Poll

Would you support a Military Coup to remove a Corrupted Government?

Yes62%62% - 89
No, democracy has tools to remove corrupted politicians37%37% - 54
Total: 143
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6900|USA

sergeriver wrote:

lowing wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Lowing when you attack Liberal people you are attacking half your country m8.  Did you ever think that?  Being Liberal is not such a bad thing, you should try it yourself, at least to know what you are talking about.
I would try it, but sharing my hard earned money with those that don't feel like they need to work for a living just doesn't appeal to me.
Being a liberal means you don't want to work for a living?  Or you just talk about the people who kept out of the American dream and haven't been as lucky as you.  You know there are some requirements to get your social security check?  It must be pretty sad living in a bunker waiting to be bombed or invaded by immigrants.
In America today, if you are not living the American dream you have to look no further than in the mirror to find the one responsible.

No actually, I don't live in a bunker. You see, when you work for a living you earn money. With that money you can buy all kinds of shit. One of which is my new home. ( my 3rd new home).

As far as the invasion from Mexico, your, who cares attitude. is EXACTLY the liberal response that I appose and contributes to the problem....


And by the way, ALL I have and DON'T have is not by luck, it is by working for it, or not working hard enough for it. I take complete credit for all I have, and complete responsibility for all I want, and DON'T have.

Last edited by lowing (2006-09-23 02:56:53)

JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6835|Montreal

lowing wrote:

I have 100% absolutely no use for people in this country that leech off of hard working Americans. Like it or not, these are also the SAME VOTERS that liberal democrats target for re-election. Sorry if the truth tastes so bitter.
What proof exactly are you basing that incredible claim on?
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6939|Tampa Bay Florida
There was once greed.... and then, there was lowing.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6900|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing wrote:

I have 100% absolutely no use for people in this country that leech off of hard working Americans. Like it or not, these are also the SAME VOTERS that liberal democrats target for re-election. Sorry if the truth tastes so bitter.
What proof exactly are you basing that incredible claim on?
Well, if you think the poor and the"unlucky" and the Majority of the minority communities vote conservative Republican then you are on crack. Do your own research.

I am not saying the democratic party doesn't have its educated, wealthy and successful citizens. They do, however, support big govt. I don't
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6900|USA

Spearhead wrote:

There was once greed.... and then, there was lowing.
so  I am a racist AND  NOW I am greedy,..........how so??

Last edited by lowing (2006-09-23 03:38:12)

sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7006|Argentina

lowing wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

lowing wrote:


I would try it, but sharing my hard earned money with those that don't feel like they need to work for a living just doesn't appeal to me.
Being a liberal means you don't want to work for a living?  Or you just talk about the people who kept out of the American dream and haven't been as lucky as you.  You know there are some requirements to get your social security check?  It must be pretty sad living in a bunker waiting to be bombed or invaded by immigrants.
In America today, if you are not living the American dream you have to look no further than in the mirror to find the one responsible.

No actually, I don't live in a bunker. You see, when you work for a living you earn money. With that money you can buy all kinds of shit. One of which is my new home. ( my 3rd new home).

As far as the invasion from Mexico, your, who cares attitude. is EXACTLY the liberal response that I appose and contributes to the problem....


And by the way, ALL I have and DON'T have is not by luck, it is by working for it, or not working hard enough for it. I take complete credit for all I have, and complete responsibility for all I want, and DON'T have.
Lowing, I also bought my home and my car and all the shit I have with the money I earn with my business.  But I also pay taxes and those taxes should be used among other things to help people with basic needs unsatisfied.  That's not communism, that's social security and if you forget your fellow country men and women in need, what are you defending your homeland for?
Rosse_modest
Member
+76|7025|Antwerp, Flanders

sergeriver wrote:

lowing wrote:

sergeriver wrote:


Being a liberal means you don't want to work for a living?  Or you just talk about the people who kept out of the American dream and haven't been as lucky as you.  You know there are some requirements to get your social security check?  It must be pretty sad living in a bunker waiting to be bombed or invaded by immigrants.
In America today, if you are not living the American dream you have to look no further than in the mirror to find the one responsible.

No actually, I don't live in a bunker. You see, when you work for a living you earn money. With that money you can buy all kinds of shit. One of which is my new home. ( my 3rd new home).

As far as the invasion from Mexico, your, who cares attitude. is EXACTLY the liberal response that I appose and contributes to the problem....


And by the way, ALL I have and DON'T have is not by luck, it is by working for it, or not working hard enough for it. I take complete credit for all I have, and complete responsibility for all I want, and DON'T have.
Lowing, I also bought my home and my car and all the shit I have with the money I earn with my business.  But I also pay taxes and those taxes should be used among other things to help people with basic needs unsatisfied.  That's not communism, that's social security and if you forget your fellow country men and women in need, what are you defending your homeland for?
For the right to be an egotistical shortsighted fool.
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6787|Long Island, New York
I would.
DocZ
Member
+13|6937|Belgium
Democracy is an illusion...  to keep the masses at bay...

If democracy worked, we would already have a completely different government here in Belgium...
Plus, I see no reason why democracy would work anywhere else aswell...
It is a nice concept, but the proverb doesn't say "power corrupts" for no reason...  I am still to meet an honest politician... ( Or a lawyer for that matter.... )
Rosse_modest
Member
+76|7025|Antwerp, Flanders

DocZ wrote:

Democracy is an illusion...  to keep the masses at bay...

If democracy worked, we would already have a completely different government here in Belgium...
Plus, I see no reason why democracy would work anywhere else aswell...
It is a nice concept, but the proverb doesn't say "power corrupts" for no reason...  I am still to meet an honest politician... ( Or a lawyer for that matter.... )
Democracy is not an illusion, there just aren't any democracies in this day and age.
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6939|Tampa Bay Florida

lowing wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

There was once greed.... and then, there was lowing.
so  I am a racist AND  NOW I am greedy,..........how so??
"Leech money off of hard working Americans"

Whether you believe or not, lowing, most Americans are hard working.  Your little idea that all working class people are just too lazy to earn more money is very old and very cliche.  Believe it or not, most working class people aren't as smart, aren't as creative, and don't have as many opportunities as you.  Does that mean we shouldn't support them? 

As for the racist thing, you can't comprehend the fact that the white Europeans and Americans f*cked the African continent and culture pretty much beyond repair.  Black racism towards whites at least has some truth and meaning, but the vice versa is just plain racism.  If you hate it when blacks happen to call you "white boy" or "kracker", then live with it.  If you are personally offended, then ignore them.  There are racists in every race, the sooner we realize that stereotyping is BS, the sooner racism will end
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6893|Seattle, WA

sergeriver wrote:

But I also pay taxes and those taxes should be used among other things to help people with basic needs unsatisfied.  That's not communism, that's social security and if you forget your fellow country men and women in need, what are you defending your homeland for?
Thats why we have the social security program, and EXACTLY why we need to privatize it, yet you libs think that is such a horrendous idea (oh free choice forget that)...and excuse me you think we can use tax money for "social security" hah, do you have any idea how bad our economy would be, Have you EVER taken an economics class, while I AGREE IT WOULD be nice to help people who need it, it certainly wouldn't help EVERYONE to have a shitty economy by mistakingly trying to help someone in need

Thats the problem right there, your emotions getting in the way of the truth, we do need taxes for a stable economy, too much taxation is bad, and not enough is bad too.  Your high if you think those taxes should be used "among other things" to help people with basic needs.  They should help themselves to a job. 

I heard some guy the other day complaining on the radio how he had no health insurance, well no shit he's unemployed, god get a job at Fred Meyer (grocery store) or Safeway, or something and you have health insurance in bam 6 months.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7006|Argentina

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

But I also pay taxes and those taxes should be used among other things to help people with basic needs unsatisfied.  That's not communism, that's social security and if you forget your fellow country men and women in need, what are you defending your homeland for?
Thats why we have the social security program, and EXACTLY why we need to privatize it, yet you libs think that is such a horrendous idea (oh free choice forget that)...and excuse me you think we can use tax money for "social security" hah, do you have any idea how bad our economy would be, Have you EVER taken an economics class, while I AGREE IT WOULD be nice to help people who need it, it certainly wouldn't help EVERYONE to have a shitty economy by mistakingly trying to help someone in need

Thats the problem right there, your emotions getting in the way of the truth, we do need taxes for a stable economy, too much taxation is bad, and not enough is bad too.  Your high if you think those taxes should be used "among other things" to help people with basic needs.  They should help themselves to a job. 

I heard some guy the other day complaining on the radio how he had no health insurance, well no shit he's unemployed, god get a job at Fred Meyer (grocery store) or Safeway, or something and you have health insurance in bam 6 months.
We won't ever agree on this issue m8.  And I can say I know a little shit of economy, that's what I studied.  The best economies in the world take up to 49% of your earnings.  Of course, if you cut taxes to the level GWB did, you won't have money for anything but foreign issues, and then people of N.O. are still homeless after a year.

Last edited by sergeriver (2006-09-23 17:34:02)

topthrill05
Member
+125|6827|Rochester NY USA
"Black racism towards whites at least has some truth and meaning, but the vice versa is just plain racism.  If you hate it when blacks happen to call you "white boy" or "kracker", then live with it.  If you are personally offended, then ignore them."

Is that a joke? So if I call someone a dumb nigger because they can't speak english or write it then I am not being a raciest because it has some truth too it? How about my great grandfather raped your great grandmother, should I still take shit for it?

Your logic is flawed.
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6893|Seattle, WA

sergeriver wrote:

We won't ever agree on this issue m8.  And I can say I know a little shit of economy, that's what I studied.  The best economies in the world take up to 49% of your earnings.  Of course, if you cut taxes to the level GWB did, you won't have money for anything but foreign issues, and then people of N.O. are still homeless after a year.
Ok than, the best economies in the world take up to 49% of individual earnings.  What does the U.S. take? (This is a quiz). And why is that important?(Not sarcasm, an actual question on your opinion on why you think that is important)

So we cut taxes as per GWB, and people spend more money boosting the economy (if you haven't checked the DOW and the economy as a whole is on the rise)........ and N.O. has less to do with taxes and more to do with retarded local, state, and fed(FEMA) directors who don't know what they are doing.

Its ok if we don't agree, but you said
THOSE TAXES SHOULD BE USED...to help people with basic needs
Ok every time anyone gets a paycheck, there is something called a "social security" tax, hmmm I wonder what that is used for.  Are you saying we need to RAISE taxes on SS?? You failed to respond to my privatization "statment"/question.  Do you think privatiziation of SS would be a good idea??

Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-09-23 17:38:41)

topthrill05
Member
+125|6827|Rochester NY USA

sergeriver wrote:

Of course, if you cut taxes to the level GWB did, you won't have money for anything but foreign issues, and then people of N.O. are still homeless after a year.
You are just plain wrong there.

Not bashing, but completely off the real reason.
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6893|Seattle, WA

topthrill05 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Of course, if you cut taxes to the level GWB did, you won't have money for anything but foreign issues, and then people of N.O. are still homeless after a year.
You are just plain wrong there.

Not bashing, but completely off the real reason.
Exactly what I thought, taxes have little to do with how Katrina was handled.  And we use a *(&#*(@#& load of money from taxes on A LOT other things than foreign issues.  If economics was something you studied, you sure haven't proved it as of yet.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7006|Argentina

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

We won't ever agree on this issue m8.  And I can say I know a little shit of economy, that's what I studied.  The best economies in the world take up to 49% of your earnings.  Of course, if you cut taxes to the level GWB did, you won't have money for anything but foreign issues, and then people of N.O. are still homeless after a year.
Ok than, the best economies in the world take up to 49% of individual earnings.  What does the U.S. take? (This is a quiz). And why is that important?(Not sarcasm, an actual question on your opinion on why you think that is important)

So we cut taxes as per GWB, and people spend more money boosting the economy (if you haven't checked the DOW and the economy as a whole is on the rise)........ and N.O. has less to do with taxes and more to do with retarded local, state, and fed(FEMA) directors who don't know what they are doing.

Its ok if we don't agree, but you said
THOSE TAXES SHOULD BE USED...to help people with basic needs
Ok every time anyone gets a paycheck, there is something called a "social security" tax, hmmm I wonder what that is used for.  Are you saying we need to RAISE taxes on SS?? You failed to respond to my privatization "statment"/question.  Do you think privatiziation of SS would be a good idea??
Here you go for your knowledge http://www.worldwide-tax.com/.
I never said RAISE taxes on SS, I said that taxes are very low in the US.  And regarding the privatization of the SS it would be a disaster, believe me, they did in other countries and didn't work.  Do your research.
Now you are happy coz they are taking less money from your earnings, but you are absolutely wrong about the economy boom in your country.

Bush Administration Fails to Jumpstart Economy
As of May, 2005, there have been 893,000 jobs created over the first 52 months of the Bush presidency - a gain that is due solely to the 917,000 jobs created in the government sector that offset the 24,000 jobs lost in the private sector. Since the Great Depression, no other president who served at least 52 months has overseen a net loss in private sector jobs through this point. In addition to lack of job growth, real weekly and hourly wages have declined since the start of the recession. At a time when middle-class Americans are experiencing stagnant wages and vanishing benefits, CEO pay continues to rise.
Source: Center for American Progress, Economic Policy Weekly, Jenna Churchman, June 6, 2005

Bush Budget Slashes Education, Veterans' Health Care, Law Enforcement, and Environmental Protections
The Bush administration's budget for the 2006 fiscal year will cut non-defense discretionary spending, including education, veteran's health care, law enforcement, and environmental protections. In all, President Bush's fiscal 2006 budget plan calls for elimination of or drastic cuts from 154 programs. Funding for the Iraq war, however, was recently increased. A House subcommittee approved an initial $45 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan next year, two weeks after Congress approved $82 billion for this year's costs of the conflicts. Although President Bush argues that it is too early to request money for the wars during the 2006 budget year, which starts Oct. 1, with no timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, war costs are certain and many lawmakers are reluctant to wait for his request.
Source: Washington Post, "Bush's '06 Budget Would Scrap or Reduce 154 Programs," Judy Sarasohn, February 22, 2005; Washington Post, "House Bill Would Provide $45B More for War," Liz Sidoti, May 24, 2005

Numbers Contradict Bush's Claims of Economic Growth
In the 2005 State of the Union address, Bush said that more Americans are going back to work and that the economy is growing and healthy. The numbers don't necessarily support this assumption. Job growth over the last 18 months has fallen short of administration predictions by 1,703,000—more than one-third fewer jobs than the president's Council of Economic Advisers said would be created. Present employment levels show only 119,000 more individuals working than when Bush took office in 2001, which is effectively a decrease in employment rates, as the total civilian labor force grew by more than two million workers in 2004 alone, according to the Department of Labor. Additionally, the most recent data from the Census Bureau show that the average income for middle-class households has dropped by $1,525 since its peak in 2000. The labor force participation rate—the percentage of people either working or looking for work—fell in Jan. 2005 to a seasonally adjusted 65.8 percent, the lowest rate since 1988.
Sources: USA Today, "Fewer Americans participating in labor force or seeking jobs," Barbara Hagenbaugh, Feb. 6, 2005; Department of Labor, "Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age," Feb. 2005; Center for American Progress, "American Progress Report: Talking Points," Feb. 2, 2005; Center for American Progress, "On the January Employment Situation," Scott Lily, Feb. 4, 2005; "State of the Union," President Bush, Feb. 2, 2005; Economic Policy Institute, Feb. 4, 2005.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7006|Argentina

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

topthrill05 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Of course, if you cut taxes to the level GWB did, you won't have money for anything but foreign issues, and then people of N.O. are still homeless after a year.
You are just plain wrong there.

Not bashing, but completely off the real reason.
Exactly what I thought, taxes have little to do with how Katrina was handled.  And we use a *(&#*(@#& load of money from taxes on A LOT other things than foreign issues.  If economics was something you studied, you sure haven't proved it as of yet.
I don't have to prove nothing, I know me and that's enough for me m8.
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6893|Seattle, WA

sergeriver wrote:

1) I never said RAISE taxes on SS, I said that taxes are very low in the US.  And regarding the privatization of the SS it would be a disaster, believe me, they did in other countries and didn't work.
Since you decided to avoid some of my QUESTIONS, I see no reason to respond to any information.  I never said that you SAID that taxes should be raised, I asked you a question, no need to assume anything more than that. WOW.

So you can source an article, and no you don't have anything to prove, but when you don't respond to my questions asking your own opinion, than it seems somewhat dubious for you to CLAIM that you know something about whatever we are talking about.  So anyways, calm down, I was ASKING for your opinion, not criticizing you. once again, WOW.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7006|Argentina

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

1) I never said RAISE taxes on SS, I said that taxes are very low in the US.  And regarding the privatization of the SS it would be a disaster, believe me, they did in other countries and didn't work.
Since you decided to avoid some of my QUESTIONS, I see no reason to respond to any information.  I never said that you SAID that taxes should be raised, I asked you a question, no need to assume anything more than that. WOW.

So you can source an article, and no you don't have anything to prove, but when you don't respond to my questions asking your own opinion, than it seems somewhat dubious for you to CLAIM that you know something about whatever we are talking about.  So anyways, calm down, I was ASKING for your opinion, not criticizing you. once again, WOW.
Which one of your thousand questions am I avoiding?
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6893|Seattle, WA

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

What does the U.S. take? (This is a quiz). And why is that important?(Not sarcasm, an actual question on your opinion on why you think that is important)

So we cut taxes as per GWB, and people spend more money boosting the economy (if you haven't checked the DOW and the economy as a whole is on the rise)........ and N.O. has less to do with taxes and more to do with retarded local, state, and fed(FEMA) directors who don't know what they are doing.  Whats your point with low taxes here?

Its ok if we don't agree, but you said
THOSE TAXES SHOULD BE USED...to help people with basic needs
Ok every time anyone gets a paycheck, there is something called a "social security" tax Whats the problem here???

Are you saying we need to RAISE taxes on SS?? Thats called a question sergeriver, not an assumption or accusation

Do you think privatization of SS would be a good idea?? Ok so you don't think so, you say it would be horrible by only quoting other countries that tried to do it, but you and I both know they didn't go about it in the right way and put way too much effort in the wrong areas.  So why don't you think it would be a good idea?
I highlighted ALL the QUESTIONS so you can plainly see them, they are not accusations or assumptions, they are simply questions regarding your opinion, which I do respect.  So if you don't mind, please humor me and answer those questions so I may more better converse with you on this subject.  Thank you.

Edit: I added info in the "quote" to better help you identify my intent with the questions, the added information was not and is not intended to mislead you into thinking that the added information was there before.

Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-09-23 18:07:22)

sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7006|Argentina

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

What does the U.S. take? (This is a quiz). And why is that important?(Not sarcasm, an actual question on your opinion on why you think that is important)

So we cut taxes as per GWB, and people spend more money boosting the economy (if you haven't checked the DOW and the economy as a whole is on the rise)........ and N.O. has less to do with taxes and more to do with retarded local, state, and fed(FEMA) directors who don't know what they are doing.  Whats your point with low taxes here?

Its ok if we don't agree, but you said
THOSE TAXES SHOULD BE USED...to help people with basic needs
Ok every time anyone gets a paycheck, there is something called a "social security" tax Whats the problem here???

Are you saying we need to RAISE taxes on SS?? Thats called a question sergeriver, not an assumption or accusation

Do you think privatization of SS would be a good idea?? Ok so you don't think so, you say it would be horrible by only quoting other countries that tried to do it, but you and I both know they didn't go about it in the right way and put way too much effort in the wrong areas.  So why don't you think it would be a good idea?
I highlighted ALL the QUESTIONS so you can plainly see them, they are not accusations or assumptions, they are simply questions regarding your opinion, which I do respect.  So if you don't mind, please humor me and answer those questions so I may more better converse with you on this subject.  Thank you.

Edit: I added info in the "quote" to better help you identify my intent with the questions, the added information was not and is not intended to mislead you into thinking that the added information was there before.
If you read my previous posts all these questions were answered.
1-What does the Us take? 
http://www.worldwide-tax.com/.  Read and compare.
2-Whats your point with low taxes here? 
My point is when you spent more than you earn you have deficit, and this government has a huge one.
3-Ok every time anyone gets a paycheck, there is something called a "social security" tax
That's not an answer.  It's an statement.
4-Are you saying we need to RAISE taxes on SS?? 
I say you need to raise taxes in the US.  Social Security system has a surplus in fact but the government is saying there is a deficit there to call the privatization.
5-So why don't you think it would be a good idea?
As I mention before the SS privatization didn't work in a lot of countries.  SS is an issue that the government shoul take care of.  You can't sell the future of a lot of people to Insurance Companies and banks.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6804
I´ll answer by quoting what scrolled across the front of the US Mission to Cuba´s windows when I visited their today - Liberty does not come though imposition. Hypocritical but correct.
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6939|Tampa Bay Florida

topthrill05 wrote:

"Black racism towards whites at least has some truth and meaning, but the vice versa is just plain racism.  If you hate it when blacks happen to call you "white boy" or "kracker", then live with it.  If you are personally offended, then ignore them."

Is that a joke? So if I call someone a dumb nigger because they can't speak english or write it then I am not being a raciest because it has some truth too it? How about my great grandfather raped your great grandmother, should I still take shit for it?

Your logic is flawed.
You know what I freaking mean.  Tell me the last time blacks invaded a white country and turned them into slaves.  If you went tp Africa, and didn't speak a word of their language, does that mean that you are dumb white trash?  The African that doesn't speak english could be a preacher, or a lawyer.  That doesn't mean they're a "dumb nigger".  Classifying someone as a "dumb nigger" is racist in itself.  Call them dumb, a hobo, or a lowlife criminal.  But using the word "nigger" is plain racism.  Are you saying that white people who don't speak english or write it are dumb niggers as well?  White people rape eachother, too, you know.

Your logic is flawed.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard