cancel reply
Posting mode: Reply


Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
name e-mail subject pw(deletion)
Post and go
Bump thread?

  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Javascript must be enabled for all of our addons to work.
  • Come chat and see that we're all a bit crazy on IRC!
  • Do not post any artwork from sexyfur.com and/or
    Jeremy Bernal. This is now a bannable offense.
Flockmod!

File: 23476727_10215057639297553_1622647326_n[1].jpg - (38.54 KB, 960x424) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
39467 No.3482617

It all comes tumbling down tumbling down tumbling down

No.3482618

SJWs nerds/LGBTBBQs attacking themselves. Thank god.

No.3482619

What counts as sexual "assault" today is insane. If you flirt with someone in a bar, you're basically a rapist.

No.3482620
File: 23439222_10215057752340379_1191714500_n[1].jpg - (33.33 KB, 720x399) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
34128

>>3482619
The guy is alleging being drugged. Way more serious than groping.

No.3482624

>>3482620\
Alleging... from 1981. I'm a proportionate for innocent until proven guilty, and its going to be hard to prove that you were drugged nearly 40 years ago.

It would be hard to prove he even met him 40 years ago.

No.3482625

>>3482624

Innocent until proven guilty only applies when it's a rightwinger. Like how Milo Pedopolis was innocent of advocating for sexual relationships between men and boys until he's proven guilty somewhere, or something.

The point is that it's okay when it's a rightwinger and bad when it's anyone to the left of Hitler.

No.3482634

>>3482625

Are you kidding me? Seriously? Milo was out on his ass and made to resign, lost business deals, and was disinvited from conservative republican rallies. All that from talking about current gay culture, and past gay culture.

Meanwhile, Sulu runs around giving tug jobs on the Howard Stern show and talking about how beneficial his relationships were with older men, and that's a-okay because his politics are right.

Milo hasn't been accused of pedophilia, sexual harassment, assault or rape. Only Takei has that honor currently.

No.3482636

oh_my.jpg

No.3482645

>>3482625
>>3482634
Milo WAS the child in the case he was discussing. If anything he was a victim, and people are calling him the pedo.

It's always innocent until proven guilty, but I do enjoy poking fun when "believe women" bites the regressive in the ass.

No.3482647

>>3482645

I know. That was my point. Milo turns out to be the actual victim, and someone like Takei turns out to be the actual predator.

I swear, the harder people moralize and decry others as literal monsters, the more likelihood they're going to be sexual abusers. Tons of male feminists in 2016 and 2017 getting busted.

Fucking wolves in sheep's clothing.

No.3482649
File: stupid_fucks.png - (293.53 KB, 621x364) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
300579

What the hell is up with all these headlines? Famous people and their 'sexual assaults', at this point I feel I should just be "expecting" it. That everyone is/was a pervert, even the mighty famous and rich.

Two things that stand out to me, are the claims from the past, that sometimes take place before the person accused got really famous. Good fuckin luck trying to make those charges stick, but really why come out 25-40 years later and suddenly say "____ assaulted me." Simply for a pay day? Revenge to tarnish their career? Were you two even sober at the time this thing went down, yknow, while Mama's Family was on the TV?

Then you got the current day allegations. To which I say, if you are famous, and have an image to maintain, why the fuck don't you keep your nose clean? As if you are so untouchable, you are the last person that should be fuckin around, lest the paparazzi catches you in a shocking moment. Don't these dopes ever think what would happen to their careers if "x" news story got out talking about "x" thing they did? It's as if between the money, fame, and drugs, these assholes can't think past their damaged nose.

Out of the recent wave of bullshit, Louie's one surprised me the most. But then I thought about how so many standup comedians are damaged goods, and maybe this is just par for the course. Perhaps he hid it better, longer.

If these dickheads weren't famous, these would be two second stories in your local news that you wouldn't even bat an eye over.

No.3482651

Milo is a pedo though, he was glad it happened and sees no problem with pedophilia.

Ron Moore is another case, conservatives are saying even if it's true they will support him.

Right wingers are fucking liars anyway.

No.3482658

Here's a recap for all the boys and girls playing along:

>Cosby: 50 gorillion accusations of a once-beloved comedy icon. Unlikely to have been politically motivated. Either did it, or is the unluckliest man in the universe. Rightwingers sometimes insist that he's innocent because one time he told black people to pull their pants up.
>Ailes: Multiple accusations by women who are known to have worked with him. Proven track record of running professionally crafted coverups and smear jobs. Notoriously creepy. Although hated by political opponents, nearly all of his victims shared his extreme political ideologies, and thus unlikely to be politically motivated. Evidence was strong enough that his own company that he built from the ground up had to fire him. Rightwingers insist that he did nothing wrong and all those conservative women he harassed are just whores or something.
>O'Reilly: We have audio of him harassing women he worked with. Undeniably guilty. Rightwingers insist that he did nothing wrong and that those audio recordings are a liberal conspiracy or whatever.
>Trump: Bragged about grabbing multiple women and getting away with it because he's famous. Went into a dressing room for a children's beauty pageant while the girls were getting changed. Routinely comments on how attractive various underage girls look. Rightwingers deny or downplay all of this.
>Milo: Video recording of Milo advocating for pedophilic relationships between adult men and boys in their early teens. Claims that pederasty is a good educational experience for a developing mind. Praises the Priest who molested him, claims that he learned how to "give such good head" from the experience. Rightwingers desperately spin this by ignoring his comments and trying to reframe Milo as the victim.
>Weinstein: 50 gorillion accusations of a not-so-beloved, famously scummy Hollywood suit. Behavior was something of an open secret. Immediate condemnation throughout the left. Weinstein's initial reaction is, "But I'm a liberal." This intensifies condemnation and fans the flames of hatred among the left. Examples of leftists making excuses or downplaying the incident are almost impossible to find. Rightwingers use this incident to point their finger at the left anyway.
>Spacey: Multiple allegations, always of men claiming to have been harassed. Generally liked on the left due to House of Cards, right tends to be ambivalent towards him. Immediately condemned by the left. Left-wing news sources use him as an example of how men can be victims of sexual assault too, something that alt-right neckbeards insist that liberals don't care about. Spacey uses the incident as an opportunity to come out of the closet; LGBT groups condemn him for trying to use coming out as a cynical means of earning sympathy. Surprisingly, rightwingers don't particularly try to capitalize on this one.
>Louie CK: Definitely did it. Well-liked by both the right and the left. Admits to doing it. Public is thrown for a loop by unique example of honesty, isn't sure how to react.
>Takei: Single, difficult to prove accusation from decades ago. Incident is denied by Takei himself. Takei is treated as public enemy number one by the rightwing, who loathe him with an unsurpassed ferocity. Seen as the ultimate "SJW", famously outspoken and unapologetic about his left-wing views. Liberals take a guarded approach to the accusation, hesitate to defend him in case the claim is true. Rightwingers go apeshit; "innocent until proven guilty" goes out the window, all liberals are assumed to be guilty by association, all rightwing molesters are immediately exonerated. Regardless of what happens, rightwingers will continue to screech about this incident forever, all while simultaneously insisting that Ailes/O'Reilly/Milo/Trump/etc are innocent.
No.3482659

And how could I forget:

>Roy Moore: Convicted criminal who was pardoned by unconvicted criminal Trump. Views himself as above the law. His son is also a convicted criminal who views himself as above the law, because his daddy is a judge. Far-right dominionist religious nut who ignores separation of church and state, gay marriage and virtually every other established law that goes against his particular ideology. Significantly more insane than anyone on any imageboard; if given the option, would happily ban all pornography, establish a Christian Caliphate. In spite of this, beloved by the right because "durr hurr fuk libruls". Multiple accusations of sexually harassing, assaulting and just generally being creepy around girls as young as fourteen.
>Rightwingers insist that it's all a witch hunt. Innocent until proven guilty you guys, unless it's George Takei.
No.3482662

Hollywood Reporter
[-]

No.3482731

So...Louis C.K. asked a chick once if he could whack it in front of her years ago and now it "haunts" her forever? And when she said no he apologized on the spot?

How the is that assault? That's a creepy and pretty stupid request yeah, bu his case seems like someone unable to handle their slightly shitty human experiences. If someone cat calls you and you ask them to stop and they DO then why not shut up and be happy they got the point instead of ruining their career 20 years later just because it's easy to do right now? Did someone highlighting more clearly than cat calling that they wanted their dick involved (before apologizing even) bring it to some higher plane of abuse?

Weinstien actually whipping his dick out and jacking off at people is assault. From what I read, a middle finger or someone yelling "suck my dick" is more aggressive/abusive than what Louie did.

No.3482737
File: Abstinence_Demotivator_99.9_effective.jpg - (115.11 KB, 600x750) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
117876

>>3482731
5 women (at least), and he not only asked, he actually did it. He even said as much himself - https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/10/563316860/louis-c-k-admits-to-sexual-harassment-of-multiple-female-comedians - stating that "These stories are true. At the time, I said to myself that what I did was okay because I never showed a woman my dick without asking first, which is also true. But what I learned later in life, too late, is that when you have power over another person, asking them to look at your dick isn't a question. It's a predicament for them. The power I had over these women is that they admired me. And I wielded that power irresponsibly."

>>3482659
Oh, even worse with Moore - you had one particular fuckwit compare him to Joseph, Mary and Jesus by stating that Mary was only a teenager and Joseph a grown man at the time. Of course, that's also omitting the whole "Jesus was God's son" aspect, along with the fact that it used to be 13 as the age of adulthood (hence the Bar/Bat Mitzvahs in Jewish tradition), but no one would seriously argue for that shit now.

No.3482738

>>3482737

So he asked...and he only did it if they said yes.
What are you trying to convince me of?

You think that power he's talking about is real or that he believes that? I guarantee in his head he's wondering why the fuck he has to deal with this shit when there was consent or clear rejection. Great pandering to the idiot masses on his part however.

When exactly is it ok these days to ask a girl if they want to get busy? And we all have to be aware of some vague (non-existent) circumstantial power scale instead of people actually controlling their own yes and no decision on sex in the moment? I just don't buy it. It's part of this 3rd wave all-sex-is-rape horseshit. If you "can't refuse" Louis C. K. asking you to check out his gross ginger dick just because you're starstruck you need professional help, and I don't mean from a lawyer to fuck over a regular human being.

No.3482741

>>3482658
>>3482659
yeah, but clinton [squeaky wet fart that knocks something loose]

No.3482746

Georgey's own words. https://youtu.be/AJYb0Yom5UQ

He grabs the junk of "Skitish" people. Admits he does it when people visit his home.

No.3482748

>>3482746
So he Zaushes them?

No.3482750

>>3482748

Well, worse. According to his accuser, he was drugged. Takei must've been best buds with Cosby on the downlow.

No.3482759
File: 2011-07-06_1286911364576__.jpg - (64.09 KB, 600x450) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
65628

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc08DHydV5E Tinseltown Comes Tumbling Down (Mister Metokur)

My take on it: fuck (((Hollywood)))

No.3482787
File: hy.png - (117.07 KB, 372x351) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
119884

Takei has thrown many others to the wolves without a seconds hesitation over alleged sexual misconduct. He was always a loud voice in bringing justice to victims and exposing the monsters of hollywood.

Now he gets to become the monster he hates so much.

You shouldn't throw stones in a glass house Mr Sulu.

cap: loleable

No.3482791
File: Pansbaar_Queerbansoo.jpg - (494.00 KB, 739x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
505857

Oh my!

No.3482887

>>3482787
Guilty until proven innocent and then still guilty.

George Takei is one of the few people I would honestly say is incapable of what he was accused of. Wankign a guy off when asked to and allowed to is one thing. Accusing him of groping and manhandling someone without permission? I really don't see Takei doing that. If you knew anything about him at all you wouldn't believe it either.

No.3482891

>>3482887

Especially when the accuser says it happened in 1981.

1981? I can't even remember where I was living in 1981!

No.3482892

>>3482887

Did you fucking listen to what was just linked? He admits to getting aggressive with reluctant people and grabbing them by the crotch.

He even goes on to say it's different from Trump because Trump has power over people (and I'm assuming, Takei thinks that he himself does not.)

He is literally Zausching. "Oh, you're in my dwelling? That means I can grab you even when you're clearly not enthusiastic and consenting!"

I'm sure a lot of sheep have trouble believing a priest would molest little boys, too, but here we are.

No.3482899

>>3482891

you were living in you father's testicles aka nutville. your mom was a hooker.

No.3482903

>>3482887

>Guilty until proven innocent and then still guilty.

This can't be stressed enough. We could discover that the accuser wasn't even real, and the entire thing was nothing more than a hoax, and rightwingers would still use the entirely fictional incident to smear Takei. They don't give a shit about what actually happened.

No.3482912

>>3482903
You think that's unique to either side?

No.3482913

>>3482903

Dude. The man admits to grabbing people who are reluctant. People he describes as skittish. People he describes as "Needing to be persuaded."

This is textbook rape culture. This is the shit feminism is directly against. This is coercion and sexual assault because he even admits he was aware that his partners were not enthusiastic or consenting.

No.3482937

>>3482913

why do you think half the nutters saying rape culture is totally a thing come from the west coast? I'm not denying rape culture may exist, I just get the feeling that maybe they're more familiar with it and think that's how everywhere is

No.3482956

Sex is for making babies.

No.3482963

>>3482937
rape culture, as applied to more obvious and more quoted things such as college campuses is totally bunk. Chicago has arguably the highest rate of violence in the US, and still less than 1% of people are shot or suffer from assault there. The idea that 1/3 women are raped or suffer from sexual assault on college campuses, and 1/4 is the same amongst the general population is insane.

If 25% of the population is being raped, we need to quit talking about a "rape culture" and shut down all public services, put task forces in every community, and declare a state of emergency. The simple fact that we aren't on total rape lock down is a testimate to the non-existence of the rape culture.

No.3482974

If a woman molests a guy ... no one will care and she has 100% chance of getting away with it scot free. We never here about it because they all got away with it.

No.3482980
File: Beavis-and-Butthead-Huh-Huh-Humbug-beavis-and-butthead-9406240-500-333.jpg - (46.25 KB, 500x333) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
47361

>>3482617 Give'm the chair!

No.3483000

I for one think it would be a nice thing if these sick attention seeking fucks would stop raping our culture with their whining about getting themselves into rapey situations with rapey people because their friends, family and coworkers wouldn't watch their backs.

No.3483002

>>3482980

But captain, that violates intergalactic law! Or something...

No.3483005
File: aaaa18.jpg - (476.74 KB, 954x634) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
488180
No.3483074

>>3482617

The irony of the whole thing is..

The left leaning guy did something? the entire left demonishes them and asks them to get punished.

The right leaning guy did something? every single right guy with questionable tactics is now defending the accused person and saying that rape and paedophilia is not a big thing.
Even comparing stupid things like Ann Coulter (that woman with zero brain) compares JKF's affair with a young adult, vs Roy Moore's rape of a 14 year old girl.

No.3483082

>>3483074

Oh bullshit. 90% of Hollywood's gay scene is up to pedo shit.

Meanwhile, where is Milo? Out on his ass. Where is O'Riely? Out on his ass. What is being demanded of that republican that just won and then got accused? His coworkers want him to resign.

I'm not going to say that Republicans are always fast to act, but at the same time, they do eventually get around to it.

Bill Cosby made his comments about black kids needing to man up and act right, and now that motherfucker is being buried in his sexual assault cases.

George Tekai and Neil DeGrasse Tyson (And I'm a fan of his) get accused, but hey, their politics are good, so let's just wait and see if the courts want to take a bite. Don't ruin them prematurely!

(Even tho, y'know. Tekai admits on the recent Howard Stern segment that he sexually assaults people in his home. )

No.3483083

TL;DR version: Being a pedo or a rapist alone is enough reason to drum someone out of town if you're not a liberal.

If you are a liberal, someone being a rapist or a pedo is merely a tool to run someone out of town if their politics suck.

Big distinction there.

No.3483086

Since it is seemingly so impossible for most of the rich and famous to keep their fingers and dicks off minors, why not just do what Muhammed did?
Lower the age of consent to 9.

No.3483127

>>3483082

Yeah right, have you ever seen the defence of Moore?
All of them are saying that banging a 14 year old is "no problem".

>>3483082

>they do eventually get around to it.

Yeah right, just like how many have actually (in sound and videos) accept of doing lewd acts (like Trump) still get elected?

lol
you're funny!

No.3483133

>>3483127

>All of them are saying

MOOOOOOOOOOOMMMM!!!! THESE PEOPLE ARE SAYING SOMETHING I DISAGREE WITH MAKE THEM STOP!
>>3483086
Yeah but that's only if you're Muslim and you marry them. It's part of their culture.

No.3483138
File: double-standards-comic-illustrations-110-59843e354a84d__700.jpg - (135.29 KB, 700x967) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
138535
No.3483149

>>3483127

Literally lost almost every single endorsement he had. 11 out of 12 endorsements are gone.

Trump said nothing different than what Tekai said except Tekai admits that he has actually DONE THE ACT to pursue people who were not consenting at the time. Trump never elaborated, he was talking shit, Tekai actually gave a fucking play by play about why he did it, and how he did it. (Not a gentle squeeze, by any means.)

Also, there's the whole fact that Trump has had his accusers admit they were using sexual assault as a legal power play (ex-wife) and recanted. Or were shown to be lying bitches. (Air-plane girl. Other witnesses on the flight said Trump fled to the mens room like a little bitch.)

So spare me.

No.3483151

>>3483149
Hey leave Takei out of this, he lost the election he's irrelevant.

No.3483153

>>3482658

take em all down. the lion's shares of these motherfuckers are/were hollywood darlings, Trump included. the right's retarded BUT hollywood's reputation for circling wagons to protect predators is well known and well earned.

it's time to end the degeneracy

No.3483155

>>3483153

And you thought pizzagate had no basis in fact :P

No.3483158

>>3483155
It didn't.

What does is the fact that rightwinger scum are pro-pedophilia when it's their guy. We see it over and over with this filth, from that duck dynasty rapist to Trump to Moore.

No.3483159

>>3483158

Oh bullshit, it wasn't Brietbart or fox that was putting out pro-pedophilia think pieces. It was the The Guardian, and The Huffington Post. Both of which conveniently deleted those pieces while they drummed Milo out of political commentary. Good thing we have internet archives!

The more you make shit up, buddy, the more chances you give me to prove to the public what a lying little shit you are, and convert them away from you.

I mean jesus christ, you fucks have been painting people like Sarah Butts and Lena Dunham as perfect angels since 2008. Fuck off.

Pizzagate had PLENTY of validity, the only thing that was bullshit was the pizza parlor itself. Did you miss the fact that 5 months into Trump's presidency, there was a bust of 100 some-odd people related to child sex trafficking? Or that many of the perps were residents of D.C.? or in liberal areas where home values exceed 7 figures?

No.3483160

So where's the fox news/ the hill/ brietbart equivalent of the following articles?

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/devon-murphy/rehabilitating-pedophiles_b_3845546.html

https://www.salon.com/2015/09/21/im_a_pedophile_but_not_a_monster/

Oh whooops, they deleted it!

Too bad the internet never forgets.

https://archive.is/ttVNy

Should I keep pulling examples? I mean, there are more.

No.3483161

Or how Berkley antifa group BAMN is directly in support of pedophile rights group NAMBLA?

http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/28/documents-tie-berkeley-riot-organizers-to-pro-pedophilia-group-nambla/

I mean... If you actually read the communist manifesto, you know the other founding father of communism, Fredrick Engels, said that pedophilia is fine, and that preventing child sexuality with older men is 100% unfair oppression.

No.3483163

Let's go motherfucker. Keep asserting your bullshit. I'm happy to show where not only is the left supportive of active and former pedophiles on a personal level, but where the left is also philosophically in support of pedophilia. ((Unless they can use it as a weapon against a political opponent, anyway!))

No.3483165

>>3483161

imagine being so retarded as to fall for a Jack Posobiec con. the same faggot behind pizzagate is behind that banner, and is currently defending the Alabaman pedophile Moore. shut the fuck up degenerate scum.

No.3483166

Posobiec is a degenerate defending degenerates through deflection.

No.3483173

>>3483159
>>3483160
>>3483161
>>3483163
Look at this vile cunt deflecting from an actual unapologetic pedophile using discredited staged photos and examples of liberals trying to reform pedophiles. Rightwingers are the most evil, disgusting trash. They will say or do literally anything to prop up their foul ideology.

No.3483180

ITT: Anitfa and CTR bring up their bullshit to fool the general population.

Cap: now

No.3483209

>>3483165

Yeah, sure, take the weakest link in the argument instead of trying to address the fact that Fredrick Engels was a pro-pedo motherfucker.

Ignore the Salon, or the huffington post pedo apologia.

Take easy street, you lazy twat.

No.3483216

>>3483209

>articles about reforming pedophiles and/or pedophiles trying to deal with their sickness
>pro-pedo propaganda
>friedrich engles, aka the other guy, a man who died in 1890, once said something bad about pedophilia
>all of Communism is now invalid automatically because guilt by association
>rightwingers happily admitting that they will support a pedophile even if he did it
>actually liberals are the bad ones, please look away now

Ziggity zulag, go straight to the gulag.

No.3483218

PS: Milo should have been thrown out on his ass even if he hadn't done anything wrong. The fact that he actually was a pedo just made it easier. Rightwingers are depraved trash and should be destroyed by any means necessary.

No.3483219

It's Russia's fault! https://www.gq.com/story/george-takei-says-sexual-assault-allegations-are-a-russian-conspiracy

BTW, I'm amused, but not surprised, to note that queerty.com hasn't said a peep about Takei. Roy Moore multiple posts. Kevin Spacey? Yes. Bryan Singer? No idea who that its, but apparently he's worth posting an article about he's been accused of sexual assault.

No.3483224

>>3483216

When your founding fathers say "Hey, child sex is good!" That's more than guilt by association. You're actively choosing to follow an ideology that promotes child sex, and many communists chapters support NAMBLA.

You can call it a frame job if you want, but no one forced BAMN to put up a pedophile's picture on their website to honor him when he died, because he was a thought leader among communists and pedohiles. (within the last 10 years.)

Keep pretending communism doesn't have a hedonism and pedophilia problem, it's cute.

No.3483226

>>3483138

>bawww im a piece of shit it must be the females' fault
No.3483228

>>3483224
Jefferson owned slaves. By your logic this means America is inherently pro-slavery.

No.3483230

I literally can't find an example of Engels supporting pedophilia. Not even a hysterical raving far-right source. All I can find is "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State" where he theorizes about the social evolution of the family and concludes that we should advance toward naturally-occurring monogamy under Communism.

No.3483234

>>3483230
He's probably about talking about gay rights "commies" like Harry Hays and plenty of furries. Harry Hays supported NAMBLA during the gay rights movement.

Although, it just seems like he's a communist in name only like other LGBTQ+ activists like artdecade. Not even Lenin would have supported the LGBTQ+ movement as he thought that it was bourgeois. All communists should be anti-LGBT.

No.3483250

>>3483234
Gay proletariat are comrades. Gay kulaks get gulag. Gay bourgeoisie get sent to the wall along with all other bourgeoisie.

No.3483252

>>3483228

Uh, that's what the left is already arguing. Dumbass.

No.3483253

>>3483252
America is inherently pro-slavery due to fucking capitalism. Retard.

No.3483257

>>3483253

That word doesn't mean what you think it means, fuckstick.

No.3483258

>>3483257
No, I know what a retard is, and you fit the bill.

No.3483259

Really looking forward to seeing you in the news after you're overcome by cheeto-stained image-board rage and you randomly shoot up a Denny's or something, btw. Fucking trash.

No.3483262

>>3483258

Such love and tolerance from the inclusive little commie <3

No.3483265

>>3483262
Loving and tolerating shit like you is liberal bullshit. But gulags are very inclusive.

No.3483275

So the Moore accusations have just gotten a little creepier, as The Guardian did some digging into the court cases he oversaw as part of the Alabama Supreme Court - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/14/roy-moore-alabama-law-rape-victims-judge - and 10 times he dissented from the Majority opinion in favor of an accused rapist, with the other 6 agreeing with the Majority.

These include instances where he believed the "rape-shield" law (to protect accusers from getting their name dragged through the mud in an attempt to discredit them) overreached, including this lovely little bit.

Among Moore’s 10 dissents was the case of David Pittman, who had pleaded guilty to the rape of a 12-year-old girl. Moore in September 2015 said that Pittman ought to have been allowed to present evidence to court indicating that the girl had been sexually active and had a sexually transmitted disease.
“I believe this evidence could be relevant to the complaining witness’s alleged motive in accusing Pittman and that it is not barred by … the rape-shield rule,” Moore wrote in his dissent.

Another case had him defending a teacher who'd coerced a pair of 15 year olds to touch him sexually, saying that the teacher should have been allowed to state his belief that they were bisexual and in a relationship with each other. The Appeals Court below his said "no" because it had literally zero bearing on the case at hand.

And in what is probably the absolute skeeviest of the cases, we have this.

Robert Simmons, who was convicted of first-degree sodomy and first-degree sexual abuse of a six-year-old girl. Moore in June 2015 said Simmons should be given a hearing to argue that he had not been adequately represented by his attorneys. Mind you, Moore had another case involving the rape of a four-year-old boy, and said that “sodomy is an abhorrent crime and should be strictly punished” but argued the evidence did not support a lower court’s finding that Higdon had assaulted a child using “forcible compulsion”.

Given this cavalcade of fuckery, I'm legitimately surprised these accusations didn't start sooner.

No.3483276
File: Jmcohwow.jpg - (154.58 KB, 562x437) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
158287

>>3483133

>Thinks somehow "saying something I dislike" is equal to actually defending a pedophile who accepted being a pedophile and being accused by multiple persons for rape, sexual assault and other things.

You mean just like those republican using the defence of Mary and Joseph banging?

Glorious Republican style defending folks!

No.3483278

>>3483276
You mean just like those republican using the defence of Mary and Joseph banging?

The part that really boggles my mind with that argument is that, Biblically-speaking, Mary was knocked up by God, not Joseph, so it falls through to an even worse degree than it normally would.

No.3483286

>>3483276

>Glorious Republican style defending folks!

The Democrats basically generate rape and sodomy and abuse by their policy, not to mention personal actions. Republicans don't have to do anything but continue breathing to look like saints.
>>3483278
Republicans are having a little insider chuckle. How many Democrats are going to know what the Bible says?

No.3483305

I expect Kid Rock to be accused soon. He's only in the music biz to get women and money, and he'd gladly force himself on girls.

Trump will help sweep it under the rug and conservashits will defend him, even with mountains of evidence. Evidence? You mean like the Russian collusion, the Holocaust and Roy Moore? No such "evidence" exists in their eyes, amirite?

Keep in mind that Kid Rock is a northerner who hates himself and pretends to be an Alabama redneck conservative. His fursona is a fucking loser who worships a government that lost a war. Confederate fanboys are goddamned retards that think their pro-slavery government is legit, nope, you lost, you don't get monuments, you get smeared, now fuck off.

>you

More like your long-dead ancestors, nice job glorifying shit you weren't a part of, faggot.

Though considering how many Trump bashers are magically accused, Eminem is the most likely one to be outed in short order. Gotta pay to smear those who don't praise you, Trump? Eminem forcing himself on women? If he were any more of a misogynist he'd be fucking men.

No.3483310
File: tailhole-troubled.jpg - (164.80 KB, 700x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
168758

>>3483305

>Trump will help sweep it under the rug and conservashits will defend him

Oh yes, conservatives are so ASS 2 MOUTH in love with Trump! 4srs

No.3483312

>>3483310
Now that's an image I haven't seen in a long time. Wasn't there a flash variant, too?

No.3483313

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZAPwfrtAFY#t=5m

America is hilariously fucked

How could you let this happen

No.3483314

>>3483310

Scrolls by
Sees and reads your post before seeing >>3483305
Can already tell you're replying to Leukemia

Goddamn. What's that autist wrong about now?

Trump yadda yadda yadda
will help sweep it under the rug

Why in the everloving hell would he care about Kid Rock?

Roy Moore

Where the fuck have you been the last few days? While you're too busy mouth-breathing and shitposting on every forum you frequent, Roy Moore's lost 11 out of his 12 endorsements and the GOP have all but abandoned him. Some say that even if he somehow survives the election, he's gotta go.

more confederate bashing
(weak fart noises)

now its Eminem bashing
This is why you suck at what you do Leukemia. Your damaged brain can't fucking focus. You can never seem to complain about just ONE thing. You can't help but throw in a couple of the other things you hate, and string them together, even if they often have nothing to do with each other, which most people with some neurons sparking up there can see.

Honestly, I can't tell whether you're male or female. It matters not - cancer doesn't care or discriminate.

No.3483318

>>3483313
Because "her emails!"
And/or "Benghazi!"

No.3483321
File: 8582216f-5c7b-4681-a71c-11e82e6499ef.png - (1178.58 KB, 1025x544) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
1206861

>>3483313

https://youtu.be/1ZAPwfrtAFY?t=696

11:46 Holy shit. David Ross finally hit the big time.

No.3483333

>>3483286

Hu, I have yet to see a single Republican actually follow what the bible say. They just say what they want to hear.

Just like this hilarity:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5084385/AP-Explains-What-happened-Russia-bought-Uranium-One.html

No.3483357

>>3483321
It exposes the lies and dirty techniques of Trump and Co very well.

No.3483366

>>3483333
You don't guys don't even understand it yourselves. You just think that "Jesus liked poor people, therefore they should pay mandatory health premiums that increase yearly. If they don't, they get a fine."

That's what the ACA is, but you guys try to play the direct corporate theft of the poor off as a charitable, biblical action when it isn't. You bear false witness frequently enforce your rules.

No.3483369

>>3483321
Who the fuck is David Ross?

No.3483374

>>3483366
Yeah the republican strategy of moving to a single payer system like the rest of the world and gradually phasing out the medical insurance industry is much better

No.3483378

>>3483313

Because she wanted to create a no fly zone certain to create war with Russia, which most of the top American generals had commentated on as a sure fire way to get into a major war.

I mean, honestly, you dumb fucking neo-con loving warhawks can't even see she's a figurative lizard person masquerading as a democrat. Bitch aint liberal, or dem, she's a neo-con warhawk.

No.3483383

>>3483378
Your parents obviously don't have any furniture to pawn, and you're just jealous.

No.3483387
File: Rules_for_Radicals.png - (299.70 KB, 309x474) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
306889

>>3483357
Trump just did the same thing Democrats do, but better. There's no way anyone with standards and morals could beat them.

No.3483392

>>3483366
As opposed to increase and maintain the stupidly high prices of care for everyone? specially when they are unobtainable and unpayable for most of the bottom 40%?

You forgot that Jesus said about taking care and helping your neighbour? not kicking them in the nuts because you refuse to pay 10 USD more a month.

No.3483393

>>3483374

hu.. what?
The Trumpcare is pretty much the opposite of what most developed nations are doing.

No.3483398

>>3483393

Yeah you guiys know how most sane places deal with healthcare costs? By having healthcare and medication actually cost a reasonable, affordable amount that won't instantly bankrupt all but the wealthy, and then having health insurance on top of that with reasonable premiums that scale based on your actual income.

So all citizens are covered, and people without insurance such as foreign workers or tourists can still afford to see a doctor.

No.3483399
File: maude that's the joke.jpg - (54.32 KB, 1044x765) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
55628

>>3483393

In the meantime we're being set up to have even well-established social programs like social security and medicare eliminated because "we can't afford them".

No.3483405

>>3483399

>we

What did pony person mean by this?

No.3483406
File: its gone.gif - (1593.04 KB, 400x225) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
1631278

>>3483405 pony pic was in response to >>3483393

The rest is about the GOPs incessant obsession with cutting taxes as if that solves everything .. They're ignoring it for now but when it comes time to plan a budget they'll be like OMG $$$TRILLIONS IN DEBT ALL BECAUSE OF TAX-N-SPEND DEMOCRATS and it becomes a big excuse to cut more and more social programs. So far the big ones like Social Security and Medicare have remained but for how much longer do you think the GOP will tolerate them?

No.3483407

>>3483393

Most other nations are not keeping a standing military thanks to deals with America and with NATO. It is easy to afford social programs when you have "Daddy" to fight your wars for you.

Also, most of the money spend in researching cancer, new antibotics and treatments for degenerative diseases is done by America.

Pretty easy to have a nice healthcare system when next to none of the budget goes into researching for advancements.

Dog on America all you want, but the entire United Nation member states put together still do not exceed America's spending on advancing medicine through research. So fuck off.

No.3483420

>>3483407

So why is it considered a good idea to take care of much of the world defensively and medically, but we can't adequately take care of ourselves without it costing a small fortune?

No one price gouges medicine like we do. Not even close.

No.3483421

>>3483407

>Most other nations are not keeping a standing military thanks to deals with America and with NATO.

Protip: NATO demands you to invest a certain % of your GDP to maintain your own military.

That military has to be NATO compliant, which means NATO member countries must buy equipment and ammunition from the US arms industry or licensed partners, or buy the licenses to manufacture the weapons. In any case, they must have their own armies, and they must pay America to maintain it.

The US is not the payer in NATO, in fact the net cash flow is positively towards the US military-industrial complex thanks to NATO. The US is simply the biggest spender within NATO because the US is fighting wars of its own making while the others don't, and then Trump complains about other countries not chipping in to these wars which they didn't start.

No.3483426

>>3483406 never gonna happen unless they want immediate civil war those programs keep the man in check just like us.

No.3483429

>>3483420

Because logistically, it gives us a huge advantage. We're not defending them out of the goodness of our hearts. A threat pops up anywhere in the world, we have serious missiles just minutes away. And nuclear subs parked outside allied nations that are armed with nuclear warheads.

VERY FEW COUNTRIES BESIDES THE UNITED STATES HAS MILITARY BASIS OUTSIDE OF IT'S BORDERS.

Which is pretty goddamn huge. In most of the history of warfare, you did not get to station your army in someone else's kingdom in the long term without it causing a war.

No.3483430

>>3483421

Sure, that's your spin on the situation. Talk to me again when every NATO member is putting in their full percentage as agreed upon. Til then shut the fuck up.

No.3483431

>>3483421

By the by, the military basis and American troops we put on them are not considered part of our NATO spending. Our NATO spending is done in addition to that. ((Especially since we like to arm our soldiers with guns and other weapons that are not NATO certified, given they are too new. The eagle rifle was an example of this for some time. ))

No.3483439
File: health-care-oecd-full.gif - (37.37 KB, 720x540) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
38262

>>3483426 You'd think this is the case but voters recently have shown that they're more than willing to vote against their own interest (and will do it again) especially if they think the other side is going to grab their guns or let all the brown turban-wearing people in.

>>3483421 Having a big military isn't stopping the USA from spending quite a bit on health care -- twice per capita vs most other developed nations, yet somehow tens of millions are uninsured and people have to set up GoFundMe sites to have an operation. As (>>3483420) mentioned, despite all the extra money we spend we're totally getting price-gouged. There's a lot of reasons why but most boil down to too-many-middlemen and everything done 'for profit'. -- Nearly all the buildings I see being expanded and under construction are either hospitals or insurance companies. .. they're totally raking it in.

No.3483442

>>3483439

If the government steps in to help people pay for this shit, they'll raise their prices. (See college tuition.)

Throwing money at things is not a proper solution. The market will just grow to consume the surplus and you're right back to not having enough federal and state dollars to cover costs.

You could cover 100% of costs tomorrow, and by Monday, hospitals and insurance companies together would raise costs to 120%

No.3483450

>>3483439 problem is some things are cash sinks where its not supposed to be prioritizing profit over needs while other things that get taxed to shit become a for profit to set a balance between resources. issue is that not one president has tried to fix things through executive congress override systems set in place so the pres can make the decision instead of a bunch of baboons squabbling over what ifs an fake losses and messing things up.

No.3483451

>>3483450

Christ Cobalt. You think faster than you type. Every time I read what you're trying to say it comes across as a mess. Do you read what you write before you click submit. Like just a grammar and punctuation check?

No.3483452

>>3483429

>VERY FEW COUNTRIES BESIDES THE UNITED STATES HAS MILITARY BASIS OUTSIDE OF IT'S BORDERS.

That's because if anyone else put their military bases outside of their own borders, it would be called the World War III.

>>3483430

>Sure, that's your spin on the situation. Talk to me again when every NATO member is putting in their full percentage as agreed upon. Til then shut the fuck up.

But that's just shifting the goalposts. Other countries DO have standing armies, and they're paying the US to have them. NATO is not a charity towards them - it's good business for the US.

No.3483453

>>3483451

>Christ Cobalt. You think faster than you type.

There's one word too many in there: "think".

No.3483474

>>3483407
this is a stupid argument made by brainwashed retarded trumpists.
NATO is not a "free" thing.
Nato demands you pay a percentage of GDP, pay products and military units/equipment of US based factories/technology and have a self standing military.

THE US just expends way more because they are inventing wars with everyone (particualrly mid east countries) that do not support "the american way" or are pro russian)

No.3483475

>>3483430

Except they do, the only countries that have not chipped the full amount is because they're not making random wars with random people (like the US) and trying to force allies into it.
And when these countries do not chip the supposed budget (by a minimal amount). They usually have increased their own self defence forces.

No.3483486

Just saw this in my email:

Former President George H.W. Bush is facing new allegations from a Michigan woman who said he touched her inappropriately while he was in office at an event in April 1992.

The woman, now 55, spoke exclusively with CNN and said she was attending a fundraiser for Bush's re-election campaign in Dearborn, Michigan, with her father when the president grabbed her rear end during a photo-op.

"We got closer together for a family photo and it was like 'Holy crap!'" she said, describing the moment Bush touched her buttocks. "It was like a gentle squeeze."

Her story -- remarkably similar to the accounts shared by at least six other women who said the former president groped them during photo-ops between 2003 and 2016 -- is significant, because it is the first time a woman has come forward to accuse Bush of unwanted touching while he was in office.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/16/politics/george-h-w-bush-accuser-1992/index.html

It never ends.

No.3483487
File: e10717a71df9eac5a98f2873494911fc.png - (835.33 KB, 575x900) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
855381

>>3483486
This would never happen if we had a gay president.

No.3483491
File: kevin-spacey-fired-house-cards.jpg - (169.42 KB, 620x420) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
173491

>>3483487

Like fuck, it wouldn't.

No.3483507

>>3482887
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/george-takei-apologizes-howard-stern-remark-calls-it-distasteful-joke-1058074

You're a retard.

No.3483529

>>3483507
Stern has gotten soft over the years. He is turning into all the things he rallied against when he was younger. Should have retired in 2015, imo.

No.3483708
File: 633ec04155d481d25e136525045286d9.jpg - (31.77 KB, 618x387) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
32537

All these "Ohh, he pinched me bum!" -cases are just a distraction so we'd forget all the real satanist-pedo-politicians.

No.3483723

>>3483708
I always laugh my ass off when conservatives still insist that pizzagate was true.

No.3483745

>>3483723
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRDTyE_HF80

No.3483765
File: taxcutsnow.jpg - (92.40 KB, 1280x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
94620

>>3483406

No, I think you misunderstood. The question was what to do you mean by "we" when you say "we can't afford them"? There is no "we". I can't afford them. The rest of the middle class can't afford them. The job creators can't afford them. There is no "we" motherfucker.

What we need are tax cuts now so hard-working Americans and small business owners can keep more of what we earn in our pockets.

http://taxcutsnow.com/

No.3483771

>>3483765

No, I think you misunderstood. The question was what to do you mean by "we" when you say "we can't seize the means of production"? There is no "we can't seize the means of production". I can't seize it. The rest of the proletariat can seize it. The job creators are a disgusting bourgeoisie lie. There is no "job creators" motherfucker.

What we need are gulags now so hard-working proletariat and red guards can take your toothbrush and send you on a free vacation to northern Alaska.

https://www.reddit.com/r/FULLCOMMUNISM/

No.3483777

>>3483765 you do realize why its that way right? its so those who underpay or not at all can push smaller businesses under so they can profit further. take trump as example 1.

No.3483778

>>3483777

American businesses pay one of the highest rates world wide. "Socialist paradises" like Scandinavian countries actually have less taxes on business than America does.

Try again.

No.3483783

>>3483778
They're gonna pay everything when the proletariat figure out who's really screwing them.

No.3483787

>>3483783

You missed the point. Social benefits can still be solvent, and adequate, in a system where the businesses themselves are not overly taxed. It points to a problem with management in general, and not a problem with the tax rate in and of itself. The fact that there are multiple countries with high social care, and low corporate taxes, proves that the mix can be successful.

So what is uniquely dysfunctional about America where we have a high corporate tax rate AND no social benefits to show for it?

No.3483788

>>3483778 and home to many of the dirtiest dishonest thieving billionares they can afford it but smaller businesses ljtteraly survive by just making enough but no more. its definately a means to prevent rapid rising competition

No.3483790

>>3483778

>American businesses pay one of the highest rates world wide.

And yet...

>In 2012, the United States raised 2.5 percent of GDP from the corporate income tax, just below the OECD average of 2.9 percent. Denmark raised slightly more at 3 percent and Sweden raised slightly less at 2.6 percent of GDP. Norway is the exception with corporate revenue equal to 8.5 percent of GDP.

https://taxfoundation.org/how-scandinavian-countries-pay-their-government-spending

No.3483800
File: Sweden_3rd_world_nation_by_2030.jpg - (37.42 KB, 600x448) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
38319

>>3483787

>So what is uniquely dysfunctional about America where we have a high corporate tax rate AND no social benefits to show for it?

It's because America is a vast multi-cultural nation whereas the Scandinavian nations have been racially and culturally homogeneous, at least until recently. They haven't had to deal with people like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBqjZ0KZCa0&feature=youtu.be&t=49s

But watch as their recent push for uncontrolled, mass immigration puts such a massive strain on their welfare system that it ultimately collapses. Sweden is already on track to become a 3rd world nation and is currently experiencing a crime wave of robberies, fraud and sexual assault.

http://speisa.com/modules/articles/index.php/item.454/sweden-to-become-a-third-world-country-by-2030-according-to-un.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-16/crime-wave-engulfs-sweden-as-fraud-sexual-offences-reach-record

No.3483811

>>3483765
Except the rich will keep fooling that you need tax cuts while destroying the budget of everything else. While they benefit of tax cuts way more than you or anyone else.

How many tax cuts until you cant pay military anymore? how about the infrastructure? its already decaying because not many states or federal groups are working on them.

And when the crisis starts, you bet your ass that the first ones to flee the ship will be the rich. Who will be happily sitting in offshore tax heavens as the US goes down in flames.

All because they were so greedy to want a few million USD more to their already insane wealth.
And idiots like you will be most probably applauding them becasue 'murrica!,muh capitalism!

No.3483813

>>3483811

>All because they were so greedy to want a few million USD more to their already insane wealth.
>And idiots like you will be most probably applauding them becasue 'murrica!,muh capitalism!

Well, of course I will. I've never been offered a job by a poor man.

No.3483815

>>3483813
The kulak mindset, folks.

Still think gulags were such a bad thing?

No.3483837
File: AWTHOR.png - (123.51 KB, 394x322) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
126476

>>3483815 Yeah. It's a horrible idea!
The fuck is wrong with you people? You're fighting over who's going get gulaged and who's getting gas chambered?

These are not intuitions we want in a development society! We're trying to grow out of these kinds of things. And you people are fighting which ones better?!

We're trying to get into space. We're trying to build a stronger loving world and here you are talking about throwing people into work camps for having different politicals than you.

That's not "left" that's fucking insane!

No.3483846

>>3483837
You're replying to a troll, you idiot.

No.3483847

>>3483813

> I've never been offered a job by a poor man.

I've never been offered a job by a rich man either. Very few people have - most have to apply for jobs and there are millions of unemployed people in line ahead of you.

No.3483848
File: roma.jpg - (180.42 KB, 923x544) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
184754

>>3483800

>It's because America is a vast multi-cultural nation whereas the Scandinavian nations have been racially and culturally homogeneous, at least until recently. They haven't had to deal with people like this:

Oh please.

No.3483849
File: romani.jpg - (49.68 KB, 580x326) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
50876

>>3483800
These guys are the niggers of Europe - worse than niggers. They're professional victims, social trolls and thieves. They have large families to raise child support, welfare, refuse to work, refuse to act and behave like the society around them, steal your shit and try to sell you the stolen shit back, and when you refuse to deal with them and you try to kick them out of your shop or your bar, they take it "personally" and use every excuse to harass and troll you in order to "justify" further theft and general misbehaviour. If one of those families decides to play it cool and stop doing that shit, stop wearing their race ID clothes, put their kids in school, try to get a proper job, the other families start a vendetta on them for being race traitors. They're deliberately causing their own misery in order to complain and demand shit from the society, to remain in the society but outside of its rules so they can do whatever they want - fraud, drugs, thievery, smuggling, extortion... they know you can't throw all of them in jail for indefinitely.

It's just a constant nuisance and you can't even throw them out because they've been around for thousands of years - nobody else wants them either - and rounding them up into gas chambers isn't an option anymore.

No.3483855

>>3483849
I thought that honor went to the Italians.

No.3483858

>>3483855
Gypsies are turbo-italians-

No.3483863

>>3483855
Seriously though. Gypsies are worse than literally all the sand niggers combined.

0.2% of total population are gypsy/roma, but 20% in prison population. You often hear statistics about how an immigrant is 12 times more likely to rape you or something to that end - gypsies are 200 times more likely to commit crimes than the general population.

They're complete pests, and a far bigger problem than any of the people coming from the middle east, and now with the open borders within the EU there's waves of them coming from Romania every summer, setting up tent villages and squatting on peoples' lands, and literally shitting and pissing on the streets like animals, begging, thieving, selling drugs, and when the police breaks up the camps they just scatter and combine elsewhere.

The cities are actually paying them airplane tickets back to Romania to get them to leave. which they do every fall, and then next summer they're right back.

No.3483864

That's why I always get a chuckle over some American douche raving about how Sweden is being destroyed by muslim immigrants. The immigrants are like confused puppies compared to the truly shit people like the slavs and the gypsies, who have made it their business and purpose in life to be complete parasites.

No.3483871
File: Muslim-Popultaion-in-Europe.jpg - (40.52 KB, 640x427) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
41490

>>3483864
Except that you already stated that gypsies make up a very tiny portion of the population, 0.2% is the value you quoted. But muslims are much larger minority and they're growing enormously. That's why Sweden will be a 3rd nation by 2030, because at the rate that the muslims are multiplying and swarming in Sweden, they'll be on the verge of becoming the majority by that time and would be large enough to drag down the economy to a halt. That's why muslims are far more dangerous to the current Scandinavian welfare model than the stable gypsy population.

No.3483872

>>3483765
What we need are tax cuts now so hard-working Americans and small business owners can keep more of what we earn in our pockets.

You're right on half of that. Just watch this line of questioning - https://youtu.be/wSR8F_4w4l0
TL;DW - she asked questions regarding personal deductions (moving expenses, buying work supplies as a schoolteacher, State & local sales taxes) vs. business deductions (moving expenses, buying work supplies for employees, State & local sales taxes). All of those personal deductions go bye-bye under the House bill, while they're kept intact for businesses - up to and including that relocation deduction even for a move going overseas.

No.3483875
File: tax-and-spend.gif - (193.31 KB, 640x432) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
197947

>>3483872

>she asked questions regarding personal deductions (moving expenses, buying work supplies as a schoolteacher, State & local sales taxes)

If you're trying to get any sympathy from me because they're going to get rid of personal deductions such as property taxes and state & local taxes, then you'll be sorely disappointed. Those benefit people from New York like yourself and punish those from Texas like myself. Why should I have to shoulder more of the federal tax burden because you morons shoot yourselves in the foot with high property taxes and state and local income taxes? I can guarantee you that with those deductions gone and you dipshits in New York and California have to feel the yoke of the entire tax burden you've imposed on yourselves, that you'll be much less eager to vote in tax & spend liberals that give the rest of us Democrats a bad name.

No.3483876

>>3483811

Idiot; American wealth is based in faith and not material goods. The wealthy's wealth goes away if the country falls to ruin. There isn't enough gold in the country for all the rich to cash out. Get a clue. America has to stay alive for American money to have worth.

No.3483879

>>3483875

>Why should I have to shoulder more of the federal tax burden because you morons shoot yourselves in the foot with high property taxes and state and local income taxes?

You say you're from Texas and you have to "shoulder the burden" of New York and California's state income taxes?
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/

Sorry, bud. They are the ones subsidizing your state's lack of funding for in state services.

>give the rest of us Democrats a bad name.

Yeah, I totally believe you're a democrat.

No.3483883

>>3483875

It's always baffled me how conservatives can bitch about taxes and claim the free market is the best thing ever. Hint: Taxes are a market. You are paying for services that you are getting. We all pay for the services that we are getting. It is U.S. government acting as your personal shopper trying to get you a good deal which it usually does. You can't be anti-taxes and pro-market because they are the same damn thing.

No.3483891

>>3483871

>Except that you already stated that gypsies make up a very tiny portion of the population, 0.2% is the value you quoted. But muslims are much larger minority and they're growing enormously.

Yes, and they don't cause half the problems the gypsies do, and most of the issues they do cause comes from people being new to the society and clueless about how shit should work, not because they're inherently evil trash people.

No.3483904

>>3483883

Agree, plus everyone uses the infrastructure that no normal group would pay. Like roads.
And things that would break socially if they were turned private. Like police and Firemen service.

In other news.. LEL "Ivanka, the Fraudster and the Panama Hotel That Made Trump Rich
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.823393

No.3483912

>>3483883

>Hint: Taxes are a market. You are paying for services that you are getting.

In order to have a market, you must have competition between different providers and the ability to choose none if you need none. If there's only one seller of public services, who isn't even selling you anything but just taking your money and shoving the services down your throat whether you like it or not, that's not a market.

Taxes are income for the political class, and the "services" you get in return are merely excuses to justify why the political class is allowed to take your money by force. It's as if you entered a cafe and immediately got robbed, and forced to drink a coffee in "compensation". Aside for the non-voluntary exchange, what if you went in for tea and biscuits instead of coffee? You just have to vote for different robbers into office, who promise to pour tea instead of coffee down your throat, but you may not succeed because the coffee brewers' lobby has much more political power than you do.

Some of the services serve a real point, and some of them you might even want to have anyways, because the political class has to at least pretend to be working in your benefit to remain in power, but their real interest is to do the absolute minimum while taxing you to the maximum, in order to pocket the difference - and since they are the monopoly on the market, you have very little options but to pay up whatever they ask.

No.3483914

>>3483904

>Agree, plus everyone uses the infrastructure that no normal group would pay. Like roads.

Ironically, in Norway, major roads aren't paid by taxes but by road tolls. That limits the government from just building pointless highways everywhere in order to justify taxing more.

The question is about the fact that when public infrastructure is funded by tax, nobody wants to bite the bullet and build it for themselves. Everybody expects everyone else to pay - which includes those who would have no benefit from that particular piece of infrastructure. It means the people who actually use the infrastructure offload some of the cost to those who don't, and that means the infrastructure can cost more than what benefit these people derive from using it. In other words, by using other people's money, some people can have stuff that wouldn't make sense, which turns up as a net loss to the entire society.

If the government wasn't there playing santa claus and robin hood, people would have to build and pay what they use by themselves, and only that which has a net benefit would get built - saving everyone a great deal of time and effort and improving living standards immensely. Of course, it would mean that you can't just whine about why the government isn't building roads to your bumfuck nowhere town : either you make it worth something by having something of worth in your town, or you move out.

No.3483915

>>3483914

>which includes those who would have no benefit from that particular piece of infrastructure

Examples?

No.3483921

>>3483915
Roads are a good example. You build a road in one end of the country, and the people in the other end of the country have little to no use of it, yet they end up paying for it - or people who don't even own cars. Why would they pay up? Maybe they would like a railway instead?

Now, the first law of the market is that prices scale up to the ability to pay, and when the "ability to pay" is dependent on the government which is drawing money from everybody, suddenly hammers start to cost $1000 each. Firstly because the government doesn't know how much hammers should cost, since they have no direct experience over practical matters, and secondly because the bigger the budget the more "spillover" you can sneak in to pay yourself with, plus all the kickbacks and palm-greasing you get for spending more money.

So, the road that actually gets built is going to be priced not according to what it's worth to the people who will be using it, but according to how much the government can afford and is willing to pay for it, which is a lot.

Still wondering how the 1% get so immensely rich?

No.3483922

>>3483921
Of course, the government can hire a panel of experts to do a five-year market study on how much is reasonabe to pay for a hammer, and after five years and a budget of $5 million, they will conclude that a hammer is worth about a dollar wholesale and $25 bought individually from Home Depot.

No.3483924

>>3483912
In order to have a market, you must have competition between different providers and the ability to choose none if you need none. If there's only one seller of public services, who isn't even selling you anything but just taking your money and shoving the services down your throat whether you like it or not, that's not a market.

Okay - so what about police or fire departments? Road maintenance? Because we tried the former back around the turn of the century, and firefighters would literally come to blows over who got to put out the fire and get paid for it - all while the fire still raged behind them.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/early-19-century-firefighters-fought-fires-each-other-180960391/

Or for the more recent take, we've got shit like the Tennessee home that firefighters allowed to burn down because the homeowner lived in a township that could either take a tax hike or pay a $75 yearly fee for fire service from a neighboring district - and said homeowner didn't pay.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39516346/ns/us_news-life/t/no-pay-no-spray-firefighters-let-home-burn/

Privatization of certain aspects of society is a fast way to wind up in a world of shit.

No.3483932

>>3483921

>You build a road in one end of the country, and the people in the other end of the country have little to no use of it, yet they end up paying for it

I asked for examples, not hypotheticals.

>or people who don't even own cars

You don't need to own a car to benefit from road infrastructure. Goods and services don't appear at your door after materializing from the ether.

>Roads are a good example.

Not really.

>Still wondering how the 1% get so immensely rich?

Because they get to write the rules and people like you turn a discussion of publicly funded infrastructure into a rant about hammers.

Did the 1% drop one on your head?

No.3483933

>>3483932
For a specific citation, there's the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravina_Island_Bridge - though it had such a ridiculous cost-benefit ratio that it finally got the axe in 2015.

No.3483939

>>3483914
You're just noting a flaw of the government's member, not fault of the government itself.

Just like outright corruption and abuse of power can also be inflicted by oligarchs of megacorporations.

No.3483994

>>3483924

>Okay - so what about...

It wasn't an argument against all public infrastructure - just pointing out that it's not a "market" - i.e. you're not buying the public infrastructure. It is foisted upon you, and the money extracted with or without your consent. Remembering that is important when you evaluate what sort of infrastructure and to what extent should be public.

>Privatization of certain aspects of society is a fast way to wind up in a world of shit.

Privatization of natural monopolies is a fast way to turn society into shit. Having them run by the government still isn't a good option, but it at least gives you the illusion of control as opposed to letting a private corporation fuck you in the skull. Other forms of control, such as co-operation would be possible as well, but they are rarely tried because the government always gets there first.

No.3483996

>>3483932

>I asked for examples, not hypotheticals.

What would suffice for an example? We're talking about something that is funded by tax money, that benefits some taxpayers and not other taxpayers - just look everywhere the government spends any significant money.

>You don't need to own a car to benefit from road infrastructure. Goods and services don't appear at your door after materializing from the ether.

Not all road infrastructure automatically benefits all the people to the same degree. Building a road somewhere doesn't magically mean people all the way across the state get equal benefit to those who actually drive on that road.

Why, if that were the case then we could just build ALL the roads in one place and save a bunch of money - of course it would be totally useless, but remember: it's your theory that when costs are spread evenly the benefit is also spread evenly regardless of where you put the roads or the fire departments, or the police stations...

No.3483997

>>3483939

>You're just noting a flaw of the government's member, not fault of the government itself.

You're not seeing the forest from the trees.

Governments always have flawed members that make selfish and incompetent decisions on your money, and a government always has to fight against being completely filled with these self-serving people because a government is the perfect place for them to exist. Now the problem is, who's doing the fighting - the very same people!

That's why governments eventually corrupt, and have to be overthrown if they don't have the good sense to step down before the pitchforks come out.

No.3483998

>>3483933

>though it had such a ridiculous cost-benefit ratio that it finally got the axe in 2015.

And yet Sarah Palin managed to build a useless $25 million highway leading up to the now non-existing bridge - because it was "already earmarked". The point being that individual politicians do shit like that all the time to benefit their own constituents, because the money goes to the local construction companies and they don't care that the road is completely pointless - as long as somebody else (all of the US) is paying.

No.3484011

>>3483998
Which, according to that same Wikipedia page, she could also have just returned the money to the Federal government.

Alaska Department of Transportation spokesman Roger Wetherell disagreed, stating that Palin could have canceled the contract upon taking office and reimbursed contractors for any expenses incurred in association with the project, as happened when Palin cancelled a $18.6 million contract on a Juneau road and reimbursed the contractor for $65,500 in expenses. Federal Highway Administration spokesman Doug Hecox stated that Palin could have opted not to use the federal earmark, which would have allowed Congress the opportunity to send it to other federal needs.

So that can be laid more at the feet of Palin than the government as a whole.

No.3484012
File: You_asshole.jpg - (423.05 KB, 1714x1015) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
433202

>>3483996

>Not all road infrastructure automatically benefits all the people to the same degree.

This right here was the point you went from having a debate to just being an asshole. Your complaint is becoming, "Other people MIGHT get more benefit out of my tax dollars than I do so I don't want to pay taxes."

No.3484019

>>3484012

>Your complaint is becoming, "Other people MIGHT get more benefit out of my tax dollars than I do so I don't want to pay taxes."

Nope. That's what you want to make it into, to erect a strawman.

My actual complaint was that tax funded public infrastructure allows building projects that cost more than they're worth to the people who actually use them. It's inefficient use of resources, which instead of providing necessary services to the people, ends up being a drain and a source of inequality in the society.

In other words, the government is not doing you a favor - they're simply spending your money unwisely.

No.3484021

>>3484012
Let me make a simple illustration of the principle:

Group A wants to have a road, and they estimate it would bring $1 billion worth of revenue to the area, so that road would be worth $1 billion to the local economy and to Group A - but alas, building the road would cost $2 billion and therefore if it was up to Group A to pay, they should never do it because it makes no sense to build the road.

But look, we can fund it by public tax dollars, so groups B, C, D, ... , Y, Z have to share the cost and therefore Group A, like everybody else, pays only 77 million each. Suddenly building the road starts to make sense to Group A, because where previously they'd be making $1 billion loss, now they'd be pocketing 933 million in profit by taking money from all the other groups - out of what is fundamentally a non-profitable enterprise because the road still costs $2 billion and returns $1 billion in revenue.

So by building the road on public expense, the society loses $1 billion in real value over the road, and has to cut benefits and services elsewhere. Now realize that this sort of pork barrel spending is happening all over the place, in smaller and greater amounts wherever the government is involved, and you'll understand why they're not helping.

No.3484022

In fact, just about the only times people actually do go to the government to beg for money for public infrastructure is because it would be too risky or unprofitable for private investors, so they can't raise the necessary capital on the free market. It means the project is likely to result in no net benefit whatsoever.

The government then is left with the role of the gullible idiot who falls in for the unfounded promises and cost estimates and ends up paying double.

No.3484039

>>3484019
My actual complaint was that tax funded public infrastructure allows building projects that cost more than they're worth to the people who actually use them. It's inefficient use of resources, which instead of providing necessary services to the people, ends up being a drain and a source of inequality in the society.

So - what if someone that lives down a stretch of 10+ mile dirt road has a heart attack and needs an ambulance to get to them? Or there's a 911 call from the same place requesting police assistance for an intruder in the house? That road suddenly becomes a major impediment for first responders trying to get there in a timely fashion.

No.3484041

>>3484039

>So - what if someone that lives down a stretch of 10+ mile dirt road has a heart attack and needs an ambulance to get to them?

Should they be living down there? What are they doing so far away from everyone else? Should public tax money be used to support everyone's life choices, no matter how much it costs to everyone else?

No.3484043

>>3484039
Or, consider - even if that 10+ miles of road was paved, it's still going to take 30+ minutes for the ambulance and police to arrive from somewhere else, because there simply isn't enough resources to put an ambulance or a police car on the ready for every old man on his farm.

No.3484048

>>3484041
Farmland, typically. And most farmers would prefer to put their profits right back into their farms rather than infrastructure.

No.3484050

>>3483996
You would have saved yourself some time if you had just said you couldn't come up with any examples.

No.3484056
File: new_york_dont_live_here.png - (288.68 KB, 660x330) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
295608

>>3484039

>So - what if someone that lives down a stretch of 10+ mile dirt road has a heart attack and needs an ambulance to get to them?

Why should I be responsible for that? Shouldn't it be part of your responsibility when deciding where you'll live? I live literally two blocks down from one of the best hospitals in the nation that's here in Houston. Yes, that means that I live around a bunch of nig-nogs and wetbacks which I wouldn't have to deal with if I lived out in the country, but I wouldn't have close access to this awesome hospital either.

>>3484048

>And most farmers would prefer to put their profits right back into their farms rather than infrastructure.

And? Oh wait, a farmer putting money into his farm so he can produce more food to support people like you? Oh God, the horror!!! I'm sure if farmers didn't properly manage their farms and invest in them, then it's okay because New Yorkers like yourself are totally capable of producing all the food you need yourself, right?

No.3484068

>>3484056
I live literally 5 minutes from an apple processing facility, and have an apple orchard right across the street, with migrant housing getting installed as I sit here typing.

And I was using that as a point as to why roads should be publicly funded - otherwise it'd be on the backs of the farmers to shell out the funds for it. And when you're dealing with dozens of acres of farmland, tractors, semis required to haul the apples to the processing plant, and an assortment of other things - yeah, they need the money for personal use more than they'd need to fund roads, which the aforementioned semis need to use to transport them off the farm itself.

No.3484070

>>3484068
Oh, you know what else is publicly funded with roads? Clearing them! New York tends to get snowfalls - if those roads were privately-built, only those that shelled out for it would be legally responsible for maintaining them in good weather and bad. Good luck trying to get people in rural areas to work when their roads are blocked by 3+ feet of snow due to no one being able to plow.
Otherwise, those aforementioned hurdles that >>3484043 keeps going on about would apply just as much in that situation. Which, again, is why roads being publicly funded is fucking necessary, not just a good idea.

No.3484080
File: 2435.jpg - (9.62 KB, 300x180) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
9851

>>3482649
Jeffrey Tambor is next in line for sexual harassment headlines. Who is next?

No.3484083
File: 4tehlulzl_by_3b.jpg - (370.37 KB, 1296x864) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
379263

>>3483912

>In order to have a market, you must have competition between different providers and the ability to choose none if you need none.

Do you think the government keeps millions of street pavers constantly working moving around the country paving roads? Of course not. They put out a contract bid, the company that gives them the best deal gets the contract. It's the free market. Your tax dollars go to create jobs in a free market system and if there is no need for a job, no job is created. They don't just keep millions of employees on hand and send them where ever they are needed. They hire locally. That is how it works.

when you complain about paying your taxes you are complaining about supporting the free market. You are saying that the free market doesn't work. So which is it? Are you a commie liberal who wants socialism or do you believe in the free market? If you want jobs, economic growth and the services America needs to grow instead of collapse then pay your fucking taxes and be a good consumer.

No.3484087

>>3484070

>Good luck trying to get people in rural areas to work when their roads are blocked by 3+ feet of snow due to no one being able to plow.

You do know that tractors can have snow blowers and plows for attachments?

Fuck, my parents house is on a road that is not owned by the city, and every winter they pay their neighbor a few bucks to clear the road when it snows.

No.3484088

>>3484083

>They put out a contract bid, the company that gives them the best deal gets the contract. It's the free market.

No, that's shifting the goalposts and changing the argument.

You were talking about the government providing public infrastructure in return of tax money as a free market, which it isn't because you can't choose between different governments to provide you the service, and you can't choose not to pay your taxes. It's not a free market - they take your money, and give you in return whatever they think they can get away with.

3B, why are you such an abject liar?

No.3484089

>>3484068

>otherwise it'd be on the backs of the farmers to shell out the funds for it.

As they should. The road to the farm is part of the expense of producing apples!

The farmer chooses where to put the farm, so they are responsible for the transportation costs. If the public funds the road, then part of the cost of producing apples in that particular location gets shouldered by the public, and again the same old inefficiency argument crops up: it might be that the apple orchard is worth less than it costs because it's in the middle of bumfuck nowhere and the transportation costs are too high - but because the government foots part of the bill, the farmers can grow apples profitably while the rest of the society loses value over it because the apples they get in return aren't worth as much as they cost.

It's kinda like, I set up a coffee shop 5 miles from the highway because the land is cheap there, because there's nobody in there, and go "boo hoo hoo, nobody's coming here I can't make any money, pls government re-route the highway past my shop".

No.3484090

>>3484083

>our tax dollars go to create jobs in a free market system and if there is no need for a job, no job is created.

How naive of you. Any time there's government money to be had, a job will be created to take all of it, whether that work is ultimately needed or not, because the only people you need to convince of the necessity of that job is the government, which is incompetent in assessing both whether something really needs to be done, and how much should be paid for it.

Government work always expands to fill the available time and the available budget, and typically exceeding it as the government is not only taxing but also printing more money to pay for what they can't tax.

No.3484096
File: Batman.jpg - (239.23 KB, 647x869) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
244968

>>3484088

>It's not a free market if the government does it...

Ok, then is investing in a mutual fund part of free market economics? The stock market? Because it's the same damn thing. You are putting your money with other people's money in the hands of someone who knows the market (A broker) to get you the best deal for your money. That's what the government does. So again, free market. You can't say you believe in the market and that the you don't believe in taxes because its the same exact thing. You are just so angry, so petulant, so entitled that you think you should run everything yourself but guess what? The world has more people in it than you. We work together in a society. If you want to be part of that society then you pay for the services we all share just like everyone else. If you don't like it there are lots of places you can move too with no taxes like the lawless parts of Africa where you can just shoot anyone who disagrees with you and vice versa. If you want civilization, taxes are the literal price you pay.

No.3484098

>>3484096

>Ok, then is investing in a mutual fund part of free market economics? The stock market?

Yes.

>Because it's the same damn thing.

No it isn't, because you get to choose whether to pay into those schemes, and to which schemes you want to join. Try "choosing" not to pay the IRS, try choosing your government past the corporate lobbyists, try making the bureaucrats actually do what you require of them!

No.3484099

>>3484096

> If you want to be part of that society then you pay for the services we all share just like everyone else.

Your fallacy is in two points: "we all share" and "just like everyone else". Again, the benefit of tax spending isn't evenly spread, nor are the taxes btw. because of progressive taxation.

Secondly your "society" is an arbitrary concept and a fiction that that only exists in to lump together people who have barely anything to do with each other, so that you could take money from the other people to pay for your shit. You're talking with the mouth of an imaginary "we", as if some guy in Seattle were somehow obliged to pay money to another guy in Florida just because they both happen to belong to the society named the United States.

You think YOU are entitled to get YOUR infrastructure paid for by other people against THEIR will and against everyone else's interest. Who's being the greedy bastard there?

No.3484100

>>3484096

>If you want civilization, taxes are the literal price you pay.

Taxes are only necessary to support a government, which is only necessary to fend against warlords and corporate assholes taking over the whole society, to keep a semblance of a free market.

Taxes are a necessary evil and a problem in themselves: there can never be an entirely fair and justified tax because that concept would have to presume that you have to have your money confiscated against your will, to do something that is according to your will in the first place. If that were the case, you would sooner pay the money yourself. Tax funded public services are always operating under the belief that it's good to make people do shit as long as it's in their interest, like it's good to have a child vaccinated even though sticking a needle in them hurts and they don't want it. But that's always assuming that the people are like children that need parents to look after them: well guess what the government is too? Children parenting children - how could that end?

Indeed the real problems start when the government starts to encroach their purpose and begin to foist favors and services on the people, beyond what is necessary of them in order to justify more spending, more taxes, because the people in power want a) money for themselves personally, b) the social power that comes with being able to spend other peoples' money, which ultimately serves point a. That is why, governments spending lavishly on public infrastructure is always a symptom of corruption within the government. Someone is skimming the cream off the top, or using the projects to pay their buddies in the industries, or just pork-barrel spending to benefit their home town.

Take Venezuela for example: every time the oil prices go up and they get a little bit of money, they sink it on grand public projects and welfare programs instead of investing it into other kinds of industry and commerce, so then when the money runs out they sink back down into being a third world communist shithole. Why? Because the government doesn't want to create a thriving economy, since it would require them to dismantle communism and lose their power.

No.3484105

>>3484100

You have a stunningly poor understanding of the world, just your description of Venezuela outs you. I recently heard Libertarian horseshit described as "the worldview of a 12 year old boy" and your dives into parenting-as-government could not be more illustrative.

No.3484110
File: trump_venezuela_socialism.jpg - (38.39 KB, 480x370) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
39307

>>3484096

>>It's not a free market if the government does it...
>Ok, then is investing in a mutual fund part of free market economics? The stock market? Because it's the same damn thing.

No, it's not. A good example is Venezuela and its state-owned enterprises including PDVSA, which is the state-owned monopoly on all oil & gas production. Venezuela is about as far from a free market as you can get, but the government does participate in free markets around the globe. Free markets such as the US where Venezuela owns Citgo, a company that operates gas stations and refineries down here in Texas. Just because the socialist government of Venezuela does participate in the free markets outside its borders, doesn't make the Venezuelan government and its activities within its borders a free market enterprise.

No.3484113
File: Aramco.png - (213.76 KB, 1000x604) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
218891

>>3484100

>Take Venezuela for example: every time the oil prices go up and they get a little bit of money, they sink it on grand public projects and welfare programs instead of investing it into other kinds of industry and commerce, so then when the money runs out they sink back down into being a third world communist shithole. Why? Because the government doesn't want to create a thriving economy, since it would require them to dismantle communism and lose their power.

This man speaks the truth. If you want to see how to do a state-owned oil monopoly correctly, you need to only look to Saudi Arabia, who is currently planning to sell a fraction of ARAMCO for $100 billion.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-oil-opec-russia-saudi-aramco/saudi-aramco-ipo-on-track-for-2018-officials-idUSKBN1CA0SI

That kind of cash would really help Venezuela right now, it's just that they wasted it on failed public projects, costly welfare programs and outright corruption. Instead PDVSA is about to go bust, the entire nation of Venezuela is about to go bankrupt and all of those state assets are going to be bought out by foreign interests. Maduro is already selling off his reserves of oil to Putin, so that oil prices recover it'll be Russia that'll be reaping the profits off of Venezuelan oil. It's kinda sad when a theocratic absolute monarchy is a far superior form of governance.

http://splash247.com/pdvsa-defaults-billions-loans/

No.3484114
File: Libertarian_Reality.gif - (69.95 KB, 550x840) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
71624

>>3484105

No.3484115
File: libertarianism_summary.gif - (41.18 KB, 320x1027) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
42165

>>3484114
Or for the punchier version...

No.3484117

>>3484089

You're wrong dipshit. The redistributor and the ones who purchase the apples are the ones using the infrastructure to move the product.

The apples might and can stay there rooting.

>>3483914
If your government is taxing you to build roads to nowhere, why the fuck you elected said government in the first place?
This is what baffles me of America.
They knowingly vote for the biggest dipshit who only cares about their 1%er group.

>>3484068
The problem who still do not understand the issue of why government is needed. Neds to understand not even business can afford for insane expenses for advancement of science (see NASA). Until the last decades where megacorporations rose and have the capacity to buy entire countries.

There are many things that a normal everyday company for profit wont give a damn.
Besides the public roads are there for a reason. They are used for something, not just transportation. Its like an incentive to make business and help economies connect. And thus boost economy.

No.3484119

>>3484117
For proof positive of that, let's go to another New York thing - Clinton's Ditch, aka the Erie Canal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erie_Canal
The existence of that 363 mile canal, which was grossly unpopular at the time (hence the nickname after DeWitt Clinton), was what made New York City the economic center of the East Coast way back when. All those goods were able to go downriver rather than over dirt roads or try to get limited space on the railroads (if they had any), and cut overall transport costs by 95%.

No commercial enterprise would have wanted to do something like that, and for good reason - but the long-term economic impact it had is still felt, as NYC remains as the biggest economic center of the US and possibly the world.

No.3484121
File: Autocorrect.png - (84.70 KB, 320x382) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
86735

>>3484099

>Some people pay more than others...

Yes, this is true. Because some people have more than others to pay and some use more of our resources than other people. If you did it your way where everyone paid an equal amount the bills would never get paid because while the people who had the most money paid less, the people who have no money would end up in debt and there would never be enough money to create a functional government. You can't make people pay taxes with money they don't have. You are being childish.

Besides, those millionaires who bitch about paying for roads and infrastructure are the ones causing the wear and tear on the infrastructure in the first place. Do you think freight-trucks, dump trucks, 18-wheelers, and other heavy business vehicles cause the same amount of damage to a street as a soccer mom's SUV? No, your precious businesses that make the 1% their money do way more damage and cost the country way more resources than your average citizen so yes, it is fair that those who make money pay more. You break it, you buy it.

No.3484122
File: trump_venezuela_socialism_.png - (502.02 KB, 480x628) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
514071

>>3484110

We've gone over a thousand times why Venezuela failed it had nothing to do with socialism. In fact the United nations leaders literally laughed in Trump's face when he said that.

Saudi Arabia and America worked together to drive down the price of oil because Russia was trying to get into the oil business and both of them wanted to starve Russia of those resources.

The Saudi can operate at half the price of the oil because it is abundant and cheap for them. Venezuela's oil is a different kind that is more costly to process and make usable. It went from $100 a barrel to less than 50$ a barrel almost overnight because of this artificial price manipulation.

It was economic warfare and Venezuela was the collateral damage. The nation was in debt up to it's eyeballs because it had what it thought was a product that would be needed forever then suddenly was too costly to even produce at half the price.

Saudi fucking over the OPEC arrangement to buddy up with America fucked them to. They have been keeping the price low and letting the oil flow as if the market was going to keep moving at that volume forever but as technology has progressed oil is used less and less.

Now they are fucked because their one good resources is losing value past the point where they can maintain the volume of sales needed to maintain the artificially low prices. The price of oil needs to go up because the demand for it grows less every year but they can't without pissing off America and getting invaded.

No.3484130

>>3484117

>The redistributor and the ones who purchase the apples are the ones using the infrastructure to move the product.

So let them pay the road. The price of the road should be rolled into the price of the apples, by the farmer, distributor, retailer, anyone along the chain so the people who want them apples pay the expense to get them. Building the road on taxpayer money is still subsidizing the apples by taking the money from people who didn't want those particular apples, and again the price of the apples may be higher than the benefit of the apples to the society at large.

>>3484105

>I recently heard Libertarian horseshit described as "the worldview of a 12 year old boy" and your dives into parenting-as-government could not be more illustrative.

But can you actually answer the logical contradiction that it illustrates: the government is taking your money on the argument that people are incompetent and incapable of choosing how to spend their own money rationally, so the government must spend it for them. But at the same time the government consists of people just the same, who are by their own argument - and as shown by practical experience - at least equally incompetent in spending the money and what's worse prone to corruption.

>Neds to understand not even business can afford for insane expenses for advancement of science (see NASA).

I don't dispute the utility of a government in overseeing very large projects. I'm merely questioning their competence in choosing the projects. Projects like >>3484119 can happen, but they are one in a thousand among the pointless endeavors.

And NASA too was created as a means to shuffle taxpayer money to the aerospace industry. It was sold to the government as a means to create jobs and a means to one-up the Russians in creating ballistic nuclear missiles. NASA didn't actually create much of anything - the private contractors did - and much of the technology already existed but lacked a buyer, so surprise surprise, guess who shows up with a mission to the moon?

No.3484131

>>3484121

> If you did it your way where everyone paid an equal amount
> You can't make people pay taxes with money they don't have. You are being childish.

No, you are being childish because that's your argument, not mine. You flipped the whole thing around and are now arguing that I want people to pay taxes, when I'm saying they should not have to pay the taxes in the first place.

Again, 3B, why are you being such an abject liar that you have to twist other people's words to be "right"?

>>3484122

>We've gone over a thousand times why Venezuela failed

You mean, you've ignored any and all arguments a thousand time, and keep repeating the same irrelevant points. The Venezuelan situation IS because of the incompetence of the socialist government to branch out and diversify their economy, because they started spending the money to buy votes and keep themselves in power from day 1. They made themselves into a banana republic.

>The nation was in debt up to it's eyeballs because it had what it thought was a product that would be needed forever

They knew very well the OPEC and the US could fuck them up by crashing the oil prices - that was always a possibility. The socialist government was up in ears in debt because they saw loose money and took it.

No.3484135
File: 1-fossilfuelem.jpg - (67.94 KB, 1000x668) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
69571

>>3484122

>but as technology has progressed oil is used less and less.

Another lie by the resident crank.

https://phys.org/news/2017-11-fossil-fuel-emissions-high-unexpected.html

>The most significant factor in the resumption of global emissions growth is the projected 3.5% increase in China's emissions. This is the result of higher energy demand, particularly from the industrial sector, along with a decline in hydro power use because of below-average rainfall. China's coal consumption grew by 3%, while oil (5%) and gas (12%) continued rising.

Petroleum demand is at an all-time high and growing thanks to the masses of people in the developing world, China and India, gaining access to wealth and building industry and cars etc.

No.3484136

>>3484122
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez_administration

>Economic policy of the Hugo Chávez administration
>In the early 2000s when oil prices soared and offered Chavez funds not seen since the beginning of Venezuela's economic collapse in the 1980s, Chávez's government became "semi-authoritarian and hyper-populist" and consolidated its power over the economy in order to gain control of large amounts of resources.[1][2] Domestically, Chavez used such oil funds for populist policies, creating the "Bolivarian Missions," aimed at providing public services to improve economic, cultural, and social conditions.
>As Chávez began to increase domestic spending to build a loyal political following, high inflation, currency controls, an unfriendly environment with private businesses and the risk of default prevented the entrance of stronger foreign currencies into Venezuela.[4] The Chávez government then turned to China to fund its overspending on social programs.[4] Despite warnings near the beginning of Chávez's tenure in the early 2000s,[1] Chávez's government continuously overspent in social spending and did not save enough money for any future economic turmoil, which Venezuela faced shortly before and after his death.
>Other industries suffered as a result of the over-reliance on oil, with the share of manufacturing in GDP dropping from 17.4% in 1998 when Chavez took office to 14.2% in 2012.[6] As a result of Chávez's overspending and policies such as price controls, there were shortages in Venezuela and the inflation rate grew to one of the highest in the world.
No.3484138

Also

>The price of oil needs to go up because the demand for it grows less every year

For fucks sake 3B, can't you get anything right? Demand growing less than the production means the price drops. You're just all over the place with your bullshit as always.

No.3484139

>>3484119
Also, the Erie Canal wasn't funded by federal tax dollars but by a "loan" from New York state treasury:

https://www.thoughtco.com/erie-canal-1435779

>Once the route and plans for the Erie Canal were established, it was time to obtain funds. The United States Congress easily approved a bill to provide funding for what was then known as the Great Western Canal, but President James Monroe found the idea unconstitutional and vetoed it.

Rightfully so, because the canal would benefit New York first and foremost, so they had no right to spend federal money to build it.

>Therefore, the New York State legislature took the matter into its own hands and approved state funding for the canal in 1816, with tolls to pay back the state treasury for upon completion.
>In 1862, the Erie Canal was widened to 70 feet and deepened to 7 feet (2.1 m). Once the tolls on the canal had paid for its construction in 1882, they were eliminated.

So in the end, the users and beneficaries of the canal ended up paying for its cost - not every taxpaying citizen. This is the right way to fund public projects - unfortunately rare in these days.


Delete Post []
Password