Lost all respect for Brad Pitt

[Docscurlock]

"This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly

Nope, my power company is a privately owned power monopoly

regulated by the US department of energy.

Oooh, couldn't live without this government bureaucracy.

I then took a shower in the clean water provided by the municipal water utility.

nope, got a well.

After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC regulated channels to see

hate TV, if I watch TV it is netflix ( a private company)streamed over the internet by my provider (a private company)

what the national weather service of the national oceanographic and atmospheric administration determined the weather was going to be like using satellites designed, built, and launched by the national aeronautics and space administration. I watched this while eating my breakfast of US department of agriculture inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the food and drug administration.

All could have been done cheaper and more efficiently by the private sector

At the appropriate time as regulated by the US congress and kept accurate by the national institute of standards and technology and the US naval observatory,

Like that needs a bureaucracy to keep running

I get into my national highway traffic safety administration approved automobile and set out to work on the roads built by the local, state, and federal departments of transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the environmental protection agency, using legal tender issued by the federal reserve bank. On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the US postal service and drop the kids off at the public school.

After work, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building fire codes and fire marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all its valuables thanks to the local police department.

I then log on to the internet which was developed by the defense advanced research projects administration and bash the evils of 'Socialism.'"

Stop speaking on things you're absolutely clueless of.[/QUOTE]


All of the services you have talked about are paid for by TAXPAYERS, people who WORK and by corporations that DEVELOPE and SELL products for a PROFIT. None of it was free, just happened, was accomplished by the myriad government employees because they felt like it, or were GIVEN to me for nothing. Do you think money to pay for all the government services and bureaucracy just magically appears or is grown on a tree harvested by fairies and deposited in the government coffers at midnight every night. The only part of this country that is socialist is the government employees. It is the biggest social welfare program ever invented. You are the clueless one, you let the gov take care of you and provide you with money for whatever "service" you provide them.

Sponsored

 

[watisthis]

You're going to hurt my feelings by talking this way. Go ahead and vote for that crazy vodka swilling, communist wanna be. What do I care? I will vote for American culture and values until the day I die, or have been properly reprogrammed by the Bernie Bros.

Alright, good for you. How about you stop making shit up tho?

Reprogrammed? Lmao! Manufactured outrage spewed from well-paid pundits whose job is to influence the gullible electorate into believing whatever positions benefit the ruling wealthy elite. Massive corporate conglomerates who own all main stream media who feel like their existence is threatened by a Sanders presidency painting the man in a bad light, literally the same thing happened to Trump.

 

[watisthis]

Nope, my power company is a privately owned power monopoly
Oooh, couldn't live without this government bureaucracy.



nope, got a well.


hate TV, if I watch TV it is netflix ( a private company)streamed over the internet by my provider (a private company)



All could have been done cheaper and more efficiently by the private sector

Like that needs a bureaucracy to keep running

I get into my national highway traffic safety administration approved automobile and set out to work on the roads built by the local, state, and federal departments of transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the environmental protection agency, using legal tender issued by the federal reserve bank. On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the US postal service and drop the kids off at the public school.

After work, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building fire codes and fire marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all its valuables thanks to the local police department.

I then log on to the internet which was developed by the defense advanced research projects administration and bash the evils of 'Socialism.'"

Stop speaking on things you're absolutely clueless of.


All of the services you have talked about are paid for by TAXPAYERS, people who WORK and by corporations that DEVELOPE and SELL products for a PROFIT. None of it was free, just happened, was accomplished by the myriad government employees because they felt like it, or were GIVEN to me for nothing. Do you think money to pay for all the government services and bureaucracy just magically appears or is grown on a tree harvested by fairies and deposited in the government coffers at midnight every night. The only part of this country that is socialist is the government employees. It is the biggest social welfare program ever invented. You are the clueless one, you let the gov take care of you and provide you with money for whatever "service" you provide them.

Woosh, right over your head.

 

[Docscurlock]

Alright, good for you. How about you stop making shit up tho?

Reprogrammed? Lmao! Manufactured outrage spewed from well-paid pundits whose job is to influence the gullible electorate into believing whatever positions benefit the ruling wealthy elite. Massive corporate conglomerates who own all main stream media who feel like their existence is threatened by a Sanders presidency painting the man in a bad light, literally the same thing happened to Trump.

Only Trump didn't say he was going to take all of our money and pay for social programs.
Funny though, Manufactured outrage, well-paid pundits, gullible electorate, benefit the ruling wealthy elite, Massive corporate conglomerates.

You sound like AOC and her rabid followers.

 

[Docscurlock]

Woosh, right over your head.

It's not over my head, it's over your head. if you think .gov is your Savior and GOD, more power to you. Me, I want no part of it.

 

[watisthis]

Only Trump didn't say he was going to take all of our money and pay for social programs.
Funny though, Manufactured outrage, well-paid pundits, gullible electorate, benefit the ruling wealthy elite, Massive corporate conglomerates.

You sound like AOC and her rabid followers.

Yeah, Trump said we would have Mexico pay for the wall, surprise, we're paying for it that's your so called 'socialism.' Also, that trade war? Yeah, we paid for that and gave 'socialism' to farmers. How about those billionaires? Tax breaks more of that 'socialism' you keep talking about.

You just can't comprehend the simplest of things.

 

[Docscurlock]

Yeah, Trump said we would have Mexico pay for the wall, surprise, we're paying for it that's your so called 'socialism.' Also, that trade war? Yeah, we paid for that and gave 'socialism' to farmers. How about those billionaires? Tax breaks more of that 'socialism' you keep talking about.

You just can't comprehend the simplest of things.

Is your real name Rachel Maddow?

Can you tell me where that money comes from that you are paid with in your cushy .gov job?

 

[watisthis]

It's not over my head, it's over your head. if you think .gov is your Savior and GOD, more power to you. Me, I want no part of it.

No, you're just a dumb dumb who doesn't understand what socialism is. The fact you don't understand what the govt does is the big woosh.

Socialism is strictly the idea that the means of production is owned by the people. Republicans call anything that might benefit society 'socialism' and people get tired of correcting these idiots who lie and mislabel anything they can't understand or don't like.

 

[Docscurlock]

No, you're just a dumb dumb who doesn't understand what socialism is. The fact you don't understand what the govt does is the big woosh.

A dumb dumb? Now that hurts. I understand exactly what .gov does and 80% of our non military government could disappear and no one would be effected or care.

Socialism is strictly the idea that the means of production is owned by the people. Republicans call anything that might benefit society 'socialism' and people get tired of correcting these idiots who lie and mislabel anything they can't understand or don't like.

And we see how well that has worked in many places all over the world.

 

[watisthis]

A dumb dumb? Now that hurts. I understand exactly what .gov does and 80% of our non military government could disappear and no one would be effected or care.



And we see how well that has worked in many places all over the world.

Obviously you do not, how about you go visit those countries without gov't. How many are there again? All those great 3rd world countries like Libya and Somalia who have had limited or no gov't before.

Humans organize into hierarchical groups, larger groups are more powerful. Given those two FACTS, we live in a world where those who fail to organize, or organize smaller groups find themselves at the mercy of those who are better organized.

One example would be: would it be better to instead pay one elected gov't or instead pay protection money to many different groups whose allegiances and accountability were less structured? Because that's really the only other choice. In the end someone will inevitably establish and maintain a monopoly on force and along with that comes power and governance.

You have an extremely narrow scope of how things work.


You're right, let me ask the rest of the developed world who already have those policies in place, literally everyone else, lmao.

 

[Docscurlock]

Obviously you do not, how about you go visit those countries without gov't. How many are there again? All those great 3rd world countries like Libya and Somalia who have had limited or no gov't before.

Humans organize into hierarchical groups, larger groups are more powerful. Given those two FACTS, we live in a world where those who fail to organize, or organize smaller groups find themselves at the mercy of those who are better organized.

One example would be: would it be better to instead pay one elected gov't or instead pay protection money to many different groups whose allegiances and accountability were less structured? Because that's really the only other choice. In the end someone will inevitably establish and maintain a monopoly on force and along with that comes power and governance.

You have an extremely narrow scope of how things work.


You're right, let me ask the rest of the developed world who already have those policies in place, literally everyone else, lmao.

I forgot who I was talking to, I was referring to the Federal government, not the State and local government. Some of those people actually work and do some good. The federal government is the world's largest welfare state.

 

[watisthis]

I forgot who I was talking to, I was referring to the Federal government, not the State and local government. Some of those people actually work and do some good. The federal government is the world's largest welfare state.

No, you forgot history. It has nothing to do with me, you just seem to be unable to do simple research prior to opening your mouth. We've tried it before just read the link, it was unworkable then and would be even worse now especially in respect to commerce, law, and America in general.

Commerce, without the federal government sharing a currency would be far more difficult. No currency union or fiscal union without governance would lead to problems and unstable systems, see EU, or read up on how currency works. No fed would basically mean no dollar. Instead a whole bunch of difference currencies for each state. The dollar is artificially strengthened by its status as a worlds reserve. The would mean Americans buying power would go down in this fed less world and it would get increasingly worse for smaller, poorer states. Not to mention even basic inter state business would come with fees and risks such as tariffs or other trade reducing practices so trade would be driven down and drive prices up. In comes a free trade agreement. Good luck negotiating that without a federal government for 50 states.

People would be less likely to move from state to state due to no full faith and credit clause i.e. drivers license and the like. The stats would then have to set up their own education health standards, and retirement systems, good luck keeping your pension, once again making it difficult to have inter-state mobility. All of this will reduce economic growth further and in the states that do grow. This in turn will increase the demands on social safety net programs on the states that stagnate.

Without the fed, the integration of literally everything we take for granted would be incredibly different

Now the real debate is weather you believe you are smarter than the founders of our government who constructed it like this for reasons you seem to not understand. Debating existence is woefully ignorant, debating scope, on the other hand, is what we do every election cycle.

 

[Docscurlock]

No, you forgot history. It has nothing to do with me, you just seem to be unable to do simple research prior to opening your mouth. We've tried it before just read the link, it was unworkable then and would be even worse now especially in respect to commerce, law, and America in general.

Commerce, without the federal government sharing a currency would be far more difficult. No currency union or fiscal union without governance would lead to problems and unstable systems, see EU, or read up on how currency works. No fed would basically mean no dollar. Instead a whole bunch of difference currencies for each state. The dollar is artificially strengthened by its status as a worlds reserve. The would mean Americans buying power would go down in this fed less world and it would get increasingly worse for smaller, poorer states. Not to mention even basic inter state business would come with fees and risks such as tariffs or other trade reducing practices so trade would be driven down and drive prices up. In comes a free trade agreement. Good luck negotiating that without a federal government for 50 states.

People would be less likely to move from state to state due to no full faith and credit clause i.e. drivers license and the like. The stats would then have to set up their own education health standards, and retirement systems, good luck keeping your pension, once again making it difficult to have inter-state mobility. All of this will reduce economic growth further and in the states that do grow. This in turn will increase the demands on social safety net programs on the states that stagnate.

Without the fed, the integration of literally everything we take for granted would be incredibly different

Now the real debate is weather you believe you are smarter than the founders of our government who constructed it like this for reasons you seem to not understand. Debating existence is woefully ignorant, debating scope, on the other hand, is what we do every election cycle.

I understand it much better than you think. Our federal government was never designed to be this bloated self replicating welfare system that is full of unelected bureaucrats that think they know whats best for everyone. Here is some history for you to read:
1. DELEGATED (sometimes called enumerated or expressed) powers are specifically granted to the federal government in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. This includes the power to coin money, to regulate commerce, to declare war, to raise and maintain armed forces, and to establish a Post Office. In all, the Constitution delegates 27 powers specifically to the federal government.

Coin money: They gave that power to the Federal reserve in 1913
Regulate commerce: $1 in Michigan is worth $1 in Maryland
Declare War/Raise and Maintain Armed Forces: Already said "non military government"
Post Office: Doing a bang up job here, at least Jeff Bezos is making money from it

Politicians have used the "necessary and proper" clause to invent the monstrosity we call a Federal Government. Face it, 80% of "federal" government positions are irrelevant to the function of normal society and are essentially welfare for the people who are employed by it.

And, to keep the thread on topic:

 

[watisthis]

I understand it much better than you think. Our federal government was never designed to be this bloated self replicating welfare system that is full of unelected bureaucrats that think they know whats best for everyone. Here is some history for you to read:
1. DELEGATED (sometimes called enumerated or expressed) powers are specifically granted to the federal government in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. This includes the power to coin money, to regulate commerce, to declare war, to raise and maintain armed forces, and to establish a Post Office. In all, the Constitution delegates 27 powers specifically to the federal government.

Coin money: They gave that power to the Federal reserve in 1913
Regulate commerce: $1 in Michigan is worth $1 in Maryland
Declare War/Raise and Maintain Armed Forces: Already said "non military government"
Post Office: Doing a bang up job here, at least Jeff Bezos is making money from it

Politicians have used the "necessary and proper" clause to invent the monstrosity we call a Federal Government. Face it, 80% of "federal" government positions are irrelevant to the function of normal society and are essentially welfare for the people who are employed by it.

And, to keep the thread on topic:

Do you want me to debate the necessity of government or welfare? You seem to be upset about the entire idea of literally everything that benefits society rather than just yourself.

 

[Docscurlock]

We have been debating the necessity of government and the fact that it is state sponsored welfare. Of course, you are going to be all for it. I have always been willing to pay my fair share for stuff, but now I will have to pay everyone's fair share. It will either be "live my old age in penury" or work until I die. There will be no avenue to save money left.

Sponsored