Messages

121

Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

« on: May 13, 2017, 05:15:25 PM »

now minnesota please

now entire country please

122

Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

« on: May 13, 2017, 12:54:56 PM »

also a representative democracy is kind of logistically necessary since having every citizen make an informed vote on every bill is effectively impossible

yeah i know that but the point would be to ensure that these representatives aren't entirely comprised of elites, and involve more average people i guess. informed votes would be easier with guaranteed, adequately funded education, though.

123

Off Topic / Re: ho stuff guys off topic is about to hit 100K topics

« on: May 13, 2017, 12:03:51 PM »

i will make it my life's mission to ensure that the 100,000th title contains the phrase "gamer goo" in it

124

Off Topic / Re: The day Kimon lost his innocence

« on: May 13, 2017, 10:53:16 AM »

youre in denial

nothing gay about a little brojob every once in a while
just remember to say no homo

125

Off Topic / Re: what ice cream place does it better?

« on: May 13, 2017, 10:51:51 AM »

if you voted anything other than coldstone creamery you clearly have never had a Banana Caramel Crunch(tm) from your local coldstone creamery

also tip the employees when you get your icecream we don't get paid stuff lol

126

Off Topic / Re: The day Kimon lost his innocence

« on: May 13, 2017, 10:47:09 AM »

traps aren't gay

see this guy gets it

127

Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

« on: May 13, 2017, 10:26:24 AM »

im gonna go ahead and say i'm only gonna address a couple of your points that are focused on the central debate itself because i'm tired of writing big ass replies (sorry)

okay
who decides those brackets? you? do "climate change deniers" and people who disagree with your worldview get the same amount of resources as those who do?
who allocates the resources? how can we assure that they don't take more for themselves than give to the people who you say deserve it?
most importantly, what if the people want to be rewarded for their hard work over people who do jack stuff?

i thought i made this pretty clear before, but what i am alluding to is democratic socialism. the government would control the allocation of these resources, but the people would control the government. i don't mean how our half-baked democracy functions either, i mean kick out all the political elites, dynasties, and corrupt politicians who more or less don't listen to what the people say. it would be closer to pure democracy than what we have now, essentially. as for the "hard workers", i suppose it would be up to democracy to decide if what they did was good enough to be given more 'things'. democracy would be controlled by the laborers and common man, including even conservatives, so i suppose i don't see why not?

you're insinuating that every single person that has a forgetton of money (or just the people in the 1%) earned it through inheritance and not through hard work and innovation, which is the case with most people

while it is true that only ~15% of the top 1% achieved their wealth via inheritance, simply being born in the top 1% guarantees you a cushioned seat in the top 1% in your future. the elites send their children to expensive, prestigious private schools attended only by other children of elites. they make connections there, typically lifelong friends and subsequently future business partners. they graduate high school and jump right into ivy-league schools like harvard, primarily because their wealth is recognized and secondarily because they receive far greater than average education at these prestigious private schools. (paris hilton got into harvard with a gpa of something like 2.0) once these children and all of their friends (business partners) graduate from college, they step into the world of the economy their parents control. neither their parents, nor their business pals want to see one another fail in their pursuit of wealth, so they help them out with start-up funds and other forms of financial aid. kind of a sick bastardization of socialism that only benefits the super-wealthy, if you think about it.

at a certain point, it is undeniable that a huge portion of the super-wealthy's money is completely unnecessary. (99% of the country's capital? seriously??) these people earn money at a rate they couldn't possibly outspend.at some point, the fruits of their "hard work" become a game, trying to grab more and more money they don't need, just to say they have that much more. to get that much closer to being the elite of the elites. nobody needs 5 countryside castles for earning money that was near-guaranteed to them from a young age. imagine what even a fraction of that wealth could be used towards, had there been a reasonable cap on what they earn.

if those bougie forgets wanna cry a river because their bank account doesn't give them as many bragging rights as it did before, they can cry a damn river and wipe their tears with their immense wealth.

I'd take an economy with people who work hard that win out in the end with some casualties over one where not everyone works, then everyone gets the same stuff, then everyone gets sick and dies

right, you'd rather take an economy with 50 million americans starving, not to mention out of the workplace and thus not contributing to society, than a society where a number way lower than that maybe doesn't want to go to work, or can't quite find a job yet, while still being generally prosperous and healthy (not getting sick and dying) along with everybody else in society?

very interesting. perhaps you just aren't considering that progress may be better for the welfare of our society, rather than being too afraid to make a change because the status quo is "stable" (growth at our current rate isn't sustainable forever) for now? maybe actually consider it, rather than blowing it off because you've been hearing about how evil socialism is your whole life.

128

Off Topic / Ding Dong, It's Me (The weird man) - The Big Bopper

« on: May 12, 2017, 11:15:55 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tcygOGHsWY

129

Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

« on: May 12, 2017, 11:00:38 PM »

boo bring back the funny man put him back on stage

you want some funny forgetin jokes buddy i got a god damn joke for you

I wasn't even talking about Bernie?

didn't help that you were so vague

130

Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

« on: May 12, 2017, 10:53:46 PM »

I
I mean

did you even

the video literally has Bernie saying on tape that Comey should resign

also what the forget are you talking about "circumstances have changed", Bernie wanted Comey out, then Annoying Orange fires Comey and he flips his position
how you extrapolate "everything's different now so my guy's inconsistency is validated!!!1!!11!!!!" from that is beyond me but frankly it's loving annoying

again, i'm saying he did not write the tweet yelling at Annoying Orange for firing comey, bernie has only said that first part himself. the circumstances have changed, though, because nobody would say anything if he was fired with nothing going on, but the fact of the matter is he waited until comey started investigating him to fire him.

except they don't, because you get healthcare for yourself and not for somebody else
that is the fundamental idea behind healthcare

it's YOUR idea of what healthcare should be, not everyone's gonna agree with that.

it's less they saw an economic opportunity and more the looming threat of fascism from one empire and that we got attacked by another fascistic empire at the same time
but please continue with your warped sense of history

the overwhelming majority of americans remained adamantly against entering world war 2, but were completely fine with profiting off of it until we were attacked by japan.
keep in mind also that ww2 was far from the only time we've done something like this.

would you rather have the opposite where everyone is jobless, broke, and literally stealing food and silverware from restaurants that didn't shut down to get by?

...no? i want workers to benefit directly from the wealth they themselves create, rather than the CEOs / executives taking it all.

I can't read pure socialist jargon but I think what you're trying to say is that the people who worked during wartime didn't really want to do it and were forced, and that they didn't get a lot for it, all of which is patently false

that's not what i said, but it doesn't surprise me that you would dismiss it as jargon in order to simplify it and ignore it.

"didn't get a lot for it" - the benefits they reaped literally created the middle class as we know it today

ah yes, the great american middle class. totally not getting actively forgeted over by the top 1% of income earners or anything like that.

nobody would have enough resources to innovate because the people with good ideas would get the same amount of resources as the people with bad ideas, as per the definition of socialism
and if you want to take it one step further, people wouldn't work as hard to realize these ideas, because regardless of what they do they'd still get everything the dedicated person does, as per the definition of socialism

i think you're operating on a fundamentally flawed view of how this would work. The point of socialism is that everybody gets adequate resources, resources that would be proportionally allocated depending on the field you work in. scientists would receive the resources necessary to innovate, but it would be the resources that they need. there wouldn't be any janitors being given scientific equipment, because it would be given to the scientists. if that janitor went to college and became a scientist, though, he would then have access to these resources along with every other scientist.

because rich people don't work hard to get their wealth and power, they all just get it from their parents
who
worked hard to get their wealth and
and

ooh look free stuff

not even sure what you're saying here tbh

also, please don't say stuff will "statistically happen" without providing statistics
where do you think you are
NeoGAF

why would i need to provide statistics for that? let me illustrate what im trying to tell you here with an example:
a group is tasked with finding a number between 1 and 100. 10 people are selected, and in one instance all 10 people are placed in separate rooms and, though they ware working towards the same goal, they each have a task that has a 1/100 of being completed. now imagine all 10 of those people are allowed to be in the same room and guess all at once. this makes the likelihood of them guessing the correct number 1/10, as opposed to 1/100.

you're talking about reverse engineering as though it's a chore, meanwhile you get paid a whole lot to do it and you get to figure out how things work
do you know how popular the show "How It's Made" is and other stuff like that?
I've been to four engineering camps and I'm going to be counseling at a fifth one, and every single time reverse engineering is brought up it's been a smash hit
every single time

doesn't matter how "fun" reverse engineering is, it literally wouldn't be necessary (and you wouldnt have to pay people to do it) if the innovative knowledge was made public from the get-go.

you also fail to explain how companies can control the market with unreleased products when they don't release them, which every single company that wants to make bank will do with all of their technology eventually
otherwise it will get discovered via industrial espionage, which yes is illegal sometimes, but that's only sometimes

to give a recent and relatively simple example, consider Battlefield 1. people liked the idea of a WW1 game, so it made a lot of money. call of duty, who had been falling behind in sales due to them chasing the market trend of futuristic shooters, then started work on call of duty WW2, because they saw how well BF1 sold. Battlefield 1's release shifted the video game shooter market to be more profitable for world war shooters. now as for the unreleased part of it, battlefield 1 could have been released at any time. while it is still unreleased, they have the power to, at any given moment, change the market. maybe i wasn't specific enough, though. i kinda meant that it's moreso the controlled release of products at the time it is most advantageous to the company, and that waiting to release them whenever they want gives them a degree of control.

if it works don't try to fix it

and what exactly is your definition of a "working" economy? you would certainly have a tough time explaining how well our economy works to the 50 million americans below the poverty line, people who have been completely forgeted over by this economy. the economy certainly didn't "work" in their favor, did it?

literally the first comment on that socialist blog that you linked:
oops

there's a massive difference in what can be considered a "mixed economy" from both sides. america is considered a "mixed economy" despite not even guaranteeing healthcare to its citizens, and countries like sweden are, according to you, considered a "mixed economy" despite being noticeably more socialist.

who would these "CEOs" make the products for?

uh.. society? these CEOs are also apart of this society, so when they help society it helps them in return

who would craft them, or mass produce them?

the workers? people need some kind of job while they're receiving a higher education, and that's not to mention all the people who would rather just work as a laborer rather than go to college.

A 90% tax rate is ok

fake news


anyways how was your day guys

131

Off Topic / Re: TNT | MINECRAFT PARODY OF NUCLEAR

« on: May 12, 2017, 01:04:48 PM »

me after listening to this

132

Off Topic / Re: what is the best jolly rancher flavor

« on: May 12, 2017, 12:27:17 PM »

i was gonna say green apple before i even looked at the poll my dude

133

Off Topic / Re: what the forget is it with these fidget spinners

« on: May 12, 2017, 12:13:24 PM »

oh shidd lmao i change my mind these things are sweet

134

Off Topic / Re: [NEWS] Annoying Orange has 2 scoops of ice cream.

« on: May 12, 2017, 11:15:51 AM »

i mean to be fair why DOES he get 2 scoops of ice cream....

135

Off Topic / Re: what are your thoughts on Straight Shota

« on: May 12, 2017, 10:48:22 AM »

bad, not good. evil.