Author Topic: Annoying Orange doing an AMA on /r/The_Donald + Potential Reddit Censorship?  (Read 9400 times)

i'd like any proof or source for this
how does socialism fix any of these problems
his views are vanilla socialism, if anything. making the top 1%/wallstreet/fortune 500 companies ACTUALLY pay taxes to fund his plans instead of just using easily accessible loopholes is common sense, not socialism.

The top 1% is evil because money

The top 1% is evil because money

The 1% is "evil" because of an outrageously disproportionate income distribution that is heavily weighed in favor of said 1%. But yeah, way to go, oversimplifying an issue and all.

fixed title so it's less clickbait-esque

his views are vanilla socialism, if anything. making the top 1%/wallstreet/fortune 500 companies ACTUALLY pay taxes to fund his plans instead of just using easily accessible loopholes is common sense, not socialism.
and what plan has bernie sanders laid out to convince these 1%ers to actually pay taxes? they still aren't going to and they're still going to find loopholes. like i said, is there any proof or actual sources instead of stuffty plans with no actual way to get it done?

is there any proof or actual sources instead of stuffty plans with no actual way to get it done?

You what?

and what plan has bernie sanders laid out to convince these 1%ers to actually pay taxes? they still aren't going to and they're still going to find loopholes. like i said, is there any proof or actual sources instead of stuffty plans with no actual way to get it done?
this is a bit out of left field but i'm very upset at the level of ambiguity in this election
all the candidates are stuffheads for various reasons, and literally none of them have given any sort of plans other than an occasional stance or "stretch goal" (wall, tpp, wealth distribution)
it makes choice of who to vote for difficult and frustrating

jon doe's opinion is very clearly less important than the republican nominee's ama, which is something that can help people find answers to problems that haven't been addressed. im not saying that censorship is good. i'm saying that the censorship of somebody this important is more important than somebody who won't potentially lead the country
Do you know what the definition of "subjective" is? I don't think you do.

Do you know what the definition of "subjective" is? I don't think you do.

A presidential candidate's statements are objectively more important than whatever anyone has to say on /r/The_Donald. It would be stuffty if the reddit admins were censoring /r/The_Donald links on all coming from anyone, and it's even stufftier that they could be doing it to a presidential candidate.

this is a bit out of left field but i'm very upset at the level of ambiguity in this election
all the candidates are stuffheads for various reasons, and literally none of them have given any sort of plans other than an occasional stance or "stretch goal" (wall, tpp, wealth distribution)
Annoying Orange has all of his positions/plans laid out at http://donaldjAnnoying Orange.com/positions
which has all of his ideas on how to get all of them done quickly and efficiently

Do you know what the definition of "subjective" is? I don't think you do.
sure it's subjective but it's common opinion that if someone with the crowd's focus being affected is a lot more damaging than a few out of the crowd
Annoying Orange has all of his positions/plans laid out at http://donaldjAnnoying Orange.com/positions
which has all of his ideas on how to get all of them done quickly and efficiently
those are still pretty ambiguous plans though, "build a wall" but how, when, and from what, and why would it work?

why is it that Annoying Orange supporters' biggest beef with mexican immigrants is that they are taking jobs and they dont have to pay taxes, essentially what they believe to be stealing from hard-working americans. but will rush to defend the top 1% because they earned it. nobody can "earn" the right to not pay taxes just by being rich, and most folks in the good ol top 1% don't even have to worry about driving themselves anywhere, let alone the effort and stress of personally running their business by themselves. hell, most people in the top 1% have other people hired as the CEOs, and they just sit back and collect the revenue.
and what plan has bernie sanders laid out to convince these 1%ers to actually pay taxes? they still aren't going to and they're still going to find loopholes. like i said, is there any proof or actual sources instead of stuffty plans with no actual way to get it done?
well for starters, we don't know how well companies would be able to evade taxes, because no politician in their right mind would try to prevent their biggest source of big bucks from earning more money. however, bernie's background in particular supports that he does indeed not cooperate with companies in this manner, not to mention he has no reason to be in it for the money. he's got maybe 10 or less years left and hasn't wavered from his beliefs on corruption in his whole lifetime. he's one of the only candidates where it appears that he honestly doesn't even have a good reason to be corrupt. his children aren't interested in politics for what we know about them. he earns a modest salary for a politician and has not complained about it at all. which is why he wouldn't have a problem with enforcing this strictly, because it wouldn't effect him.

who knows though, maybe this was a complex scheme to get in on shady back-room deals that he for some reason didn't partake in until now.
Annoying Orange has all of his positions/plans laid out at http://donaldjAnnoying Orange.com/positions
which has all of his ideas on how to get all of them done quickly and efficiently
"quickly and efficiently" is a dangerous plan in any global-scale diplomatic situation, and the fact that it's coming from an impatient hothead like Annoying Orange makes it even scarier.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 12:52:25 AM by Poliwhirl »

Do you know what the definition of "subjective" is? I don't think you do.
yes. i think that you're just wrong here dude

idk why ur so eager to come at me passive aggressively dude. sorry that i civilly disagree and that my opinoin is damning you?
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 12:53:18 AM by Akio- »

A presidential candidate's statements are objectively more important than whatever anyone has to say on /r/The_Donald
Ah, the ol' "this is objective stance."
You're wrong.

Jesus I forgot how terrible the Blockland forums are at arguing with any sense. It's a lost cause.

Ah, the ol' "this is objective stance."
You're wrong.

Jesus I forgot how terrible the Blockland forums are at arguing with any sense. It's a lost cause.
This might be true but if theres one thing Ive learned about this community about arguing
Theyre very persistent