic libertarianism" and the failings of the "free market system in America" so label me confused then.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn’t trying to be superior. Just pointing out that socialism and paradise don’t equate.

Do better at what? I just asked you if they were socialist. And look to the Scandinavian countries Bernie likes to quote as being socialist or having social policy. They readily admit that they aren’t socialist and the policies of socialism they in acted in the past failed and they went back to a more free market economy.

I’m asking you very simple questions man. Sorry you can’t answer them and only point the finger back at me and claim I’m dumb for not seeing your unexplained points. Plus if you aren’t advocating for those programs, then why bring them up? Seriously. Answer some questions. Take them at face value. And don’t just assume I’m trying to be dumb. I’m not. Genuinely trying to understand why you are bringing this stuff up. And if you aren’t advocating for the stuff you are bringing up then what is your point. Having trouble following you.

When I said do better, I was referring to a perceived tendency of yours to infer things from what people say, not just me. Then you proceed to “educate” people on what you erroneously attributed to them.

What questions am I not answering? When I make a point to highlight yet again that I am not advocating for universal healthcare, and I also agreed with a lot of your points on why it wouldn’t work in our country, there is no longer really any valid questions coming from you that merit an answer. I don’t care what countries are socialist and what aren’t. Had nothing to do with the point I made. Go back and reread what I said (that’s also part of the “do better”. Read the words people say, not what you want it to say so you can then “educate” them again) because it’s pretty clear what I was saying.

So, once again, my bad if I’ve skipped any questions. Hit me again, Ike, and this time put some stank on it. I’ll answer your questions.

I brought those countries up because they have literally been mentioned in here a few times the last few days as examples of countries that do have systems closer to socialist programs with higher taxes and universal healthcare. The people living in said countries seem to be pretty dang happy with it, so I asked why there was a need to constantly belittle what is clearly working for, and making those people happy. It doesn’t mean that’s what I think we should be doing here.

Let me make it painfully clear one more time: my bottom line is that our current system sucks. We can do better. I encourage the discussion in here because there are smart people on this subject that have brought up smart points. There’s a couple of old cranks in here that just refuse change because that’s in their nature. I’m not engaging with those people. I’m engaging with the people that bring something to the table even if we’re “just tilting at windmills...” Who knows, maybe someone in this forum will one day be instrumental in the future policy making of this awesome country. This “tilting” might just make a difference. I know I’ve learned from both sides of the conversation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here's a topic. 2A will go away under Biden.  Also he is under impression that children can be murdered under federal law. 🤣

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Sim said:

 

Here's a topic. 2A will go away under Biden.  Also he is under impression that children can be murdered under federal law. 🤣

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans.

I think it’s a safe bet he will do his best to implement more anti gun regulation. How successful he is will depend on several factors. 
 

Team blue will have to take both the Senate and Congress. If they succeed at taking the Senate they are going to need all of team Blue to vote the party line. In some swing states and highly contested areas this might not be a smart play for a future reelection.  I would predict at least few members might not vote the party line depending on the bill. 
 

Next factor would be the Supreme Court. With a pending confirmation in the next week leaning the court to the right, I would predict the court would strike down any extreme anti 2A legislation. Caveat being, if team blue can pack the court. Biden/Harris ticket has refused/dodged  to answer if they will pack the court, but that combined with this confirmation being “shoved down their throats” I would assume it’s a safe bet that’s their plan. There is also the standing law (1930s? I forget the name of the top of my head) that heavily restricted automatic weapons, suppressors and explosives requiring the tax stamp and all the other BS.  That combined with the 1994 expired AR ban sets somewhat of a precedent. 
 

Ya, that statement is pretty misleading. No law requires shotguns to only hold 3 rounds. The act of bird hunting with a shotgun requires it to be plugged to only hold 3 rounds. (sts) There is no federal law prohibiting the amount of rounds a shotgun can hold for non hunting purposes. (At least that I’m aware of) Last I checked, shooting any person (not trying to cause life threatening harm to you or others) is illegal regardless of how many rounds your firearm has. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe other media outlets cannot very the authenticity of the source and/or story? There’s probably reason why only Trump friendly Fox News and the NY Post is running stories about Biden approximately two weeks from the election.
 

I highly doubt it’s some massive suppression conspiracy, but I’m sure the Russians already found what to display in front of you, based on your metadata, so you can share on forums like this.

https://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-post-hunter-joe-biden-giuliani-red-flags-disinformation-2020-10

Edited by Sua Sponte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Media is ignoring this. More people know about Guilliani and Borat then Bobulinski.  Just this simple fact shows that media is suppressing and playing defense for Corrupt Bidens - shows how much fake they are.  
 
https://nypost.com/2020/10/22/hunter-biz-partner-confirms-e-mail-details-joe-bidens-push-to-make-millions-from-china/

"how much fake they are".

Seriously, I hope that was a typo, or you're going to have trouble with your GRU supervisor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I said do better, I was referring to a perceived tendency of yours to infer things from what people say, not just me. Then you proceed to “educate” people on what you erroneously attributed to them.

What questions am I not answering? When I make a point to highlight yet again that I am not advocating for universal healthcare, and I also agreed with a lot of your points on why it wouldn’t work in our country, there is no longer really any valid questions coming from you that merit an answer. I don’t care what countries are socialist and what aren’t. Had nothing to do with the point I made. Go back and reread what I said (that’s also part of the “do better”. Read the words people say, not what you want it to say so you can then “educate” them again) because it’s pretty clear what I was saying.

So, once again, my bad if I’ve skipped any questions. Hit me again, Ike, and this time put some stank on it. I’ll answer your questions.

I brought those countries up because they have literally been mentioned in here a few times the last few days as examples of countries that do have systems closer to socialist programs with higher taxes and universal healthcare. The people living in said countries seem to be pretty dang happy with it, so I asked why there was a need to constantly belittle what is clearly working for, and making those people happy. It doesn’t mean that’s what I think we should be doing here.

Let me make it painfully clear one more time: my bottom line is that our current system sucks. We can do better. I encourage the discussion in here because there are smart people on this subject that have brought up smart points. There’s a couple of old cranks in here that just refuse change because that’s in their nature. I’m not engaging with those people. I’m engaging with the people that bring something to the table even if we’re “just tilting at windmills...” Who knows, maybe someone in this forum will one day be instrumental in the future policy making of this awesome country. This “tilting” might just make a difference. I know I’ve learned from both sides of the conversation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Haha. Not inferring anything. If anything I’m super literal and take your statements at face value in an effort to not infer anything. I very much dislike being taken out of context and something is then made up about my opinion.

Feel free to go back and review where I ask you questions. Or ask you why you say a particular statement and I question it and instead of clarifying, refuting, or debating you then make attacks on my character.

I agree with your statement that our current system can be better. And I think that future is further away from providing “free” health care to all. Just like the tax system. A flat tax makes much more sense for all. But people seem to think that if you are successful you should pay more. Not if you spend more you should pay more. Just a very victim mentality and socialist view point that hasn’t ever worked out in the worlds history that I’m aware of. I’m wrong all the time though.

Are the people you claim that refuse to change because they are old that way for a reason? Assuming they are old on an internet chat room might not be the best. Better yet challenge them and ask why they believe that way. You might find more historical and experiential insight into why they don’t think the change being proposed is good instead of writing them off. It more likely comes across as they don’t agree with you or don’t have new ideas you might agree with so they are discarded. If that’s not your opinion then good. As it is a prevalent opinion out there these days. Hence “okay boomer.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it’s a safe bet he will do his best to implement more anti gun regulation. How successful he is will depend on several factors. 


I think it’s funny how liberals like guns more than republicans. They just disagree who should have them. Liberals think only the government should. Republicans think the private citizens should have them as well

Now liberals want to defund the police force and the military. Interesting.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sua Sponte said:

Or maybe other media outlets cannot very the authenticity of the source and/or story?

Like they did Steele Dossier? Or Trump taxes? Or Ukraine lies? Anonymous intelligence leaks? 

There is a receipt with his signature, pictures of said person, emails that are confirmed by recipient of those emails, statements by people working with Biden, FBI investigation into CP and money laundering, FBI disposition with laptop serial number, FBI/DOJ saying it's not a Russian disinformation campaign.  

Left - "cannot authenticate" 

 

biden.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, slackline said:

"how much fake they are".

Seriously, I hope that was a typo, or you're going to have trouble with your GRU supervisor.

Learn to read between the lines. I'm calling CNN, ABC, NBC, NPR, MSNBC, WashPost, NYT and the rest of the media playing defensive omission of the news to protect their favorite party.  But that doesn't surprise me since most people still have no clue what spy-gate is about - the biggest scandate in last 50 years.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Guardian said:

A flat tax makes much more sense for all. But people seem to think that if you are successful you should pay more. Not if you spend more you should pay more. Just a very victim mentality and socialist view point that hasn’t ever worked out in the worlds history that I’m aware of. I’m wrong all the time though.

I assume you are referring to the socialist United States of America of 1936-1980. 🇺🇸 

image.thumb.jpeg.496e16f23d525718b809d5459827096c.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha. Not inferring anything. If anything I’m super literal and take your statements at face value in an effort to not infer anything. I very much dislike being taken out of context and something is then made up about my opinion.

Feel free to go back and review where I ask you questions. Or ask you why you say a particular statement and I question it and instead of clarifying, refuting, or debating you then make attacks on my character.

I agree with your statement that our current system can be better. And I think that future is further away from providing “free” health care to all. Just like the tax system. A flat tax makes much more sense for all. But people seem to think that if you are successful you should pay more. Not if you spend more you should pay more. Just a very victim mentality and socialist view point that hasn’t ever worked out in the worlds history that I’m aware of. I’m wrong all the time though.

Are the people you claim that refuse to change because they are old that way for a reason? Assuming they are old on an internet chat room might not be the best. Better yet challenge them and ask why they believe that way. You might find more historical and experiential insight into why they don’t think the change being proposed is good instead of writing them off. It more likely comes across as they don’t agree with you or don’t have new ideas you might agree with so they are discarded. If that’s not your opinion then good. As it is a prevalent opinion out there these days. Hence “okay boomer.”


Don't have tons of time, but your idea of a personal attack is seemingly very broad...

I say they're old because I know they're already retired. I'm almost there, but they went years ago, so at least older than me, and I'm older than a lot. I stand by my statement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Sim said:

Like they did Steele Dossier? Or Trump taxes? Or Ukraine lies? Anonymous intelligence leaks? 

There is a receipt with his signature, pictures of said person, emails that are confirmed by recipient of those emails, statements by people working with Biden, FBI investigation into CP and money laundering, FBI disposition with laptop serial number, FBI/DOJ saying it's not a Russian disinformation campaign.  

Left - "cannot authenticate" 

 

biden.jpg

For one the FBI hasn’t said anything other than they “have nothing to add” to what the DNI said. They’re not going to comment on an ongoing investigation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/fbi-hunter-biden-laptop-russia/2020/10/20/3478408a-133d-11eb-bc10-40b25382f1be_story.html

The Washington Post has been unable to verify the authenticity of any of the emails published by the New York Post, and the Biden campaign has disputed the New York Post’s claims about what the emails show.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

The Washington Post has been unable to verify the authenticity of any of the emails published by the New York Post, and the Biden campaign has disputed the New York Post’s claims about what the emails show.”

 

"1) FBI & DOJ concur w/ Ratcliffe that Hunter Biden's laptop & the emails in question weren't part of a Russian disinformation campaign," Fox News producer Sean Langille tweeted Tuesday evening. "2) The FBI DOES have possession of the Hunter Biden laptop in question." He said it was first reported by Fox News's Justice Department producer Jake Gibson.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/fbi-and-doj-do-not-believe-hunter-biden-laptop-part-of-russian-disinformation-campaign

 

Oh look! More releases. 

Money laundering! 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/laptop-hunter-biden-linked-fbi-money-laundering-probe

Many democrats involved! 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jim-hunter-biden-china-joint-venture-key-contacts

Edited by Sim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

distractions.JPG.23d3f03e404a23af729c4dcebf81b939.JPG

Remember folks, only liberal media is authoritative source and only they can report it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...