Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I knew Democrats were stupid, but Joe you are the dumbest of them all. You keep denying the proof that shows you are a liar over and over. Maybe it is time to check yourself into the insane asylum before you hurt yourself.
As I said before, why after 7 3/4 years of a Socialist President, do 1% of the wealth is mostly held by the elite liberals? Because mind numbed, low information, goose stepping, kool aid drinking, useful idiots keep voting Democrat and expect a different result. Stupid is as stupid does, and they vote Dumbocrat.
By the way Joe, who has been the president for the past 7 3/4 years? Yes you dumb fucks find yourselves working harder every year, for less money, you cling to your liberal government to take care of you and you get what?Liberal bigotry at its finest. So far we have seen Joe as a Racist and a Bigot, what is next?
Hey, it isn't a matter of race, it's a matter of culture. You dumb fucks find yourself working harder every year, for less money, and Cling to your guns and your bibles....
By the way Joe, who has been the president for the past 7 3/4 years? Yes you dumb fucks find yourselves working harder every year, for less money, you cling to your liberal government to take care of you and you get what?
oe , you can keep on ranting and raving, while your vagina candidate plunges in the polls. I am don't trying to debate you as, I cannot compete with your stupidity. We all know you are a RACIST and BIGOT, probably a woman abuser also, but you definitely have issues that only the best psychiatrists can take care of(yeah put you in a rubber room). Go ahead and continue to pollute this link with your inane rambling, I for one, am done with you. Dumbass.
By the way Joe, who has been the president for the past 7 3/4 years? Yes you dumb fucks find yourselves working harder every year, for less money, you cling to your liberal government to take care of you and you get what?
So you aren't going to ever answer the question, are you.
One more time. Why is it a good idea for 1% to have 43% of the wealth.
When you can answer that without talking about Obama, get back to me.
You'd really have to ask the people who made that decision, the people who gave the 1% their wealth. Do you have any guesses as to who that is?
You'd really have to ask the people who made that decision, the people who gave the 1% their wealth. Do you have any guesses as to who that is?
you can take your crazy libertarian nonsense and stick it where the sun down shine. I don't waste my time talking to Libertarians.
Don't worry about Jones. He's just a lying, sniveling, wannabe lawyer who is mad he was passed over for dictator.Venezuela’s hungerHolodomor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThe Associated Press reports that the typical resident of Caracas, the capital, spends 35 hours a month waiting in line to buy food, and 9 in 10 say they can’t find enough . After the government of Nicolás Maduro opened six border crossings to neighboring Colombia on Aug. 13, about 380,000 Venezuelans poured across in the first eight days, desperately seeking supplies. Sackings of food warehouses by hungry mobs have been reported; 50 animals in the Caracas zoo are said to have starved to death. Meanwhile, Mr. Maduro refuses to allow aid shipments into the country, contending they are unneeded.Mao's Great Leap Forward 'killed 45 million in four years'The Holodomor (Ukrainian: Голодомо́р, "Extermination by hunger" or "Hunger-extermination";[2] derived from морити голодом, "to kill by starvation"),[3][4][5] also known as the Terror-Famine and Famine-Genocide in Ukraine,[6][7][8] and—prior to the widespread use of the term "Holodomor," as well as currently still—referred to also as the Great Famine,[9] was a man-made famine in Ukraine in 1932 and 1933 that killed an estimated 2.5–7.5 million Ukrainians, with millions more counted in demographic estimates. It was part of the wider disaster, the Soviet famine of 1932–33, which affected the major grain-producing areas of the country.Why is it that "STUPID' liberals say "The ignorance common to most on the right is as much a problem as conservatives' propensity for lying. " yet time and again, when Socialism/Communism/Liberalism is tried it always ends up in disaster? Do you think that you will not be 1 of those millions who end up dead by starvation or worse? I tried to get a reasonable response why they want it, yet all I got were insults or bad mouthing capitalism. Not one real reason why they want or support it.Mr Dikötter, who has been studying Chinese rural history from 1958 to 1962, when the nation was facing a famine, compared the systematic torture, brutality, starvation and killing of Chinese peasants to the Second World War in its magnitude. At least 45 million people were worked, starved or beaten to death in China over these four years; the worldwide death toll of the Second World War was 55 million.
Mayflower Compact, The Puritans Experiment with SocialismThe failure of this collective system was as evident in Plymouth as it was in other colonies where it had been used. Young unmarried men objected to having the fruits of their toil go to support other men’s wives and children. Married men disliked having their wives sew, cook, and wash for the others. Hard-working men thought it unfair that they should support the more idle or incapable. The older men, or those of the better class, declined to work for the younger or meaner. Because of severe famine in 1623, the colonists decided to set aside their collective agreement and allow everyone to raise their own food. The immediate result was a greatly increased production, so that many had a surplus and trading began among themselves, with corn as currency.
You seem to be contradicting yourself a tad.
You seem to be contradicting yourself a tad.
Again, don't talk to Libertarian Children. Sit down and let the grownups talk.
Except when you do. I'm not slinging insults, I'm not making ad-hom attacks or building strawmen. I'm just making arguments that you don't want to hear.
Except when you do. I'm not slinging insults, I'm not making ad-hom attacks or building strawmen. I'm just making arguments that you don't want to hear.
No, you are making arguments like a high schooler who just read Atlas Shrugged.
Why is it a good idea for 1% to have 43% of the wealth?
We tend to see wealth through the lens of personal privilege and, from that narrow perspective, extreme wealth inequality does seem crazy.
But the more important aspect of wealth is economic power. People with more wealth have greater power to decide what we do with our labor and resources. That's why we give our money, voluntarily, to the people who do a good job making those decisions. If, for example, one person was so amazingly gifted and knowledgable that they were able to make all those decisions perfectly, we'd want them to have ALL the money. Of course no one is that gifted and knowledgable, so it doesn't happen. But it is the case that we want most of the economic power held by the people who put it good use. That's not a bad thing, that's a good thing.
Then they should be easy for you go counter, eh?
"I want what you earned" is the leftwing policy. It's also the policy of all thugs.
again, can you explain to me how 1% of the population owns 43% of the wealth?
Did they do 43% of the labor? Of course not.
So here's a crazy idea. Give the money to the people who do the work. Easy-peasy.
The bottom line, douche bag, is that they acquired their wealth entirely through voluntary exchanges. No one was coerced out of their money, as opposed to government where all the dollars are produced through coercion.
The bottom line, douche bag, is that they acquired their wealth entirely through voluntary exchanges. No one was coerced out of their money, as opposed to government where all the dollars are produced through coercion.
Wow, so the system lets the rich cheat the poor, and that's okay.
Who has been in charge of the system for the past 7 3/4 years? Who had a Democrat Congress and Senate for the 1st 2 years of his presidency and FORCED upon US a bogus broken healthcare system, but instead could of fixed that system that lets the rich cheat the poor? Could it be that those who were in charge were cheating the poor so the rich liberals(like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet who made billions) could then contribute to the coffers of the liberal politicians? Now make sure you insult me again as that is all you have to bring to the debate. You are just too stupid to know better.The bottom line, douche bag, is that they acquired their wealth entirely through voluntary exchanges. No one was coerced out of their money, as opposed to government where all the dollars are produced through coercion.
Wow, so the system lets the rich cheat the poor, and that's okay.
Of course not. We should root out all the ways the system cheats anyone and get rid of them. That strawman won't hunt.
EpiPens have around for decades. Long enough for generic equivalents to be introduced. Thereby driving down prices. But the Food and Drug Administration has blocked competition.
Just this year, drug companies Teva and Adamis had their applications for low-cost alternatives denied by the FDA. Other potential competitors have been wrapped-up in patent lawsuits.
[Last year, Sanofi voluntarily recalled its Auvi-Q after reports of suspected malfunctioning.]
When federal regulators and the courts allow a company to have a virtual monopoly on a product then the easiest thing to do is raise prices.
The FDA should quickly approve generic competition, and let the free market drive down prices.
Who has been in charge of the system for the past 7 3/4 years? Who had a Democrat Congress and Senate for the 1st 2 years of his presidency and FORCED upon US a bogus broken healthcare system, but instead could of fixed that system that lets the rich cheat the poor? Could it be that those who were in charge were cheating the poor so the rich liberals(like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet who made billions) could then contribute to the coffers of the liberal politicians? Now make sure you insult me again as that is all you have to bring to the debate. You are just too stupid to know better.The bottom line, douche bag, is that they acquired their wealth entirely through voluntary exchanges. No one was coerced out of their money, as opposed to government where all the dollars are produced through coercion.
Wow, so the system lets the rich cheat the poor, and that's okay.
Of course not. We should root out all the ways the system cheats anyone and get rid of them. That strawman won't hunt.
