Liberal Forum

ConsRule » 12 Mar 2024, 3:49 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 3:49 pm

Apparently the kind that you're too stupid or too scared to answer.

 

BooRadley » 12 Mar 2024, 4:41 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 4:41 pm

You're a supporter of Bernie Sanders...
Aren't you?

was

why do you ask skank?

we have been over this for years

Mrkelly » 12 Mar 2024, 5:32 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 5:32 pm

was

why do you ask skank?

we have been over this for years

Cause Sanders is an admitted socialist.

There's videos all over the place
 

R.Suave » 12 Mar 2024, 5:28 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 5:28 pm

You know when birth rates were really high?

When economies sucked so bad you had to risk death to whelp Redundance...in the hope it could feed itself by 11.

that was actually when the economy was objectively superior to what they are today. I mean this unironically.

FOS » 12 Mar 2024, 6:21 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 6:21 pm

that was actually when the economy was objectively superior to what they are today. I mean this unironically.

I don't doubt it.

BooRadley » 12 Mar 2024, 6:19 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 6:19 pm

Cause Sanders is an admitted socialist.

There's videos all over the place

And?

go away skank 
 

Mrkelly » 13 Mar 2024, 6:58 am » wrote: ↑

13 Mar 2024, 6:58 am

And?

go away skank

Socialism has been a failure everywhere

Why do you embrace it?
 

Let me ask ya this .

I don't care if ya a carpenter, janitor, a truck driver okay .

Ya should atleast be able 2 pay your bills ..

Or should we all buy tents live under the Freeway..

And let me tell ya "Elitists" something too there's a lotta more of Us than "You People"..

Don't have any hopes and prayers anymore don't care if ya send em 2 prison..

Not "Respect" or a stake in "Society" anymore

BooRadley » 13 Mar 2024, 7:17 am » wrote: ↑

13 Mar 2024, 7:17 am

Socialism has been a failure everywhere

Why do you embrace it?

[img]blob:9cf66dd4-2bfe-49c2-8f5f-1c36d6551d72[/img]
https://mumbletheatre.files.wordpress.c ... -skank.jpg
 

Truth be told "I'd Hit That" make sweet "Loving" 2 her too
 

TwoIfByTea » 13 Mar 2024, 7:46 am » wrote: ↑

13 Mar 2024, 7:46 am

Truth be told "I'd Hit That" make sweet "Loving" 2 her too

a lot of guys on the other board did

they said she gave a good blowjob, but never stopped talking while she sucked

she stalked another guy after she found out that he was rich

he said he backed out when they hooked up because she looked like a worn out crackhead 

BooRadley » 13 Mar 2024, 7:17 am » wrote: ↑

13 Mar 2024, 7:17 am

Socialism has been a failure everywhere

Why do you embrace it?
 

Why? How has humanity failed to develop a one world New World Order defying the natural timing of genetic outcomes so far?

Ya know what I ain't exactly a "Superstar" with the Ladys anymore..

Ya know sometimes ya "Take" what ya can still "Get"

TwoIfByTea » 13 Mar 2024, 7:40 am » wrote: ↑

13 Mar 2024, 7:40 am

Let me ask ya this .

I don't care if ya a carpenter, janitor, a truck driver okay .

Ya should atleast be able 2 pay your bills ..

Or should we all buy tents live under the Freeway..

And let me tell ya "Elitists" something too there's a lotta more of Us than "You People"..

Don't have any hopes and prayers anymore don't care if ya send em 2 prison..

Not "Respect" or a stake in "Society" anymore

I don't think you realize how silly that argument is.
So, you just want to be able to pay your bills, huh?  And left unsaid is that this means government (what you call "society") should be responsible for you to do that, right?
So if you went out and bought a new car and chose a Cadillac over something cheaper, doesn't that become one of the "bills you should be able to pay" despite the fact that the only job you're qualified for is at McDonalds?  Or in more realistic terms, if you choose to spend your money every week on liquor, cigarettes, and marijuana, you think you have a legitimate claim to demand free healthcare insurance?  Or if you simply MUST have that new iPhone, the 65" color tv, and the cable and cellphone service that costs hundreds of dollars more each month, do you have a legitimate reason to expect the government to pay for your free college tuition or pay back that loan you took out?

Everybody makes choices on how to spend their money.  And if you have none of those nice things and still can't afford to buy food, clothes, or keep the heat turned on, our "society" provides you with PLENTY of welfare benefits to feed, house, and clothe the truly destitute.  But for a middle class socialist like you to threaten those who HAVE strived to make their lives better by your cautionary statement that "there are more of us than you" tells me you'll NEVER choose to do the hard work needed to get what you want and you prefer to play the poor victim instead, while issuing veiled threats that you can simply TAKE what you want.

And on a side note, I find it offensive that an avowed socialist like yourself takes the name of a product created and sold for charity by possibly the greatest conservative of our lifetime, Rush Limbaugh.  His generosity has raised over $5 million dollars for the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation from his tea sales, but I have little doubt that 99% of socialists and liberals still hate him, years after his death.
 

PhiloBeddo » 12 Mar 2024, 1:00 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 1:00 pm

If you are rich or poor the economy is great. For everybody else it sucks

True, it sucks and it's getting suckier, as inflation continues to rise from month to month as well as from year to year.
So kiss goodbye any near-term interest cuts that the Democrats are hoping for as the campaign season gets underway.

Inflation up again in February, driven by gasoline and home prices
CBS News Money Watch March 12, 2024
Consumer prices climbed again last month, as inflation remains a persistent thorn in the side of the Federal Reserve and for President Joe Biden's re-election campaign, both of which are counting on a steady easing of price pressures this year.

Prices rose 0.4% from January to February, a pickup from the previous month's figure of 0.3%. Compared with 12 months earlier, consumer prices rose 3.2% last month, faster than January's 3.1% annual pace, the government reported on Tuesday.

Excluding volatile food and energy prices, so called "core" prices also climbed 0.4% from January to February, matching the previous month's increase at a faster pace than is consistent with the Fed's 2% target. Core inflation is watched especially closely because it typically provides a better read of where inflation is likely headed.

 
 

Skans » 12 Mar 2024, 1:09 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 1:09 pm

While I do not believe regulators are "sponsored" by Wall Street, I do believe that K Street and Wall Street have a bit of a revolving door going on.

You cannot see the forest for the programming. 

I went to a butcher yesterday - he was a 90 minute drive from my home. He does not retail meat. He simply butchers and wraps for a living, as a service to people who graze cattle on their land and are willing to pay by the pound to have the job done by a pro. He gave me six steer tongues for free. It was a most beautiful Spring scenic, with the redbuds expressing gloriously and the fat cattle on the hillsides providing a counterweight to my skepticism about the morrows coming our way. I saw the drive itself as worth the amortization and fuel - the tongues were a lovely bonus.

The tongues had not been wanted by the people who had hired him - along with livers, kidneys, hearts, and sweetbreads (thymus glands) and such. Not only could he not legally SELL the meat, he was taking a chance in giving it away. And all of this because the family farmer could not afford licensure from the USDA. And this, because of regulations, passed by wall street's minions for wall street's benefit. The past century has been one long, slow market-seizure by wall street from main street.

The america I grew up in had ZERO restaurants which were owned by wall street. Every restaurant was a mom and pop small business, enriching main street, with the moneys earned staying in the cities hosting the restaurants. You have no idea the cost of the giant sucking sound on main street, now that well over half of all food service business is a wall street concern.

I have a friend who is putting solar power on his well pump, with a battery backup. He could very easily build his own solar panels - very cheaply. But if he does, they will not have the UL stamp, since he claims he doesn't have a million bucks laying around. So he is forced to buy the panels at a dear cost from a wall street concern that can afford ENTRY TO THE MARKET. If he does not, then his home owners in voided.

My state legalized marijuana some years back, and allowed anyone who chooses to do so to grow and sell a marijuana crop. All they have to do us put up a million dollars for the license, and they are free to go into business.

Our government - at the behest of its wall street OWNERS - is creating massive costs associated with ENTRY TO THE MARKET. And the reason for this - not the excuses, but the reason - is to keep the little man down. 

I grew up on a street that had a half a dozen small business people. There was an upholsterer who worked from his shop behind his house, a pest control guy, a tree trimmer, a dozer operator who owned his own dozer for hire, and a truck driver who owned his own tractor. By the second reagan administration, none of those small businesses existed. Not one. 

The tongues I acquired should not have been free. The farmer should have been able to sell his meat, without committing a federal crime. We the people were NEVER intended to interact with the federal government. The state governments were our sovereigns, and the federal government was their vassal. The 17th amendment ended that.

If this is liberty, I'm a monkey's uncle. This is the opposite of liberty. This is throttling by a foreign jurisdiction - which precisely describes DC. It is a foreign jurisdiction. 

Cannonpointer » 14 Mar 2024, 3:26 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 3:26 pm

The america I grew up in had ZERO restaurants which were owned by wall street. Every restaurant was a mom and pop small business, enriching main street, with the moneys earned staying in the cities hosting the restaurants. You have no idea the cost of the giant sucking sound on main street, now that well over half of all food service business is a wall street concern.

 

I have more of an understanding about this than you might know.

I have a friend who is putting solar power on his well pump, with a battery backup. He could very easily build his own solar panels - very cheaply. But if he does, they will not have the UL stamp, since he claims he doesn't have a million bucks laying around. So he is forced to buy the panels at a dear cost from a wall street concern that can afford ENTRY TO THE MARKET. If he does not, then his home owners in voided.

My state legalized marijuana some years back, and allowed anyone who chooses to do so to grow and sell a marijuana crop. All they have to do us put up a million dollars for the license, and they are free to go into business.

Our government - at the behest of its wall street OWNERS - is creating massive costs associated with ENTRY TO THE MARKET. And the reason for this - not the excuses, but the reason - is to keep the little man down. 
 

I don't disagree with any of this. I am all for less government, less regulation and less barriers to small business owners, except for drug pushers.

I grew up on a street that had a half a dozen small business people. There was an upholsterer who worked from his shop behind his house, a pest control guy, a tree trimmer, a dozer operator who owned his own dozer for hire, and a truck driver who owned his own tractor. By the second reagan administration, none of those small businesses existed. Not one

.Perhaps not where you are.  But, we have exactly what you describe where I am.  For now, anyway.

 The tongues I acquired should not have been free. The farmer should have been able to sell his meat, without committing a federal crime. We the people were NEVER intended to interact with the federal government. The state governments were our sovereigns, and the federal government was their vassal. The 17th amendment ended that.
If this is liberty, I'm a monkey's uncle. This is the opposite of liberty. This is throttling by a foreign jurisdiction - which precisely describes DC. It is a foreign jurisdiction.

While this sounds reasonable, there is a flip side to it.  Farmers were known to sell some rancid, botulism, and diseased meat before there was any regulation.  Its one way diseases were spread.  Still, I tend to agree with you - too much regulation means economy of scale will only support industrial-sized farms, meat processors, etc.

Skans » 12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm

I call "****" on your theory.  The theory that legitimate, legal competition eradicated addiction caused by "illegal gangs".

I call **** on your straw man. I never said legalizing would end addiction. That's silly.

I said it would stop criminals from PUSHING drugs to children - and it will.

Skans » 12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm

A-B, Coors, Miller, Pabst, Yuengling, Stitzel, Frankfort Distilleries, Glenore, Old Forester, Schenley and many other booze-makers survived and thrived during prohibition, only to come out as the dominant players in Beer and Whisky markets.  Furthermore, the southern corn-liquor makers simply legitimized their operations adding to the huge bourbon and whisky powerhouses of America.

That's MOSTLY hogwash - and irrelevant to the degree that it is not hogwash. They still are not pushing their product to children.

Skans » 12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm

The same thing is happening with Marijuana, and will happen with other narcotics should they be legalized.  The illegal companies will legitimize and become huge, multi-billion dollar corporations.  The difference being two-fold.  Once legalized, these mega-recreational drug makers can lobby congress to get what they want.  And, they will contribute to Congress's campaigns.  Once you have a tight partnership between manufacturers of highly addictive drugs and all branches of the US government, the hostile takeover of every man woman and child by big pharma and government is completed.  The second part is self-fufilling - huge segmants of the population will become addicted and far easier to control. Can you really not see that?

I can only laugh at it. They STILL won't be selling meth to children.

Skans » 12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm

I have 2 mason jars of "home-made" liquor, that a friend gave me.  Around here, it ain't all that uncommon.

Yes it is.

Even the small segment of the population in your area that has ever so much as TASTED bootleg liquor spends 500 dollars in the legitimate market for every one is spends on some hayseed's homemade spirits. Which makes the illegal booze market not just an anecdotal market, but an anecdote OF an anecdote. The anecdotal market only purchases anecdotally.

Skans » 12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm

LOL - "voluntary treatment for addiction"!!!  How long will that last when the Mega-Drug makers are pouring huge donations of cash and cocaine into every Congressman, President, Governor and state legislatures?  Who the F- will want to treat addiction when they can make farm more money feeding addiction.....AND CONTROLLING THE ADDICTED?

The last mass-addiction America had was called "Soldiers' Disease," following the civil war. It was perfectly legal to be addicted to morphine and its derivatives. As a result, people could pay real world prices for their addictions - no upcharge for criminal risk taking. And yet - AND YET, - the vast majority kicked. You see, they were only addicted to the one thing: the drug itself. There was no subculture, there was no chase to score, there was no need to WORK at acquiring product. There was just the addiction, and the cure was to sweat it out. And that is what the majority of that generation did.

Prohibition creates the scoring game, and people are as addicted to scoring as they are to the dope itself.
 
Continued...
 

Skans » 12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Mar 2024, 1:01 pm

You mean like they do to Big Pharma?  Big Tech?  Social Media?  How has that worked out for us?  Is your legislator doing a good job of regulating these industries?  Will your legislator do a good job of regulating Cocaine Inc., when she is receiving mega campaign donations and all the cocaine she can ingest?  Boy, you have a real kindhearted trust and awe for your Legislators, don't you!

I have almost the innocent confidence in them that you have in the criminal cartels you insist are a better bet for controlling the market.

Did I mention they happily sell to children - even providing them free samples?

Skans » 14 Mar 2024, 3:38 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 3:38 pm

.Perhaps not where you are.  But, we have exactly what you describe where I am.  For now, anyway.
 

Why didn't you TELL me you were Mormon? I'd have adjusted my arguments accordingly.