Girls win all 5 top prizes in The National STEM Competition

[WinterBorn]

...Besides, you keep ignoring that taking the vote away from women requires a constitutional amendment.

The president can't just order it done.

Actually it will simply be left out of the new American Constitution when we rewrite the document after the Conservative Revolution.

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

A logic ability test for voters is the only way to save the nation

Since trump has the men on his side. He now has that power to save the nation by declaring s broken govt and setting up logic tests for voting

Nope, he doesn't have the authority or power. And the men may be with him so far, but when he violated the US Constitution like that, they will abandon him.

Besides, do you think Trump has an IQ of 125? lol

 

[Anathema]

Nope, he doesn't have the authority or power. And the men may be with him so far, but when he violated the US Constitution like that, they will abandon him.

LOL. Most Men realize that we've been living in a post-Constitutional society since Liberal POtuS Abraham Lincoln violated it in early April, 1861. It was further dismantled by FDR in the early decades of the 20th Century and mostly ignored sincecthen. Especially by a liberals and Progressives in both major parties.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

...Besides, you keep ignoring that taking the vote away from women requires a constitutional amendment.

The president can't just order it done.

Actually it will simply be left out of the new American Constitution when we rewrite the document after the Conservative Revolution.

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

A logic ability test for voters is the only way to save the nation

Since trump has the men on his side. He now has that power to save the nation by declaring s broken govt and setting up logic tests for voting

Nope, he doesn't have the authority or power. And the men may be with him so far, but when he violated the US Constitution like that, they will abandon him.

Besides, do you think Trump has an IQ of 125? lol

Wrong the men will
Follow trump like they did Andrew Jackson

When the men agreed or disagrees they then makes that happen because they have the real power

The founded changed constitution is illegal

They said no to the unwise voting ... Loud and Clear

 

[GreenAndBlue]

...Besides, you keep ignoring that taking the vote away from women requires a constitutional amendment.

The president can't just order it done.

Actually it will simply be left out of the new American Constitution when we rewrite the document after the Conservative Revolution.

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

A logic ability test for voters is the only way to save the nation

Since trump has the men on his side. He now has that power to save the nation by declaring s broken govt and setting up logic tests for voting

Nope, he doesn't have the authority or power. And the men may be with him so far, but when he violated the US Constitution like that, they will abandon him.

Besides, do you think Trump has an IQ of 125? lol

Again it’s the men that AGREES with trump
AGREES that the harm to the nation is liberalism and stoopid voters

They then agree that they must stop the CURRENT system to save the nation

So it’s clear what they will
Do

They will fight with trump to stop liberalism and the unwise voters

 

[WinterBorn]

Actually it will simply be left out of the new American Constitution when we rewrite the document after the Conservative Revolution.

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

A logic ability test for voters is the only way to save the nation

Since trump has the men on his side. He now has that power to save the nation by declaring s broken govt and setting up logic tests for voting

Nope, he doesn't have the authority or power. And the men may be with him so far, but when he violated the US Constitution like that, they will abandon him.

Besides, do you think Trump has an IQ of 125? lol

Again it’s the men that AGREES with trump
AGREES that the harm to the nation is liberalism and stoopid voters

They then agree that they must stop the CURRENT system to save the nation

So it’s clear what they will
Do

They will fight with trump to stop liberalism and the unwise voters

No.

Yes, the men want to improve things. But when you tell them they have to stand idly by while people's constitutional rights are denied and refused, but there is no constitutional amendment, they will refuse to fight. In fact, they will fight against anyone who tries it.

It amounts to treason.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

A logic ability test for voters is the only way to save the nation

Since trump has the men on his side. He now has that power to save the nation by declaring s broken govt and setting up logic tests for voting

Nope, he doesn't have the authority or power. And the men may be with him so far, but when he violated the US Constitution like that, they will abandon him.

Besides, do you think Trump has an IQ of 125? lol

Again it’s the men that AGREES with trump
AGREES that the harm to the nation is liberalism and stoopid voters

They then agree that they must stop the CURRENT system to save the nation

So it’s clear what they will
Do

They will fight with trump to stop liberalism and the unwise voters

No.

Yes, the men want to improve things. But when you tell them they have to stand idly by while people's constitutional rights are denied and refused, but there is no constitutional amendment, they will refuse to fight. In fact, they will fight against anyone who tries it.

It amounts to treason.

Wrong you know not what you say

Treason is when the voting changed

Changed from only the wise to a system that brings record low logic abilities voting with each election cycle

Trump now must stop you criminals that changed the founders system



That is Treason !!!

The higher logic men knows this and is why they support him


So the men are making s judgement that it is YOU guilty of treason

Foolish stooopid people

Again the higher logic men are the true judges and final say on who is guilty of treason

It is you democrats about to get hammered by the real power and the real judges

 

[WinterBorn]

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

A logic ability test for voters is the only way to save the nation

Since trump has the men on his side. He now has that power to save the nation by declaring s broken govt and setting up logic tests for voting

Nope, he doesn't have the authority or power. And the men may be with him so far, but when he violated the US Constitution like that, they will abandon him.

Besides, do you think Trump has an IQ of 125? lol

Again it’s the men that AGREES with trump
AGREES that the harm to the nation is liberalism and stoopid voters

They then agree that they must stop the CURRENT system to save the nation

So it’s clear what they will
Do

They will fight with trump to stop liberalism and the unwise voters

No.

Yes, the men want to improve things. But when you tell them they have to stand idly by while people's constitutional rights are denied and refused, but there is no constitutional amendment, they will refuse to fight. In fact, they will fight against anyone who tries it.

It amounts to treason.

Wrong you know not what you say

Treason is when the voting changed

Changed from only the wise to a system that brings record low logic abilities voting with each election cycle

Trump now must stop you criminals that changed the founders system



That is Treason !!!

Only if you redefine the word "treason".

Tell you what, I have $500 that says your unconstitutional plan for removing women's ability to vote will not happen in the next 10 years.

How about it? Want to bet?

 

[GreenAndBlue]

Why do you stoopid liberals think trump got the men the white men the military and the law enforcement on his side

His plan is to stop the nation from falling by stopping the unwise voters
He has the power and the plan

Will he do it in 6 months before the next election ??

Will he do it if the unwise votes him to stop... if they do that in nov will he In dec declare martial law and stop this crooked system

If he gets elected will he wait to do it on his 2nd term ??

It is crystal clear that this is his plan and he now has the power to do this and save the nation but he may wait to do it in his 2nd term

If he gets voted out by the unwise he could do it immediately especially if the men voted for him and he loses only because of the unwise women voters

Who can predict


Let’s hear it ???

Remember our voters logic ability level is at a record low and will keep going down until certain destruction

 

[GreenAndBlue]

Another reason why trump will stop the unwise voters is that if he don’t his whole family is at risk of being killed once he is out of office

So if trump gets the majority of the men’s vote but loses the election because of the majority of the unwise women’s vote. He then has the power to save his family and the nation

And that will be declaring the govt totally broken with insane crookedness and then to lock up the liberal leaders and make a logjc test for voting

The men are just waiting for his signal on this

 

[Anathema]

Wrong you know not what you say

Treason is when the voting changed

Changed from only the wise to a system that brings record low logic abilities voting with each election cycle

Honestly I’m not sure either of you understand what the intent of the original requirements for voting were...

Those requirements were: White, Land-owner, and Male. The purpose behind those requirement were two-fold:

1. White males were the only significantly educated and informed portion of the population. They were the ones who were literate, well read, and who publicly debated the topics of the day.

2. Property owners were the people significantly invested in how the Government worked and the limits/controls that should or should not exist on thst Government. They were the ones who paid taxes and had to deal with the regulations from Government.

Over time we whittled away at those requirements u see the guise of Freedom and Equality. Now the Educated, Informed and Invested voter rarely exists, and we are far worse off for it.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

Wrong you know not what you say

Treason is when the voting changed

Changed from only the wise to a system that brings record low logic abilities voting with each election cycle

Honestly I’m not sure either of you understand what the intent of the original requirements for voting were...

Those requirements were: White, Land-owner, and Male. The purpose behind those requirement were two-fold:

1. White males were the only significantly educated and informed portion of the population. They were the ones who were literate, well read, and who publicly debated the topics of the day.

2. Property owners were the people significantly invested in how the Government worked and the limits/controls that should or should not exist on thst Government. They were the ones who paid taxes and had to deal with the regulations from Government.

Over time we whittled away at those requirements u see the guise of Freedom and Equality. Now the Educated, Informed and Invested voter rarely exists, and we are far worse off for it.

Wake up

That test was not a property test but a logic ability test to find the most wise voters

Women could own property but could not vote or be on juries because of seen to be less logical and more emotional which would cause them to elect crooks

White males were seen to be wise but some unwise

So they set up a test to stop the unwise white males from voting

The ability to gain and hold property

Property to grow ones food was seen as the most valuable thing

And had only property owners to vote

And not the wealthy. 2 thousand acree owner voter was equal to the 1 acree owner

So it is crystal clear that the founders knew that the nation must have only the most wise to vote

The change since then has been from criminals and morons

 

[Andylusion]

...Besides, you keep ignoring that taking the vote away from women requires a constitutional amendment.

The president can't just order it done.

Actually it will simply be left out of the new American Constitution when we rewrite the document after the Conservative Revolution.

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

The biggest problem with Social Security is that the federal gov't "borrowed" money from it, with no intention of every paying it back.

No the biggest problem with social security is liberalism where we have stopped being fruitful and multiplying

We have now a giant imbalance of young to old

With a lot more young a lot more money coMing into social security

Liberalism destroys nations !!

Clearly that is part of the problem.... but the reality is, even if we were still popping out more kids, it wouldn't solve Social Security. Pension systems across the world are having problems, and that includes nations with higher rates of birth.

Socialism itself does not work. Ponzi schemes do not work. Taking from group B, to pay group A, in hopes that when it's time to pay group B, you can take from group C.... never works. It never does. Ponzi schemes flat out, do not work. Never have, and never will.

 

[Andylusion]

I think we should encourage every child to study STEM (or STEAM).

sure--so why single out girls?

Girls have not performed as well in STEM courses in the past. And farther back, they were actively discouraged from it.

5 young people did very well. That deserves some praise. That they happened to be girls just shows what encouragement will do. And at least they won't be majoring in "Women's Studies".

Girls don't perform well in STEM because they aren't good at math.

I know dozens of women who are undoubtedly far, far superior to you in math.

bripat is correct --you are wrong --plain and simple
2016 SAT test results confirm pattern that’s persisted for 50 years — high school boys are better at math than girls | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...score-higher-than-girls-on-the_fig1_229162118

How did we as a society, get to the point, where we need research to empirically prove what is obvious?

 

[GreenAndBlue]

Actually it will simply be left out of the new American Constitution when we rewrite the document after the Conservative Revolution.

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

The biggest problem with Social Security is that the federal gov't "borrowed" money from it, with no intention of every paying it back.

No the biggest problem with social security is liberalism where we have stopped being fruitful and multiplying

We have now a giant imbalance of young to old

With a lot more young a lot more money coMing into social security

Liberalism destroys nations !!

Clearly that is part of the problem.... but the reality is, even if we were still popping out more kids, it wouldn't solve Social Security. Pension systems across the world are having problems, and that includes nations with higher rates of birth.

Socialism itself does not work. Ponzi schemes do not work. Taking from group B, to pay group A, in hopes that when it's time to pay group B, you can take from group C.... never works. It never does. Ponzi schemes flat out, do not work. Never have, and never will.

Oh yes the public will indeed limit who gets to vote


Suffering and Pain will indeed MAKE a nation change

This is coming quickly

Liberalism destroys nations with pain and misery

And pain will force nations to make a logic test for voting

The world is already part there

The GDP Scores of liberal nations are low and will keep falling to
Make the wise flee
And when the wise flees the nations pains will get much more severe

 

[WinterBorn]

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

The biggest problem with Social Security is that the federal gov't "borrowed" money from it, with no intention of every paying it back.

No the biggest problem with social security is liberalism where we have stopped being fruitful and multiplying

We have now a giant imbalance of young to old

With a lot more young a lot more money coMing into social security

Liberalism destroys nations !!

Clearly that is part of the problem.... but the reality is, even if we were still popping out more kids, it wouldn't solve Social Security. Pension systems across the world are having problems, and that includes nations with higher rates of birth.

Socialism itself does not work. Ponzi schemes do not work. Taking from group B, to pay group A, in hopes that when it's time to pay group B, you can take from group C.... never works. It never does. Ponzi schemes flat out, do not work. Never have, and never will.

Oh yes the public will indeed limit who gets to vote


Suffering and Pain will indeed MAKE a nation change

This is coming quickly

Liberalism destroys nations with pain and misery

And pain will force nations to make a logic test for voting

The world is already part there

The GDP Scores of liberal nations are low and will keep falling to
Make the wise flee
And when the wise flees the nations pains will get much more severe

If the public can muster enough votes for a constitutional amendment, they can remove women's right to vote.

If they can't muster enough votes, they can not remove women's right to vote. It is that simple.

 

[bripat9643]

sure--so why single out girls?

Girls have not performed as well in STEM courses in the past. And farther back, they were actively discouraged from it.

5 young people did very well. That deserves some praise. That they happened to be girls just shows what encouragement will do. And at least they won't be majoring in "Women's Studies".

Girls don't perform well in STEM because they aren't good at math.

I know dozens of women who are undoubtedly far, far superior to you in math.

bripat is correct --you are wrong --plain and simple
2016 SAT test results confirm pattern that’s persisted for 50 years — high school boys are better at math than girls | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...score-higher-than-girls-on-the_fig1_229162118

How did we as a society, get to the point, where we need research to empirically prove what is obvious?

It happened because the left is always trying to fundamentally change our society using lies.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

The biggest problem with Social Security is that the federal gov't "borrowed" money from it, with no intention of every paying it back.

No the biggest problem with social security is liberalism where we have stopped being fruitful and multiplying

We have now a giant imbalance of young to old

With a lot more young a lot more money coMing into social security

Liberalism destroys nations !!

Clearly that is part of the problem.... but the reality is, even if we were still popping out more kids, it wouldn't solve Social Security. Pension systems across the world are having problems, and that includes nations with higher rates of birth.

Socialism itself does not work. Ponzi schemes do not work. Taking from group B, to pay group A, in hopes that when it's time to pay group B, you can take from group C.... never works. It never does. Ponzi schemes flat out, do not work. Never have, and never will.

Oh yes the public will indeed limit who gets to vote


Suffering and Pain will indeed MAKE a nation change

This is coming quickly

Liberalism destroys nations with pain and misery

And pain will force nations to make a logic test for voting

The world is already part there

The GDP Scores of liberal nations are low and will keep falling to
Make the wise flee
And when the wise flees the nations pains will get much more severe

If the public can muster enough votes for a constitutional amendment, they can remove women's right to vote.

If they can't muster enough votes, they can not remove women's right to vote. It is that simple.

Wrong dead wrong

Did Andrew Jackson get the OK for the Indian removal from
Congress or the courts ??

No he did not

So how did Jackson do that ??

Because he had the real power on his side

The Men

Exactly same as trump

Learn history and learn universal laws

 

[Unkotare]

sure--so why single out girls?

Girls have not performed as well in STEM courses in the past. And farther back, they were actively discouraged from it.

5 young people did very well. That deserves some praise. That they happened to be girls just shows what encouragement will do. And at least they won't be majoring in "Women's Studies".

Girls don't perform well in STEM because they aren't good at math.

I know dozens of women who are undoubtedly far, far superior to you in math.

bripat is correct --you are wrong --plain and simple
2016 SAT test results confirm pattern that’s persisted for 50 years — high school boys are better at math than girls | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...score-higher-than-girls-on-the_fig1_229162118

How did we as a society, get to the point, where we need research to empirically prove what is obvious?

Logic is crucial because of flawed thinking like that.

 

[Unkotare]

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

The biggest problem with Social Security is that the federal gov't "borrowed" money from it, with no intention of every paying it back.

No the biggest problem with social security is liberalism where we have stopped being fruitful and multiplying

We have now a giant imbalance of young to old

With a lot more young a lot more money coMing into social security

Liberalism destroys nations !!

Clearly that is part of the problem.... but the reality is, even if we were still popping out more kids, it wouldn't solve Social Security. Pension systems across the world are having problems, and that includes nations with higher rates of birth.

Socialism itself does not work. Ponzi schemes do not work. Taking from group B, to pay group A, in hopes that when it's time to pay group B, you can take from group C.... never works. It never does. Ponzi schemes flat out, do not work. Never have, and never will.

Oh yes the public will indeed limit who gets to vote


Suffering and Pain will indeed MAKE a nation change

This is coming quickly

Liberalism destroys nations with pain and misery

And pain will force nations to make a logic test for voting

The world is already part there

The GDP Scores of liberal nations are low and will keep falling to
Make the wise flee
And when the wise flees the nations pains will get much more severe

You have no idea what logic is, head case.

 

[Unkotare]

And you think even a simple majority will vote in favor of not having a right to vote? Good luck with that.

No I don't think people will agree to what is good and right.

I think it is wrong to allow people who do not contribute, or who directly benefit from the government to have a vote on things that will destroy the entire country.

We saw this is Greece. Greece was not a fluke. People had been warning that the entitlements and government programs of Greece was absolutely unsustainable. But because so many people benefited from pillaging the nation, every time the people who knew what was going on, tried reform the system to avoid eventual destruction of the country.... the public voted heavily against it.

Well, all the number crunchers were dead on right, and the entire public living off the government, found out they were wrong.

Same is true of Venezuela. Everyone predicted everything that happened in Venezuela, including people in Venezuela. But the people with the least invested in the country, voted to destroy those who had the most invested in the country.

Right now in the US, we know for a fact that Medicare and Social Security will clearly eventually destroy the country.

It's not really up for debate except by those who ignore basic math, just like the people in Greece ignored math, and the people in Venezuela ignored math.

The same group of people who destroyed those countries, is now in the process of destroying our country.

There is a huge danger in giving people who have nothing to lose, or people who live off the largess of the government, access to how the entire country is run.

The irony of this, is that in any other context, everyone, including yourself and every left-winger in the country, would instinctively understand this concept.

For example, if the CEO, or the entire executive board of Boeing, was on the committee that approved government contracts.... we would all understand that there is a huge conflict of interest, between the interest of the entire country, and the interest of the person collecting government money.

But what is the difference between that situation, and someone voting on whoever will continue to give them money at home? Nothing. It's the same conflict of interest between what is best for the entire country, and the interest of the individual living off the government.

So back to the main point... I would agree with you that the public will never vote to limit who can vote. I agree.

But I would still say that it is obvious that they should.

The biggest problem with Social Security is that the federal gov't "borrowed" money from it, with no intention of every paying it back.

No the biggest problem with social security is liberalism where we have stopped being fruitful and multiplying

We have now a giant imbalance of young to old

With a lot more young a lot more money coMing into social security

Liberalism destroys nations !!

Clearly that is part of the problem.... but the reality is, even if we were still popping out more kids, it wouldn't solve Social Security. Pension systems across the world are having problems, and that includes nations with higher rates of birth.

Socialism itself does not work. Ponzi schemes do not work. Taking from group B, to pay group A, in hopes that when it's time to pay group B, you can take from group C.... never works. It never does. Ponzi schemes flat out, do not work. Never have, and never will.

Oh yes the public will indeed limit who gets to vote


Suffering and Pain will indeed MAKE a nation change

This is coming quickly......

What should be coming quickly is a change in the dosage of your medication.