America this week, what the hell?

[Victor_inox]

You can argue that if both students had a B average then the C average student would now have a better employment options when they graduate. Thus earning more money and less of a chance of needing financial assistance. But the student with the A average would have to once again work harder to work and prove that they are worth more money than their transcripts tell. That is why we try in school correct. High school transcripts help us get in to better colleges. College transcripts help us get in to better jobs. Those jobs on our resume help us step further up the ladder on our way to meet what ever goal we set for ourselves.

I for one will never get behind socialism of any form. I work hard for everything I have and it's not much but I earned it all. I fix my own stuff (house, truck, 4Runner) when I can. I don't expect anyone to give me a hand out and if they did I would feel like its ill-gotten gains and probably give it to somebody/group that needed it.

I see all these groups of people that say we need to move towards one form of socialism or another. But I have yet to meet one person in those groups that willingly gives their money to someone that has less than them. It's easy to say something is a good idea but it's a lot harder to act on it.

That does not just apply to socialism it's a life truth the world over. Let's take America. We have so many people that wave a flag and say they support our troops but don't go out of their way to help them.

It doesn't even take money. It could be a simple as writing your elected representatives weekly about fixing the VA. We have these wealthy celebrities that say we need to feed and clothe the poor. That's an easy one, take some of your movie money or the money you spend on the flights around the country to speak about it and give it to shelters/food banks, instead of running your mouth to people that already agree with you lead by example.

I don't have a lot of money to help with but I do offer a very large discount to all active duty military LEO's and first responders. And well as a smaller discount for all retired.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Society evolve, many tasks eliminated or done differently.
Today's American farmer feeds about 155 people worldwide. In 1960, that number was 25.8

At some point 90% of people don`t have to work ( in a sense we use it today) . What do you suggest gonna happen to those 90%?
One way is to let them die. Does it fit your desire for human evolution?

 

[Hepar]

Not picking on you but I noticed you haven't called out ndecent for doing the same thing. Is their a reason for that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, I don't remember the specifics you speak of nor remember him asking to point out the "propaganda and misinformation." I was just answering the question.

 

[Thefishguy77]

Post 1905 stating that because republicans won't fully fund planes parenthood they are causing the premature deaths of American children.
And post 1889 saying that being a conservative state like Texas is a direct responsibility for a rise in maternity deaths.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thefishguy77]

Republicans Try Defunding Planned Parenthood In Dead Zika Bill

The do nothing republican congress may be causing the premature deaths of American children.

I have to ask ndecent. Do you believe in 3rd trimester abortions for non medical reasons?

If so you are endorsing the premature deaths of American children. 3rd trimester is viable as a child. May take some time in the toaster at the hospital but the child will live a very high percentage of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hepar]

Post 1905 stating that because republicans won't fully fund planes parenthood they are causing the premature deaths of American children.
And post 1889 saying that being a conservative state like Texas is a direct responsibility for a rise in maternity deaths.

And the post where he ask to have someone point that out?

 

[Gunslinger-13]

You recently posted a link from a website with headlines that included titles like, "It's Working: Muslims Everywhere Threatening To Leave U.S. If Trump Wins" and "Gross! Internet Investigates ‘Mysterious Green Substance’ Hillary Spit in Cup [Warning: Do not eat while reading this post]." Now, there's leaning and then there's sites with crap like this.

http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines...ry-media-yawns

People post all sorts of links to all sorts of sites- most are questionable. How about you speak to the actual post in question? Not some other post with a crappy link.

The above link was posted as it has a story; one the MSM isn't reporting.

So me posting that one link now makes every single point I've made moot regardless of anything else? That's rich.

 

[Hepar]

And I'm not trying to be a d*ck here. But he asked for someone to point that out. That is what I was responding to. I wasn't randomly saying to him that his information sources are crap. But if he was going to ask...

 

[Hepar]

People post all sorts of links to all sorts of sites- most are questionable. How about you speak to the actual post in question? Not some other post with a crappy link.

The above link was posted as it has a story; one the MSM isn't reporting.

So me posting that one link now makes every single point I've made moot regardless of anything else? That's rich.

You constantly post Breibart as a source. Again, there's leaning to one side or another and then there's sources like that. I really have no valid argument to make to someone if they can't see that.

 

[Thefishguy77]

Hepar,

Your post 1924 started with "you recently posted a link from a website with headlines that include titles like" and you gave examples of the titles.
You finished with "now there's leaning and then there's sites with crap like this"

I took from this that you were objecting to the crapy headlines and how the didn't appear to be news worthy. The 2 headlines that ndecent posted are the same thing. They are just propaganda to try and get ratings with little to no substance that would be considered news worthy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gunslinger-13]

And I'm not trying to be a d*ck here. But he asked for someone to point that out. That is what I was responding to. I wasn't randomly saying to him that his information sources are crap. But if he was going to ask...

You didn't even read the post then did you? Because he said I posted "right wing propaganda and misinformation" about Socialism, he was not referencing the post about "REDFLAGNEWS" which you posted and commented on.

Why not go read the post in question and speak to that specifixally instead of hand picking a single link that has nothing to do with the content of the post in question?

 

[Gunslinger-13]

You constantly post Breibart as a source. Again, there's leaning to one side or another and then there's sources like that. I really have no valid argument to make to someone if they can't see that.

I've posted to breitbert maybe once or twice, who cares? There's links from posters on this thread from both sides that are just as worthy and ridiculous as Brietbert.

I am in no way endorsing a news agency. Just posting a story for discussion.

HOW about you speak directly to the post that was in reference to "propaganda and misinformation" about socialism?

 

[CXS]

...God is like dark matter. Just gotta believe it's there even though its presence is just inferred....

"What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof." ~ Christopher Hitchens

 

[Thefishguy77]

You constantly post Breibart as a source. Again, there's leaning to one side or another and then there's sources like that. I really have no valid argument to make to someone if they can't see that.

I don't think breitbart is any less valid than say huffpo or msnbc, or CNN, or FOX.

They all have their slant on things but they all report what they feel is news. Just because you don't like their slant doesn't make them lass valid as a source. Look at msnbc and the Travon Martin deal. They lightened his photograph to make him appear less black and edited the 911 call to make it say "there's a black man in the street and I'm going to shoot him". Does that discredit them as a news source?

Breitbart has been one of the few sources actually trying to get information on our illegal alien problem. The have developed sources in CBP and HLS that are willing to put their careers on the line to give information to the American public they feel needs to be out there. Because of this on several occasions the heads of these organizations have been called to testify before congress and have backed up what has been "leaked". Don't ask me for links as I have posted them in the past regarding TB infected aliens being bussed around the country and ISIS fighters being found at the border and on both sides of the border.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Victor_inox]

I've posted to breitbert maybe once or twice, who cares? There's links from posters on this thread from both sides that are just as worthy and ridiculous as Brietbert.

I am in no way endorsing a news agency. Just posting a story for discussion.

HOW about you speak directly to the post that was in reference to "propaganda and misinformation" about socialism?

Speaking to you seems pointless you only see points if they fit your POV and dismiss opposite.

 

[Hepar]

Post 1905 stating that because republicans won't fully fund planes parenthood they are causing the premature deaths of American children.
And post 1889 saying that being a conservative state like Texas is a direct responsibility for a rise in maternity deaths.

Hepar,

Your post 1924 started with "you recently posted a link from a website with headlines that include titles like" and you gave examples of the titles.
You finished with "now there's leaning and then there's sites with crap like this"

I took from this that you were objecting to the crapy headlines and how the didn't appear to be news worthy. The 2 headlines that ndecent posted are the same thing. They are just propaganda to try and get ratings with little to no substance that would be considered news worthy.

The Texas headline was:

"Texas has highest maternal mortality rate in developed world, says new study"

Not sure there where you see propaganda or misinformation there.

And post #1905 sends me here:

http://www.toyota-4runner.org/2463957-post1905.html

You didn't even read the post then did you? Because he said I posted "right wing propaganda and misinformation" about Socialism, he was not referencing the post about "REDFLAGNEWS" which you posted and commented on.

Why not go read the post in question and speak to that specifixally instead of hand picking a single link that has nothing to do with the content of the post in question?

You're absolutely right. I chose to generally speak on your statement of "propaganda and misinformation."

 

[Thefishguy77]

Speaking to you seems pointless you only see points if they fit your POV and dismiss opposite.

Same can be said about all of us. Myself and you included. It was pointed out by 1engineer in a previous post. I doubt this will change anytime in the near future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hepar]

I don't think breitbart is any less valid than say huffpo or msnbc, or CNN, or FOX.

We'll have to agree to disagree there. I do agree that they definitely are no where near as bad as some other sources, but still...

 

[Victor_inox]

Same can be said about all of us. Myself and you included. It was pointed out by 1engineer in a previous post. I doubt this will change anytime in the near future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hope always dies last.

 

[Thefishguy77]

Society evolve, many tasks eliminated or done differently.

Today's American farmer feeds about 155 people worldwide. In 1960, that number was 25.8



At some point 90% of people don`t have to work ( in a sense we use it today) . What do you suggest gonna happen to those 90%?

One way is to let them die. Does it fit your desire for human evolution?

I don't actually see that as a plausible scenario. I think it's more of a tinfoil hat deal. We hear all this stuff about robots but now the people that were all for these robots are warning that it may not be a good idea after all. Now it's just big corporations they seem to be for it as a way to get better profits.

People like to deal with other people. Ever call in to a call center and have to press 5-10 keys to talk to a real person. Get frustrated because you would be done with your call by now if a real person had just answered from the start.

Some stores are doing away with the self checkout because people choose to use a person instead of a computer to ring up their groceries. I for one skip self check when ever possible. I would rather endorse keeping a person employed vs a computer to replace them.

I see so many comment on how the evil companies are only about money and not people. Well by endorsing the takeover of jobs by robots you are in effect endorsing the companies to fire people and only worry about profits.

Unless you think the next step in society is going to be like StarTrek where we just walk up to a computer and tell it what we want and then it just shows up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thefishguy77]

We'll have to agree to disagree there. I do agree that they definitely are no where near as bad as some other sources, but still...

Do you think they are any less valid than msnbc. And let's not forget the Brian Williams scandal where they knew he was lying about being under sniper fire and saving kittens and everything else but let it go because it was good for ratings?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk