Planned Parenthood caught trafficking in human body parts

[JoeB131]

Hit the nail on the head.

They think that people do not deserve to be put through the trouble of actually managing the resources that they use. You, on the other hand, just have to deal.

It is asinine.

Another Clueless White Person heard from.

Hey, guy, it's kind of hard to "manage" your shopping when you don't have a car, and the only store that is selling groceries is run by immigrants who sell expired food at exorbitant prices. That's why those stores are always the first to get looted and burned when there's a riot like we see in LA or Ferguson.

The big chain stores don't put branches in these neighborhoods.

 

[aris2chat]

Hit the nail on the head.

They think that people do not deserve to be put through the trouble of actually managing the resources that they use. You, on the other hand, just have to deal.

It is asinine.

Another Clueless White Person heard from.

Hey, guy, it's kind of hard to "manage" your shopping when you don't have a car, and the only store that is selling groceries is run by immigrants who sell expired food at exorbitant prices. That's why those stores are always the first to get looted and burned when there's a riot like we see in LA or Ferguson.

The big chain stores don't put branches in these neighborhoods.

not cost efficient if items are pilfered or stores are robbed and burned

If they want stores they need to get rid of the crime

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Hit the nail on the head.

They think that people do not deserve to be put through the trouble of actually managing the resources that they use. You, on the other hand, just have to deal.

It is asinine.

Another Clueless White Person heard from.

Hey, guy, it's kind of hard to "manage" your shopping when you don't have a car, and the only store that is selling groceries is run by immigrants who sell expired food at exorbitant prices. That's why those stores are always the first to get looted and burned when there's a riot like we see in LA or Ferguson.

The big chain stores don't put branches in these neighborhoods.

ROFLMNAO!

Well, in fact, where one doesn't have a car, and "the Only Store" has exorbitant prices, 'managing' one's shopping is precisely what one does.

ROFLMNAO! You can NOT hide a dumbass.

 

[JoeB131]

not cost efficient if items are pilfered or stores are robbed and burned

If they want stores they need to get rid of the crime

Yeah, clearly they don't understand capitalism like white people do, taking the big weenie in the ass with a smile.

 

[JoeB131]

ROFLMNAO!

Well, in fact, where one doesn't have a car, and "the Only Store" has exorbitant prices, 'managing' one's shopping is precisely what one does.

ROFLMNAO! You can NOT hide a dumbass.

So have you always been a retard who can't understand what he just read?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

ROFLMNAO!

Well, in fact, where one doesn't have a car, and "the Only Store" has exorbitant prices, 'managing' one's shopping is precisely what one does.

ROFLMNAO! You can NOT hide a dumbass.

So have you always been a retard who can't understand what he just read?

OH! How sweet.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[aris2chat]

not cost efficient if items are pilfered or stores are robbed and burned

If they want stores they need to get rid of the crime

Yeah, clearly they don't understand capitalism like white people do, taking the big weenie in the ass with a smile.

can't force a business to open in a neighborhood just to loose money.
if the people want to have stores and work move into their areas they need to take actions to improve the neighborhood. If they won't let the police get rid of crime they will have to do it themselves. Get rid of garbage, put a stop to the gangs and drugs. keep kids in schools.
get involved in community affairs and take some pride in their community.
Stores will located where they will make money. If people can't care for their streets, or let police do it, they will have to walk or take a bus to do their shopping.
They don't get businesses to move it without the right incentives. They have to take back their streets.
Some buildings will have to come down to make way for larger stories and access for parking. Many tenets will have to move.

What is the alternative? A central outlet for delivery of items ordered online? Cash in hand to pay for what they order? Even that would be a risk if the neighborhood is a hotbed for crime.

It is not the businesses but the people who have to take action.

 

[FA_Q2]

not cost efficient if items are pilfered or stores are robbed and burned

If they want stores they need to get rid of the crime

Yeah, clearly they don't understand capitalism like white people do, taking the big weenie in the ass with a smile.

can't force a business to open in a neighborhood just to loose money.
if the people want to have stores and work move into their areas they need to take actions to improve the neighborhood. If they won't let the police get rid of crime they will have to do it themselves. Get rid of garbage, put a stop to the gangs and drugs. keep kids in schools.
get involved in community affairs and take some pride in their community.
Stores will located where they will make money. If people can't care for their streets, or let police do it, they will have to walk or take a bus to do their shopping.
They don't get businesses to move it without the right incentives. They have to take back their streets.
Some buildings will have to come down to make way for larger stories and access for parking. Many tenets will have to move.

What is the alternative? A central outlet for delivery of items ordered online? Cash in hand to pay for what they order? Even that would be a risk if the neighborhood is a hotbed for crime.

It is not the businesses but the people who have to take action.

That is why the term 'food desert' is so asinine. They look at the fact that there are no stores offering a product in an area and ask how they can change that without actually asking WHY they are not there in the first place.

All stores have shrink as well. It is not the shrink but the fact that there is no demand - simple as that. McDonalds is simpler, faster and a bad idea so where do people that tend to make poor decisions go? Not to the supermarket...

 

[JoeB131]

That is why the term 'food desert' is so asinine. They look at the fact that there are no stores offering a product in an area and ask how they can change that without actually asking WHY they are not there in the first place.

All stores have shrink as well. It is not the shrink but the fact that there is no demand - simple as that. McDonalds is simpler, faster and a bad idea so where do people that tend to make poor decisions go? Not to the supermarket...

You can't spend food stamps at the McDonalds...

ANd, no, it isn't asinine. The thing is, big chains have made a decision to not serve certain areas. They should be required to serve all communities.

 

[JoeB131]

can't force a business to open in a neighborhood just to loose money.

Sure you can. We just don't do it. But you can pass laws saying that big chains have to serve all communities if they want to business in a state. That's why we have zoning laws.

Want to open your new store in Evanston? You'd better have a new corresponding store on the South Side. Easy-peasy.

What is the alternative? A central outlet for delivery of items ordered online? Cash in hand to pay for what they order? Even that would be a risk if the neighborhood is a hotbed for crime.

It is not the businesses but the people who have to take action.

I have a pretty simple solution. Have a chain of government run stores that will serve those neighborhoods. They'll get a subsidy the big stores don't get and they can sell food cheaper.

Ooooh. Wait. The Rich wouldn't like that.

 

[aris2chat]

That is why the term 'food desert' is so asinine. They look at the fact that there are no stores offering a product in an area and ask how they can change that without actually asking WHY they are not there in the first place.

All stores have shrink as well. It is not the shrink but the fact that there is no demand - simple as that. McDonalds is simpler, faster and a bad idea so where do people that tend to make poor decisions go? Not to the supermarket...

You can't spend food stamps at the McDonalds...

ANd, no, it isn't asinine. The thing is, big chains have made a decision to not serve certain areas. They should be required to serve all communities.

but you can at jack in the box, at least some of them. I've seen the signs in the windows

Fast Food Restaurants That Accept Ebt Card Jack In The Box in Long Beach California with Reviews Ratings - YP.com

 

[aris2chat]

can't force a business to open in a neighborhood just to loose money.

Sure you can. We just don't do it. But you can pass laws saying that big chains have to serve all communities if they want to business in a state. That's why we have zoning laws.

Want to open your new store in Evanston? You'd better have a new corresponding store on the South Side. Easy-peasy.

What is the alternative? A central outlet for delivery of items ordered online? Cash in hand to pay for what they order? Even that would be a risk if the neighborhood is a hotbed for crime.

It is not the businesses but the people who have to take action.

I have a pretty simple solution. Have a chain of government run stores that will serve those neighborhoods. They'll get a subsidy the big stores don't get and they can sell food cheaper.

Ooooh. Wait. The Rich wouldn't like that.

Socialism

Businesses for profit and should be encouraged to create jobs and pay taxes to keep the government running.
You start demanding where and when they can have stores that will loose money you will discourage business altogether

Is government going to take over the private sector? It that want the founding father imagined?

 

[JoeB131]

but you can at jack in the box, at least some of them. I've seen the signs in the windows

Fast Food Restaurants That Accept Ebt Card Jack In The Box in Long Beach California with Reviews Ratings - YP.com

And if you want to talk about not allowing that, I'm good with that.

Socialism

Businesses for profit and should be encouraged to create jobs and pay taxes to keep the government running.
You start demanding where and when they can have stores that will loose money you will discourage business altogether

Is government going to take over the private sector? It that want the founding father imagined?

What makes you think I give a **** what a bunch of old Slave-raping assholes would have thought about something.

Here's the thing. Our agriculture system is ALREADY socialist. Farming is subsidized, inspections are run by the government because the industry really can't be trusted to police itself, and the reason we have "Food Stamps" to start with is because you need to artificially keep the demand for food high so there can be a profit in growing it. Otherwise, you have shit like THIS happening.

So here's a crazy idea. We've already socialized demand and production, why not socialize distribution. Have government stores in your "Food Deserts" that sell food at a discount.

Here was the thing. When I was in the National Guard, one of the big selling points was that part time soldiers could go up to the PX at Fort Sheridan and get tax-free, subsidized products cheaper than driving to a Jewel-Osco.

 

[Bobby1250]

 

[sakinago]

That's not the point, and I said that's the current deficit. Still doesn't stop the point that the government is highly inefficient, and only growing it's inefficiency. You want to really help the people your talking about, then get on board with streamlining govt.

I could think of much better ways to "Streamline" government than taking food out of the mouths of poor children.

Let's start with defense. Withdraw all our troops out of every country in the world unless those countries want to pay us for them being there.

Then let's stop giving out Corporate Welfare and huge tax breaks to the rich. Obama rolled back Bush's tax giveaways to the Rich and the Deficit was cut in half.

We could also means-test social security and Medicare. If you have a pension and a 401K paying you a huge amount of money, you don't need social security.

Ahh some common ground, yes get those troops out, make the other NATO nations spend as much as they are required to for their own defense instead of relying on us. Also don't give billions of dollars to countries who openly hate us, or are just bad dictators and people. Stop propping them up.

Stop corporate welfare, which Obama does more than bush. Ever hear of stimulus, bailouts, solindra? And there's another form of corporate welfare that comes in the form of regulation. Where only the big dogs can afford to operate, like Dodd frank. Or laws that make citizens pay for things with out choice, ACA, the common core tests (which those companies are making billions), etc. And remember Obama added what like 67 new lobbyist. And deficit did not get cut in half if it went up more than all the previous presidents combined. We lost our shit when it went up to 6 trillion with bush.

The means test for social security I can see, but then it just becomes welfare essentially, especially when you pay a piss ton in your whole life with the expectation of getting some back in the end. But I could see that.

And there is a tonof ridiculous spending going on in the govt, half a mill on giving rabbits Swedish massages, couple mill euthanizing endangered turtles, swat team for the dept of education and any other govt program that does not need one.

And there needs to be a flat tax, get this stupid loophole filled code out if there. If your for profit, you pay up

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

can't force a business to open in a neighborhood just to loose money.

Sure you can.

You're an imbecile. And there's really nothing more to it, than that.

 

[JoeB131]

Congrats, guy, you managed to hit the all the high points of the Talk Radio Retard theme song...

Stop corporate welfare, which Obama does more than bush. Ever hear of stimulus, bailouts, solindra?

i think your whining about Solyndra would be great if you could spell the name of the company and knew the facts. Like the payments to that group of companies were 1) designed with the expectation some would fail, 2) Collectively actually realized a profit for the government as the companies that did work out paid back their grants with interest.

And there's another form of corporate welfare that comes in the form of regulation.

yeah, we should let the MARKET decide whether big corporations poison us or not.

The means test for social security I can see, but then it just becomes welfare essentially, especially when you pay a piss ton in your whole life with the expectation of getting some back in the end. But I could see that.

Yes, it essentially becomes welfare. If you live to be 72, you get everything you paid into back. But there's no good reason to pay rich people social security. They don't need it.

And there is a tonof ridiculous spending going on in the govt, half a mill on giving rabbits Swedish massages, couple mill euthanizing endangered turtles, swat team for the dept of education and any other govt program that does not need one.

Yes, all the other things that they misrepresent... I'm surprised you didn't include the mythical treadmills for shrimp that never happened.

And there needs to be a flat tax, get this stupid loophole filled code out if there. If your for profit, you pay up

no, we don't need yet another scheme to give tax cuts tot he rich. The rich need to pay their fair share.

 

[FA_Q2]

That is why the term 'food desert' is so asinine. They look at the fact that there are no stores offering a product in an area and ask how they can change that without actually asking WHY they are not there in the first place.

All stores have shrink as well. It is not the shrink but the fact that there is no demand - simple as that. McDonalds is simpler, faster and a bad idea so where do people that tend to make poor decisions go? Not to the supermarket...

You can't spend food stamps at the McDonalds...

ANd, no, it isn't asinine. The thing is, big chains have made a decision to not serve certain areas. They should be required to serve all communities.

but you can at jack in the box, at least some of them. I've seen the signs in the windows

Fast Food Restaurants That Accept Ebt Card Jack In The Box in Long Beach California with Reviews Ratings - YP.com

To be fair EBT does not equal SNAP.

The SNAP money goes on the EBT card but it is more controlled than the straight out cash benefits that are offered through other 'welfare' programs. That, of course, does not really address the point I was making anyway though and JoeB tried to sidestep. The fact that the problem is in the bad decisions and not in the money given.

More money just means more ability to make piss poor decisions and does not address the problem in the first place.

 

[JoeB131]

To be fair EBT does not equal SNAP.

The SNAP money goes on the EBT card but it is more controlled than the straight out cash benefits that are offered through other 'welfare' programs. That, of course, does not really address the point I was making anyway though and JoeB tried to sidestep. The fact that the problem is in the bad decisions and not in the money given.

More money just means more ability to make piss poor decisions and does not address the problem in the first place.

yes, in Conservative Land, people are poor because of "poor decisions".

Like having kids when they should get abortions. Oh, wait, no, conservatives don't want to let the poor (or anyone else) have abortions.

And clearly, they can't jump into their SUV's and drive 10 miles to get to the Jewel Osco like white people can. They have to go to the corner market run by Arabs or Koreans that gouge them on basic food stuffs and don't remove expired product from the shelves. But that's their own poor decision making, you see... not system of institutional racism.

Clueless White People Sure are Clueless.

 

[gipper]

To be fair EBT does not equal SNAP.

The SNAP money goes on the EBT card but it is more controlled than the straight out cash benefits that are offered through other 'welfare' programs. That, of course, does not really address the point I was making anyway though and JoeB tried to sidestep. The fact that the problem is in the bad decisions and not in the money given.

More money just means more ability to make piss poor decisions and does not address the problem in the first place.

yes, in Conservative Land, people are poor because of "poor decisions".

Like having kids when they should get abortions. Oh, wait, no, conservatives don't want to let the poor (or anyone else) have abortions.

And clearly, they can't jump into their SUV's and drive 10 miles to get to the Jewel Osco like white people can. They have to go to the corner market run by Arabs or Koreans that gouge them on basic food stuffs and don't remove expired product from the shelves. But that's their own poor decision making, you see... not system of institutional racism.

Clueless White People Sure are Clueless.

Josef Mengele and Margaret Sanger would be so proud of PP.