Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 51 minutes ago, Korriken wrote: the thing people need to say is "show us some proof or let em go." simple.

Well, that is how it should be.

Okay, the majority of us are obviously war weary. maybe Iran is a threat, but most likely they are not, I don't see any reason to believe Iran is any more dangerous than Iraq was, and I think the fault goes to the US government for being the boy who cried WMD.

At 1 hour ago, Ericho wrote:

maybe the Chinese have different ways of viewing a politician as good.

Well you can't really blame them. Bad politicians in western countries take your money and hand it to their rich buddies and/or crash the economy. Bad politicians in their country send innocent people to death by firing squad and then bill to their families to cover the cost of Ammunition.

At 38 minutes ago, Camarohusky wrote:
While that is a very good illustration of how socialism can fail, it still seems to be quite shallow to me. One class out of many of a college student's life is a pretty small part of their lives. Being so small, it is much easier to let fail.

well there's a much bigger example of this in the real deal, Mao dove straight into collectivisation as well, forget the cultural revolution, there is a reason he is not listed above Stalin as the evillest man in the world. he didn't kill as many people through purges and what not as a lot of those other guys, his deaths were mostly caused by either war, or the largest group, caused by famine. Pretty much every communist has had at least one famine, but his was by far the worst, even worse than Stalin's government forced famine. His famine happened for the same general reason as what that story outlined. The best farmers didn't get enough compensation for their work, so everyone did as little as they were allowed to do without provoking the reds to break down their doors.

They work for less, they get the business, that's just how economics works. They don't have a special economic practice that's somehow evil or dishonest; all countries want jobs for their own people. The route that they're on is what they see as way to advance economically.

I think I might make a thread on this later because my idea on how free trade should be handled it quite a bit different from how were all doing it (We are also guilty of selfish immigration policies that cause brain drain in other countries.) but I'd rather not derail this one

Here is a nice story you folks would love to hear

A professor of Economics and Political Science at UF said he had never failed a single student, but had once failed an entire class.

The class (students) insisted that socialism worked since no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said,
"OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism."
"All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A."

After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who had studied hard were upset while the students who had studied very little were happy.

But, as the second test rolled around, the students who had studied little studied even less and the ones who had studied hard decided that since they couldn't make an A, they also studied less. The second Test average
was a D. No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average grade was an
F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling, all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else.
To their great surprise all failed. The professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder people try to succeed the greater
their reward (capitalism) but when a government takes all the reward away (socialism) no one will try or succeed.

At 43 minutes ago, AcetheSuperVillain wrote: China's current President, Hu Jintao is in the process of stepping down. The man to probably replace him, Xi Jinping is currently on tour in the United States of America to give westerners a taste of the next generation of Chinese politics. So far, I actually like what I've heard of the guy.

You can read about Xi Jinping's style yourself hereor here, but here are the highlights:

- Known for his zero-tolerance of corruption.

okay, that's good, but without free trials that could lead to a Stalin style "purge"

- Studied Chemical Engineering at Tsinghua University

yea a lot of Chinese politicians are Engineers, as opposed to the Lawyers we have here, it works out well for them it seems.

- married to famous singer, Peng Liyuan

cool

- Enjoys American WWII movies; especially likes that the good guys always win

lol

- Described as a tough speaker with quotes like "Some foreigners with full bellies and nothing better to do engage in finger-pointing at us. First, China does not export revolution; second, it does not export famine and poverty; and third, it does not mess around with you. So what else is there to say?"

well they do tend to be very selfish with their international economic practices that are costing people over seas jobs while gathering humanitarian aid from them when ever a disaster in their country happens that they are able to but just flat out unwilling to pay for themselves.

- Plans to promote stronger US-China ties, including backing the US on issues with Iran, the Koreas and counter-terrorism
- Strongly opposes independence movements in Tibet and Taiwan (and Xinjiang?) and has called on the US to recognize its sovereignty over these territories.

that makes him poisonous now. After making this mistake through out the last century so many times over and over again, should the Americans be backing yet ANOTHER brutal dictatorship for their short term best intrests?

I know that many people will want to say that anything the PRC says or does is evil and they should all be bombed into Democracy, but I have to say that if Xin Jinping was running for office in this country, I'd vote for him over the domestic rotten scum career politicians who bicker like children and don't accomplish anything.

without a constitution democracy is just mob rule, took the American founding fathers 6 years to set up the political system they have here. It won't last much longer without a tune up but you have to admit that it lasted a pretty long time in comparison to say, Egypt's short lived democracy.

But what do you guys think of him? Does he seem alright? Will he move China in the right direction?

I was really hoping he would be like Gorbachev, Naive enough to believe in both a communist government AND in giving people the ability to spread information under a transparent government with free speech and free press. He won't be the end of the world but he isn't going to be our unwitting saviour either.

At 1 day ago, Camarohusky wrote:
I dunno. Based on the lack of nuance in yours, and the nuance oozing out of Gaywhateverbuttman's post, you still need to try harder.

Sure you may have ecapsulated some irony, but you haven't really bottled up how the country views the entire support base.

well, to match the Nuance level of his post, and cover what the average American thinks of Obama's followers, I would have to say Socialist Nazi from Kenya, but that would make me feel... dirty.

At 4 days ago, EmmaVolt wrote: They are all jokes, really. Santorum is just the least funny.

but if he were to win he would suddenly be hilarious against Obama.

At 49 minutes ago, Camarohusky wrote:

At 1 hour ago, GAYDADBUTTFAG wrote: Ron Paul's supporters are willing to elect a racist who's bros with the grand wizard of the kkk and wants to restructure the country based on Ayn Rand's political philosophy because they think he'll legalize weed. I love this country.

Truer words have never been spoken. But seriously, this is how Paul and his supporters come off...

the part that won me was where he said no to iraq, wants to stop spending so much on war, and not pass any more legislation that allows people to be put in jail with out fair trial...

it is very easy to put it in the way gaydadbuttfag wrote, but I could then retort with 1 more:

Obama's supporters are willing to elect a corporate puppet who is bros with Goldman Sachs and only pretend to be a peace loving new dealer because they think he is going to bring about "change".

as for flip floppin botox face Romney, cheating space nut Gengrich, and frothy Muslim hater Santorum, they take even less effort.

I don't think this is a matter of libraries wanting people to be watching porn or not, I think its just a matter of people being able to control what goes on in their business on their own terms or not.

If I ran a business I wouldn't want the government passing stupid laws that force me to enforce their blue laws either. It is the same as bars, they are never allowed to have smoking inside them, why can't that be up to the owner of the bar instead? Just like we should have both smoking and non smoking bars, maybe there should be both fapping and no fapping libraries?

maybe they are just acting up on their best interests, but we shouldn't be getting involved anyway. Unless their change happens from with in, who is to say that the new government will have had enough support from the populace to support itself? Us getting involved might just make the rebels look like disloyal traitors for all we know and basically sabotage the whole revolution.

At 2/3/12 12:45 PM, AJtheRipper wrote: Predictions:

Romney vs Obama and sadly Obama wins.

Then I shoot myself or leave for Norway to reside for the remainder of my life.

my eyes are on Estonia, but feel free to run away to an even more liberal nation.

merge the capital gains tax with the income tax, and provide a flat tax rate. As we saw from Mitt Romney the rich are currently paying less in taxes than many people who make LESS money than them thanks to McMoneybag's capital gains tax being so low while being the biggest source of their income.

or as Ron Paul would do: get rid of both entirely so people have more money to spend on the sales tax.

over population is easy, just make it so that you don't need a licence to hunt them for a while and that will get rid of them fast, as well as allow farmers to protect their property easier. Extinction is harder, since the fewer they are, the more they are worth, and if you ban hunting, you make them worth more.

how about the russian Holodomor? not all genocides are remembered but I will always at least place the same level of importance to each one, I don't pretend that the Holocaust was the worst genocide in history, just the most memorable.

At 1/27/12 11:05 AM, s0und wrote: What was it that compelled millions of young voters to support Baraku Obamu's race for the Presidency?

Was the notion of a brilliant, articulate, utterly decent candidate enough to inspire a heretofore apathetic group to vote? Not just vote but really participate.

Or was it the prospect of a compassionate, worldly alternative to the most belligerent, aggressively ignorant administration in our lifetime?

It would mostly the second part, it didn't matter if you liked Obama or not, a lot of people were voting for him to spite the Republicans for giving them bush.

Now were are starting to see the pieces of the puzzle come together Baraku was not ready to be president and when the USA finally drops from being a first world country to a second or who knows maybe even third world country who are we going to put the blame on? one person I know will not be blamed for this and that is me I was a McCain fan from the start.

no matter, the only people who are being built up as potential candidates by the media are Gengrich Romney and Obama, all of these people are claiming to be moderates, but the reality is that they are all maniacs who are telling people what they want to hear as opposed to what they need to hear.

Obama thinks he can hand out more tax credits and increase deficit spending to create unprofitable jobs, Gengrich wants to cut taxes, invade Iran and build a base on the moon, Romney wants to cut taxes, invade Iran, and give America the biggest army the world has ever seen.

ALL of these choices will lead to bankruptcy, but people don't want to believe that, they wan't to keep living in their dream world where these issues will never touch them and the world is perfect now, we are invincible in our ivory tower after all. Whether the intrest becomes so high that America can not borrow enough money to pay for it, or the production rate of oil reaches peak and the price sky-rockets as supply can no longer meet demand, the good times are coming to an end and people just don't want to face it.

Here it is.

At 1/26/12 09:25 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 1/26/12 07:07 AM, Kiler-Tofu wrote: Well it just got worse...

For those of us who aren't able to access youtube 24 hours a day, and those of us who realize youtube is just as good a news source or primary source as my foot, please post your thoughts in writing.

it is another attempt to restrict the flow of information: ACTA. It legally obliges your ISP to track your internet activity, and disconnect you if copyrighted material is being viewed too often, as well as report you to the authorities where you can be fined and possibly detained. But just like SOPA, it's definition of copyright infringement is very vague and can be applied to almost anything. A law like this can cause lots of damage not just to Internet users, but to websites, and yes once again, especially ones that rely on content created by users.

It is disturbing, the amount of bills like this we keep having to fend off in such short succession, the government obviously doesn't care about how much you like being able to use the internet the same way you are able to use it now, it just wants to control it, and it probably wants to just get it done as fast and quietly as possible before you can react.
here's a nostalgic video game reference

"everyone is offended by something"

I think it is more accurately the other way around:

"everything is offensive to somebody"

wind farms shouldn't be used for powering massive cities, they should be used to power farms where possible (as it saves money and natural gas won't be cheaper forever)

The one type of power I am interested in is Geothermal. Again, it doesn't work for all areas of the world, but you can say that for pretty much any power source out there except coal nuclear and natural gas, even though those would all be best off farther away from people, 1 is going to cost an arm and a leg pretty soon, one already does cost an arm and a leg, and the other is so ridiculously pollutant that nobody is going to want to live any where near it.

The nuclear missile is a defensive tool for intimidation purposes, not a means to eradicate people you don't like for petty reasons. And all this talk of invasion is really giving them even more reason to build one of their own. Let Israel fend for itself, America is out of money, simple as that, and can not afford to intervene in other peoples problems any longer.

by no money I mean thats it, zip, go to war with iran and you are broke, no peso for Paco, sorry. That is just the way life works.

the one thing they all collectively have in common is that they are all pro establishment and Authoritarian.

actually, it is NOT over.

before the white sheep come in to say that if you have nothing to hide, there is no reason to oppose this, I'm afraid you don't understand just how easily allowing the government to watch you at all times can be abused.

the NDAA was already signed you you really have to make sure you don't allow the government to find out who is verbally opposing them until it understands the difference between being a suspect, and being convicted in a court of law.

all that effort went to waste, the kid's own natural instincts that have been implanted in him before birth alone will be enough to lead him to his sexuality, and "gender role" will be thrown at him when he goes to school, unless they wan't him to be beaten up of course. even if we could just magically remove "gender bias" all the kids in school would just find a new norm for everyone to conform to and everyone who strays from it would immediately be an outcast.

There was an episode of some crime show where some girl preferred to act and dress exactly like a guy but she wasn't attracted to other girls, just men as usual. At worst case scenario the boy turns out to be the male counter part of that character.

At 1/19/12 12:53 PM, OllieGarkey wrote:
Our waters aren't fished by Scottish boats anymore, they're fished by the Spanish, thanks to the Union.

in all fairness, the Spanish don't seem to care WHO'S waters they are fishing, Canadian coast guards detained some Spanish fishermen for over fishing in international waters and depleting our Atlantic Salmon population, stirred an uproar amongst the EU but a few European politicians quietly told our diplomats that they wish they could have done the same thing.

I bet they taste like deer, I bet their fur looks nice too. have they found a use for their bones yet, or are those things going to start littering the landscape?

At 1/13/12 07:36 PM, WallofYawn wrote: No, he's just a hardcore libertarian. And I mean hardcore.

there is no way he will get it as small as he wants it to be, in fact in the state Congress is in he will be lucky to do even HALF the things he wants to do. a mixed blessing, since they are probably just going to treat him even worse than they treated Obongo what with their corporate buddies being so afraid of an actual free market.

The states should not have absolute power,

Unfortunately, the constitution that he follows so closely gives him limited power over what the Federal government can actually do with the states, but the states are still obliged to follow the constitution in the same way the federal government is, if the state turns it's back on the constitution, it is because the people are allowing it to. If they needed the federal government to keep them in line, who is keeping the federal government in line? ATM: nobody.

he wants to restore the rule of law for both big business and for government.

I'll say it right now: Ron Paul will only make big business more powerful.

I'll drop the question now: if free market only benefits big business and the corporations, why do they all fear Ron Paul so much?

It's not the federal government's place to dictate what it's citizens can and cannot do, aside from infringing upon another person's rights. However, I do think the federal government is best equipped to keep corporations from doing whatever the hell they want.

unfortunately it is currently doing the exact opposite.

Lessaiz-faire is good, so long as it is kept in check. Ron Paul's views on the free market, are that free market should be unregulated, uncontrolled, and unlimited, and this is a very, very bad idea.

there is still the law that these people have to obey, under this system they are getting away with murder! Regulation for the small guys, and lawlessness for the big guys is called Crony capitalism, and it is NOT free, OR fair.

People call Obama a socialist because he passed the dod frank bill, but really they forget that deregulation is what got us into this mess. Deregulation will only make shit worse.

The fed kind of sabotaged the idea of free market in a very unfair manner. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzMRs32AV O0
its kind of like your parents secretly poisoning you, and then taking care of you when you get sick, just to make you think you need them. And he isn't a socialist, Ron Paul correctly calls him a Corporatist.

Ok, I agree with both you and Ron Paul as far as these things are concerned. My beef isn't that he wants to do away with this fiat banking system, or that he opposes the patriot act and the NDAA, because I'm right there with him on those issues. I dislike the fact that he wants the market and corporations to be unregulated.

Prices have been driven up through over regulation and taxation, not for the people who can afford these conditions of course, they are sitting quite nicely because of it, it kind of makes it harder for competition from getting in and driving the prices back down. aka: Crony.

Ron Paul does not believe the government should provide free health care, education, disaster relief, or even pay for infrastructure. The fed's place is only to protect the country from foreign threats, and to uphold the constitution, and that is all Ron Paul thinks the fed should do. Period.

and it should, but it does neither, it starts shit with people putting the security of the country in danger, and ignores the constitution. two of its most important purposes, and they are working against them.

If you can't afford health insurance, too bad. Yes, as he put it, you can just go into a hospital and you probably won't be denied. He shows no concern, however, for those who can't afford to pay their bills. He has that,"oh well, not my problem" attitude, and he's an asshole because of it.

he is in no way an asshole, if he is wrong it is because he is mislead, he used to work for a hospital, giving health care to people for fees that his customer's could afford, and some times even for free, out of his OWN time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#Ea rly_life.2C_education.2C_and_medical_car eer
second paragraph to the bottom of that section.
he believes making the market free would make make this more common, and even profitable.

Yes, you can sue them...after you've already been poisoned, or dranken raw sewage without knowing it, and get a life-threatening illness. Seriously, it makes no sense. The EPA is there to prevent these things from happening in the first place. Who cares if I can sue them when I'm dying from cholera, hepatitus, gastrointestinal failure, etc.

you can't sue that little shit kid who broke your window until he breaks your window either, you under estimate how much you could sue them for this, you could potentially fuck them over big time. at least you could if we had some judges who weren't in bed with these assclowns.

And if it's a chemical or drug being dumped, I could be dead before I even get the chance to sew the corporation. It's just stupid. Anyone who wants to get rid of the EPA is a fucking idiot.

then that would be murder and they would go to jail for life.

They support him because he wants to get rid of the federal reserve banking system. They have no clue that if his free-market ideas are allowed to happen, you will see a true corporatism in america. This will become a country completely run by corporations. We need to lower our debt for sure, and I think we should cut a lot of programs, and there should be more accountability of the way in which the fed. spends our tax dollars, and where and what they go to/are used for, but reducing the fed
to the size of a peanut I think is not an option.

Corporatism is not free market, it is state controlled capitalism, private profits, public risk. and our debt will cause a lot more damage than you know, government funded pensions for the old people who hate the OWS protesters so much for being socialists (ironically) sound nice, but if your countries debt becomes too high to be paid, even by borrowing more money, then all the money everyone saved up, and worked hard for, would be as good as toilet paper as Ron would put it.

Getting rid of regulations on big business, and checks and balances is not an option. There is a reason Teddy Roosevelt passed anti-trust laws. There is a reason for dod frank, even though it's made companies more likely to raise their fees to overcompensate for the small amount of dollars they lost.

anti trust laws and all laws that apply to us would still exist. Free market does not permit theft or fraud.

Yes, we need to stop these big government bail outs, yes we need to stop invading countries that we have no place being in, and yes, we need to end this failed war on drugs. However, if Ron Paul had his way, the church and the corporations would be dictating and running our lives, instead of the federal government.

they already do control our lives, but it is because of all the obstacles we put in the way of their competition, and now they are even responsible for putting MORE regulations on their own market. this is why they fear Ron Paul. We are living way beyond our means anyways, and things will only get worse for our future if we keep digging this hole.

At 1/12/12 10:47 PM, WallofYawn wrote:

No, I think the main reason they are so against him is because Fox news is ran by folks who have similar views to Bachman, Romney, and Gingrich. People who support big business, and republicanism, as it exists today. Ron Paul will never appeal to either the republicans, nor the democrats. His supporters are anarchists, and other conservative libertarians. Oh, and potheads, who only want him elected because pot will be legal.

Is that so wrong? Maybe a bunch of his supporters are anarchists but Ron Paul isn't one, he wants to restore the rule of law for both big business and for government. This means the government won't be able to kidnap you and put you in an internment camp just for being suspected as a terrorist, and banks won't be able to commit fraud and get away with it. He also said that by making environmental issues a matter of private property, environmental regulations would be stricter, because you would be able to sue them if they dump waste in a river that runs through your property without your written consent, which you are not obliged to give. Another big part of his support comes from OWS because they actually happen to care about corruption, and stopped trusting Obama, and there is no way in hell that crowd will vote for Romney or any of the other guys.

the biggest problem is that even suggesting that people get less quality health care in order to speed things up is so unbelievable and ridiculous to everybody.