Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 5/8/06 07:56 PM, Steel_Reserve wrote: Being a Republican, I would definitely consider dating a Democrat.
But she has to be a conservative Democrat.

Or maybe lollerskaters

Errr, be sure to use protection then.

At 5/7/06 06:01 PM, samples wrote: I think that racism isnt that bad becuase sometimes its true

also its FUNNY to joke about

But hatred and bigotry is funny.

At 5/7/06 06:18 PM, lollerskaters wrote: I am Osama Bin Laden.

*Puts a 9mm bullet in loller's head.*

Why are foreigners jealous of us americans? We know we're the best so they should quit bitching and trying to make themselves the best.

At 5/6/06 10:26 PM, Steel_Reserve wrote:

At 5/6/06 07:53 PM, GunCrave wrote:

Fine alt, let's all live in shitty huts and give up our computers and assets. We thrive because our companies make alot of money

not as such

Why you gotta be shittin' in my pie, Steel?

At 5/7/06 03:48 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote: The consumer has a lot of power in a market economy. More than we know.

I concur with that point. Without the consumer the company could not make a profit. The company must oblige the consumer's demands if it wants to make any money. By this, the only true limit/hinderance a corporation faces is the appeasement of its customers. If a market outlet does not abhere to a consumer's whims, the consumer will not buy from the company. It's simple as that.

You won't believe how powerful the refusal to buy a certain brand can be.

At 5/7/06 04:18 PM, I_AM_PIRATE wrote: Get ready for my comeback..... drum roll please....... BUSH SUCKS MUCH COCK!!!

Bitches can't even touch me.

You're a homophobe.

At 5/7/06 04:56 PM, Wadger wrote:

At 5/7/06 04:54 PM, GunCrave wrote: Everyone with half a brain knows Jacque Chirach is hiding Bin Laden in his basement.

yer under the mastress past those 3 brown boxes with old magazines in.

Just past the French Maid magazines.

I'm starting to think JoS is prejudiced against America and americans.

Everyone with half a brain knows Jacque Chirach is hiding Bin Laden in his basement.

At 5/6/06 10:16 PM, lostmages wrote:

At 5/6/06 10:15 PM, GunCrave wrote: Wow man, if you can't keep your forums safe, then what the hell can you on the net?

hey, don't make it look like MY fault!

I wasn't trying to make it look like your fault. Your forums got hacked, what could prevent that other than a firewall or the hacker himself?

At 5/6/06 10:14 PM, RedScorpion wrote:

At 5/6/06 10:02 PM, GunCrave wrote:

Nobody elected his ass in. And I'd doubt you'd do any better either. :o

Great, I'm getting a lecture from a canadian about the American election. I must have hit rock-bottom.

Wow man, if you can't keep your forums safe, then what the hell can you on the net?

At 5/6/06 09:37 PM, Gtd_Orion wrote: and that we are undergoing a string of poor leadership capabilities.

Somehow I get the feeling that if you were encharge we'd be sucking terrorist dick even more so.

I thought darknezz was a progressive liberal.

At 5/5/06 05:11 PM, altanese_mistress wrote:

At 5/4/06 06:53 PM, GunCrave wrote: The way it is most teacher unions want it so all teachers have the same amount of pay, regardless of effectiveness. In my opinion this why our education system is so bad because their is no mentallity to improve within the teachers due to the socialistic ideal of equal pay for all.

Not equal; more.

Just riddle me this, if they're paid more, will they receive a larger amount at the same sum regardless of job performance, because that sounds like bullshit to me. If you were to just spontaneously raise every teacher's salary they will see no need to try, there's no incentive anymore.

Let's say I'm a lazy ass 1st grade teacher. I'm so bad at teaching my students think 2 + 2 = jello. Now, next to my classroom there is an exceptional skilled teacher, he/she does such a good job at it their students are not only on schedule, but beyond it.

Would you increase both our payrolls despite performance?

While we're at it let's ban all strong alcohols. People can only drink beer and whine from now on. Seeing as how alcohol poison and drunk driving kills more people than guns.

Sure, why not?

Let's also ban cars, people can take the bus to work.

Yet both the black market and mob still exist today.

DEIFANTLY not on the same scale.

Are you Robert Mueller all of a sudden? How can you assume the black market doesn't operate on as much a large scale?

You forget that whatever modern innovation policemen acquire so will the mafia.

And yet, the mob was nearly destroyed in the 80s

I disagree and so do these links. The Mafia may have been delivered a good blow, but it is still at large and terrorizing bystanders.

Click here, and here here (This is a long read about all terrorist and mafia ties.)

Besides, banning guns would open up a whole new shop for the black market and they'd even become more wealthy.

They already sell guns on the black market.

What they do sell is automatic weapons and explosives to some militia. Could you imagine how much revenue the black market would get if ALL guns or even shotguns and rifles were banned? The average Joe likes his guns a whole lot, I won't be too crazy to assume what shady outlets he'll go to get them. If you were to ban any weapon that is not automatic the black market would not only gain a new stock inventory to sell, but a whole legion of customers.

It is still considered a free-market asset; though it is a necessity. Hell, that still doesn't government the right to bully around oil companies(They aren't so hapless, but the government is more than menacing). If I want to get into the oil business where are all my rights? Why is it the feds can push me around and tell me how to run my independent business. That sounds like something a tyrannical governemt would do.

We already do it with electric companies, water works, phone companies, etc.

So this automatically justifies taking my right to persue an oil entrepreneurship? Sorry, in a democracy the people have the right to vote and persue whatever dream they wish without government interference. This may include starting an oil company.

There's still loopholes, like putting your money in a foreign bank where the government can't really tax you on your income.

Very true. But it costs a bit more to do that. Besides; just how many would know how to do that, or actually do so?

Believe it or not, they're assholes out there who write books about how to do so. Hell, I saw one of those books at a local Barns n Nobles.

You said no outsourcing jobs. That is contradictary, considering all these third-world countries are good for is cheap labor and keeping the prices of raw material low.

Still no outsourcing. And they're 'only good for cheap labor and raw material' because of the state they're in. If that were to change, their use would change.

Someone has to produce the raw material, alt, and these sub-countries are perfect for it. The reason why corporations move their manufacturing to third-world is because they cannot afford to pay their employees the minimum wage their unions demand. Not only that, but they're excessively taxed by their government. I guarantee you that if a company where to stay in the States and Europe it would go bankrupt, because it simply cannot pay the expenses lefty want it to.

If we were to industrialize them; they would undoubtly go through a sort of socio-evolution where they demand such things as fair wages, standard luxuries we have and humane-treatment which is what happened here,

Yeah, its such a shame that nowadays we don't have companies practially starving their workforce while rolling around in literally piles of their own money.

If people don't want to be labor mules they should graduate school.

The third-world countries you saved would be virtually useless for our own needs since we could no longer get anything from work and resources cheap, and then our own economy would suffer. It's either them or us.
Compare $5.50 an hour to two cents. Call me an inconsiderate asshole, but paying the person who only works for two cents and a bag of peanuts a day seems a better deal than the typical yahoo who demands $5.50 an hour.

Okay! =D You're an inconsiderate asshole. Its better for the aristocracy, but not the majority.

Fine alt, let's all live in shitty huts and give up our computers and assets. We thrive because our companies make alot of money, which the government taxes is able to make its income to set the bar for standards.

At 5/6/06 06:49 PM, hhcash wrote: Dont spam my topic

May I use it for advertisement?

At 5/6/06 03:02 PM, Dranigus wrote:

At 5/6/06 01:00 PM, GunCrave wrote: They have tabs on everyone, beware.

I know, I must make sure that hide my tea. I heard that is what attracts them.

Good idea. While we're at it, we need to torch the crumpets.
.

Notice how all people who've received a Noble Prize for economics were all capitalists. Look at how many socialists have won a Noble Peace Prize for civics, oh thay's right, none.

Planned economics is a bane to economics: as the Genesis story of creation is to science.

At 5/6/06 03:09 AM, jmaster306 wrote: 2) The delightfully evil
These people sometimes diguise themselves as the morons but there posts are always dripping with sarcasm and satire. For some this is there means of political discussion, for others it is a fun game they like to play. High frequency and post counts are a usual dead giveaway

Damnit, That's what I do an I fit that discription. Guess I'm evil then.

At 5/5/06 05:03 PM, Dranigus wrote:

At 5/5/06 04:19 PM, GunCrave wrote:

At 5/5/06 03:16 PM, Dranigus wrote: I hate parliament.

Parliament hates you.

Good for them, they notice I exist. LOL!!!

They have tabs on everyone, beware.

Jesus would win just because he sports a cool beard. A better question is who would win in a fight, Chuck Norris or a lumberjack?

People who don't like smoking are uncool.

At 5/5/06 06:15 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote: Let's define 'liberalism' before we do anything.

Liberalism, so I believe, is the belief in individual rights, private property, civil liberties and market economies.

That seems to be a mixture of liberalism and capitalism.

At 5/5/06 05:56 PM, Gtd_Orion wrote: it was already theorized how one celled creatures evolved, the early earth aatmosphere was composed of specific elements, when lighting hit them, which was a common thing back then, they would make proteins., the rain ould collect inot pools and the chemical and tempreatural conditions of earth back then would allow these proteins to make simple bonds, which then led to complex bonds. Then microsphers and microns evolved, amn form them the first true being appeared. APProx time: 2 billion years.

Oh yes.That's so muuuuuuuuuch more likely than some higher power ordaining it. Hell, maybe I could try that with my fridge, see what comes out.

At 5/5/06 04:21 PM, JMHX wrote:

At 5/5/06 04:15 PM, GunCrave wrote: There is only one way to appropriately punish Moussaoui. He should be put in a cell and starved to death. Not quickly be executed by lethal injection, but live the rest of his days until he finally kicks the bucket from malnourishment.

Huzzah for violations of human rights.

He isn't human.

For a parody thread, this has done well.

At 5/5/06 03:16 PM, Dranigus wrote: I hate parliament.

Parliament hates you.

There is only one way to appropriately punish Moussaoui. He should be put in a cell and starved to death. Not quickly be executed by lethal injection, but live the rest of his days until he finally kicks the bucket from malnourishment.

The problem is the definition of "neutrality" may vary from person to person.