Be a Supporter!

Get rid of electoral colleges

  • 1,898 Views
  • 101 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 03:46 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 01:24 PM, scoutthesoldier wrote: Yes, we should get rid of the Electoral College with a petition or something. The whole reason the Electoral College is here is because back in the day, everyone was too stupid to decide on who to vote for. But now, we are all pretty smart people, so we should get rid of them.

No and no.

The electoral college was actually a logistical mechanism. Instead of having all of the votes taking days or weeks to get to the Capital, each State would tally the votes on their own and then only the States' allotted delegates had to actually bring votes to the Capital.

No, people are not much smarter now than they were then when it come to politics.

Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 04:37 PM Reply

At 1/26/13 09:27 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Oh, so because his invasions weren't "full scale" then it's okay?

Because they weren't even invasions, which we've been over this you don't read anything we link too even when you're quite clearly wrong. I made that distinction to avoid confusing you.

As for his regulations, he's loosed them on banks and industry allowing them to get away with economic murder, just as they did before.

Hell no in fact he's passed more. Ever heard of Dot-Frank?


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 06:27 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 04:37 PM, Warforger wrote: Because they weren't even invasions, which we've been over this you don't read anything we link too even when you're quite clearly wrong. I made that distinction to avoid confusing you.

Your distinction is incorrect.

Here's what an invasion is:
An instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.
An incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity.

I wonder, if a foreign country was bombing your country with drones, would you call it an invasion, or not?

Hell no in fact he's passed more. Ever heard of Dot-Frank?

Like the one where it's law to give money to corporation?

Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 06:32 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 06:27 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Your distinction is incorrect.

Here's what an invasion is:
An instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.
An incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity.

I wonder, if a foreign country was bombing your country with drones, would you call it an invasion, or not?

No. It's just an attack. An invasion implies you're seeking to occupy the country. Obama hasn't done that.

Like the one where it's law to give money to corporation?

No one has just given money to corporations, they've LOANED it out. There's a big difference, because loaning it out means you profit from it, which the government has, hence why it's not really an issue.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 07:07 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 06:32 PM, Warforger wrote: No. It's just an attack. An invasion implies you're seeking to occupy the country. Obama hasn't done that.

Not according to the actual definition of the word.

No one has just given money to corporations, they've LOANED it out. There's a big difference, because loaning it out means you profit from it, which the government has, hence why it's not really an issue.

No, it is now law for Americans to buy insurance.

I assume YOU are referring to bailouts...last I checked there is no constitutional anything permitting the government to give out MY money to corporations. And from amoral standpoint, is it okay to give said money to billion dollar banks and automakers while small business goes bankrupt? If Obama wasn't a corporatist shill, he could've just mailed out checks to every American home and stimulated/saved jobs that way. But no, the union rat vote is more valuable to him when it came to re-election.

Also, when Republicans so much as MENTION a TAX CUT, for corporations, it's bad, but handing over money to them is okay? Explain.

KiwiSundae
KiwiSundae
  • Member since: Dec. 4, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 07:35 PM Reply

Guys, STFU. We're TECHNICALLY INVADING the countries Obama has put drones in. TECHNICALLY. Basically, we're using an armed force to hunt down terrorists. We're invading, yeah, but we're doing it with their permission to catch and kill individuals that will cause them problems. So, yes, we're invading. Drones = Armed Force. Other countries = Country or Sphere of Activity.


The time for making a webcomic is now..Introducing...

BBS Signature
Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 07:54 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 07:07 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Not according to the actual definition of the word.

It is, you just can't read.

No, it is now law for Americans to buy insurance.

Which isn't the same thing as flat out giving them money either is?

I assume YOU are referring to bailouts...last I checked there is no constitutional anything permitting the government to give out MY money to corporations.

You don't know that much honestly, no offense but you are so misinformed or not informed at all in many things you act like an authority on. Government is one of them.

And from amoral standpoint, is it okay to give said money to billion dollar banks and automakers while small business goes bankrupt?

We've experienced this so much. If a small business goes bankrupt a couple of people are laid off, if a corporation goes bankrupt thoasands of people are out of work and this continues on with a ripple effect. This is why the Great Depression happened.

If Obama wasn't a corporatist shill, he could've just mailed out checks to every American home and stimulated/saved jobs that way.

Bush by the way spent most of his two terms in recession, and he did in fact send more money to individuals. The problem was that it wasn't used to buy anything most people saved that money he gave back to them thereby not denting the recession at all. He tried trickle down as well, that didn't work either. Economists don't know how to fix this and neither do you.

But no, the union rat vote is more valuable to him when it came to re-election.

The "Union Rat" vote did not win him re-election. Unions are declining because we're losing our industrial jobs, what won him re-election is the unpopularity of the Republicans.

Also, when Republicans so much as MENTION a TAX CUT, for corporations, it's bad, but handing over money to them is okay? Explain.

Um what? The debate was over people in upper income brackets, not a corporate tax cut.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 08:38 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 07:54 PM, Warforger wrote: It is, you just can't read.

Read the definition, dumbass.

Which isn't the same thing as flat out giving them money either is?

Yeah, it kind of is.

You don't know that much honestly, no offense but you are so misinformed or not informed at all in many things you act like an authority on. Government is one of them.

I have not posted a single untruth, or falsehood about the government.

We've experienced this so much. If a small business goes bankrupt a couple of people are laid off, if a corporation goes bankrupt thoasands of people are out of work and this continues on with a ripple effect. This is why the Great Depression happened.

No that IS NOT why the Depression happened. What caused the great depression was the Federal Reserve cutting the money supply, which caused banks to have issues with liquidity, and they closed down. No banks, no loans, no money.

Bush by the way spent most of his two terms in recession, and he did in fact send more money to individuals. The problem was that it wasn't used to buy anything most people saved that money he gave back to them thereby not denting the recession at all. He tried trickle down as well, that didn't work either. Economists don't know how to fix this and neither do you.

No, the people spent money on goods and services, keeping businesses, and their suppliers, in business, and people employed.

Let people keep their money. That will help the economy. Stealing it from them, and giving it all to a small percentage of the country (that was bankrupting to begin with) is not the answer.

The "Union Rat" vote did not win him re-election. Unions are declining because we're losing our industrial jobs, what won him re-election is the unpopularity of the Republicans.

Like I said. Unions.

Um what? The debate was over people in upper income brackets, not a corporate tax cut.

Corporations and CEOs are in low tax brackets now. Weird. Better tell Bill Gates.

Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 10:28 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 08:38 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Read the definition, dumbass.

Don't just repeat things you say to yourself to me, it makes sense when you say them to yourself.

Yeah, it kind of is.

They have to provide a service in return.

I have not posted a single untruth, or falsehood about the government.

...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....

No that IS NOT why the Depression happened. What caused the great depression was the Federal Reserve cutting the money supply, which caused banks to have issues with liquidity, and they closed down. No banks, no loans, no money.

No the main cause of the Great Depression was a couple of big businesses failing bringing everyone else down with them. Learn history.

No, the people spent money on goods and services, keeping businesses, and their suppliers, in business, and people employed.

No they didn't, they took their 1,000$ check and put it into a savings account for say their children's college. They did not go out and spend that on a new tv.

Let people keep their money. That will help the economy. Stealing it from them, and giving it all to a small percentage of the country (that was bankrupting to begin with) is not the answer.

That "small percentage" employs alot of people and gives them money. Government spending can help an economy after all, in fact the decrease in spending is what is making the recession worse.

Like I said. Unions.

Yes the Unions made the Republicans look retarded, in fact they hypnotized Todd Akin into saying his legitimate rape comment, they also use their Communist allegiance to go back money from China.

Corporations and CEOs are in low tax brackets now. Weird. Better tell Bill Gates.

Corporations are businesses, businesses are not people and have their own set of taxes. Corporate taxes are taxes on corporations, not individuals. Thus your comment made absolutely no sense because it was addressing an argument no one made.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 10:55 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 10:28 PM, Warforger wrote: Don't just repeat things you say to yourself to me, it makes sense when you say them to yourself.

"Hi I'm Warforger. Definitions are irrelevant when it suits my pro-war agenda"

They have to provide a service in return.

So as long as they provide a service, it's okay to threaten me with jail time if I don't buy it?

...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....

Post em since they're so plentiful :)

No the main cause of the Great Depression was a couple of big businesses failing bringing everyone else down with them. Learn history.

And what caused those buisnesses to fail was government intervention of monetary policy, and currency manipulation. Just like what's causing it today

No they didn't, they took their 1,000$ check and put it into a savings account for say their children's college.

Banks are businesses too.

That "small percentage" employs alot of people and gives them money. Government spending can help an economy after all, in fact the decrease in spending is what is making the recession worse.

So, you support trickle down economics now? They should get more money because they employ/pay more people? That was the rationale for Reaganomics.

Government spending helps the economy. Government DEBT (which is passed on to taxpayers) does not.

Yes the Unions made the Republicans look retarded, in fact they hypnotized Todd Akin into saying his legitimate rape comment, they also use their Communist allegiance to go back money from China.

Unions make themselves look retarded. Don't want your auto plant to close? Don't bankrupt them with outlandish demands like lifetime pensions.

Corporations are businesses, businesses are not people and have their own set of taxes. Corporate taxes are taxes on corporations, not individuals. Thus your comment made absolutely no sense because it was addressing an argument no one made.

Corporations, legally, are people.

Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 27th, 2013 @ 11:46 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 10:55 PM, LemonCrush wrote: "Hi I'm Warforger. Definitions are irrelevant when it suits my pro-war agenda"

This doesn't changed the fact that you don't know what "invasion" means.

So as long as they provide a service, it's okay to threaten me with jail time if I don't buy it?

You're completely gone off topic again.

Post em since they're so plentiful :)

Laughing at your pretense of intelligence will always be plentiful.

And what caused those buisnesses to fail was government intervention of monetary policy, and currency manipulation. Just like what's causing it today

That's fringe Libertarian crap that no serious scholar preaches. The reason the Great Depression happened was over-expansion of business, not "durr FEDERAL RESERVE make it cause i dont like fed".

Banks are businesses too.

That doesn't change my point, people saved their returns instead of consuming with it, saving is a leakage from the economy.

So, you support trickle down economics now? They should get more money because they employ/pay more people? That was the rationale for Reaganomics.

No we were talking about something completely different. Any Economist in fact anyone with common sense knows that the super wealthy tend to employ the most people, that's not something Reagan argued exclusive to anyone else.

Government spending helps the economy. Government DEBT (which is passed on to taxpayers) does not.

Government debt does not get passed onto the tax payers nor does it have as bad of an effect as cutting government spending. Those states with balanced budget amendments are starting to see this (let's see, California New Jersey, states with massive debt problems).

Unions make themselves look retarded. Don't want your auto plant to close? Don't bankrupt them with outlandish demands like lifetime pensions.

Unions give their members pensions but I guess it depends on the company. But no that's not really as bad as selling the company then getting it liquidated ruining so many people's lives.

Corporations, legally, are people.

They're entitled to the same rights, but they get their own separate form of taxes that's not part of the income tax.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 28th, 2013 @ 01:05 AM Reply

At 1/27/13 11:46 PM, Warforger wrote: This doesn't changed the fact that you don't know what "invasion" means.

I'm using a dictionary. You?

You're completely gone off topic again.

That has been one of my points since you entered the discussion

Laughing at your pretense of intelligence will always be plentiful.

Oh come on big guy...if I'm wrong all the time, go ahead

That's fringe Libertarian crap that no serious scholar preaches. The reason the Great Depression happened was over-expansion of business, not "durr FEDERAL RESERVE make it cause i dont like fed".

It isn't "fringe" as much as it is undeniable fact.

That doesn't change my point, people saved their returns instead of consuming with it, saving is a leakage from the economy.

No it isn't. It empowers it.

No we were talking about something completely different. Any Economist in fact anyone with common sense knows that the super wealthy tend to employ the most people

That was the justification for giving them tax breaks, too.

Government debt does not get passed onto the tax payers nor does it have as bad of an effect as cutting government spending. Those states with balanced budget amendments are starting to see this (let's see, California New Jersey, states with massive debt problems).

LOL. Look at your paycheck pal.

Unions give their members pensions but I guess it depends on the company. But no that's not really as bad as selling the company then getting it liquidated ruining so many people's lives.

Right. Chrysler and Ford employees are all homeless now!!

They're entitled to the same rights, but they get their own separate form of taxes that's not part of the income tax.

Ok, people who own large corporations...such as Microsoft (IE Bill Gates) are in upper tax brackets, don't you agree?

Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 28th, 2013 @ 01:52 AM Reply

At 1/28/13 01:05 AM, LemonCrush wrote: I'm using a dictionary. You?

I'm tired of this. Learn what "invasion" is. In fact let's just stop talking because we both know you won't do that.

That has been one of my points since you entered the discussion

No you were claiming they were given free money, I pointed out that was wrong.

Oh come on big guy...if I'm wrong all the time, go ahead

You're not, you're just wrong alot of the time.

It isn't "fringe" as much as it is undeniable fact.

No it's not. Neither the Federal Reserve nor Hoover caused the Great Depression, THIS is undeniable fact. Yes some of their actions made it worse THIS is undeniable fact. But the main cause of the Great Depression was overexpansion by private industry this in particular IS THE BIGGEST UNDENIABLE FACT OF THE GREAT DEPRESSION! Big corporations failing and bringing the economy with them caused the Great Depression THIS IS UNDENIABLE FACT. What is total bullshit is saying the Federal Reserve caused it, that is so far removed from reality.

No it isn't. It empowers it.

Wow learn economics. When people save money the flow of money has slowed down because less is circulating. This is what happened in the Great Depression, people were saving so much money it wasn't going through circulation.

That was the justification for giving them tax breaks, too.

Uh yah. Ok?

LOL. Look at your paycheck pal.

It's fine?

Right. Chrysler and Ford employees are all homeless now!!

Right they're fine because they were bailed out....

Ok, people who own large corporations...such as Microsoft (IE Bill Gates) are in upper tax brackets, don't you agree?

I think they should pay more in taxes, in fact most rich people think they should as well.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
Ceratisa
Ceratisa
  • Member since: Dec. 8, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Gamer
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 28th, 2013 @ 02:28 AM Reply

Wait, I'm confused what is Warforger's definition of invasion? Occupation?

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 28th, 2013 @ 11:29 AM Reply

At 1/28/13 01:52 AM, Warforger wrote: I'm tired of this. Learn what "invasion" is. In fact let's just stop talking because we both know you won't do that.

Oh, I found it!

An instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.
An incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity.

No you were claiming they were given free money, I pointed out that was wrong.

No you didn't. Obama is still giving insurance companies money...by force.

You're not, you're just wrong alot of the time.

Pretty big claim to make with no evidence or proof, no?

No it's not. Neither the Federal Reserve nor Hoover caused the Great Depression

You're aware that the onset of the Depression happened after the crash of 29, right? (guessing not) That is was the kneejerk reaction of the fed cutting the money supply tnhat caused liquidity problems with banks?

Wow learn economics. When people save money the flow of money has slowed down because less is circulating. This is what happened in the Great Depression, people were saving so much money it wasn't going through circulation.

Hmm. Almost anyone I've ever known (and this isn't just people I know personally, but CEOs and billionaires the world over) save the money FOR SOMETHING.

Uh yah. Ok?

So, Obama does it, he's "saving millions of jobs". Reagan and Bush do it, it's "corporate welfare". Go ahead, please, keep trying to twist facts so that it makes it okay when Obama does it :) It funny to see liberals backpedal and make excuses when their King copies neo-cons (in every single issue) :)

It's fine?

You're okay with the new ~$100 dollars being taken out every month? Man, I thought Obama was going to make thing easier on normal american families. And here he is, stealing even more money from them (in addition to the other theft like Medicare and Social Security), which could be used to buy food, or pay bills.

Right they're fine because they were bailed out....

Are you actually retarded, or are you just trolling me now?

I think they should pay more in taxes, in fact most rich people think they should as well.

The US Treasury takes donations. Nothing is stopping anyone from paying more taxes. Bill Gates should put his money where his mouth is, and write a check.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 28th, 2013 @ 01:01 PM Reply

At 1/28/13 02:28 AM, Ceratisa wrote: Wait, I'm confused what is Warforger's definition of invasion? Occupation?

Boots on the ground with the intent of remaining for some period of time.

Mere airtrikes is not an invasion.
Mere use of spec ops units is not an invasion.
Drone strikes is not an invasion.
Any combnation of those three is still not an invasion.

KiwiSundae
KiwiSundae
  • Member since: Dec. 4, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 28th, 2013 @ 01:53 PM Reply

Why the hate on Obama? Seriously! I think he has his heart in the right place, but again, it's up to the Republicans to once again, make effort to compromise with the President.

The first things I personally would like to see done are to get rid of inequality in society. I think we should let abortion be up to the woman, contraceptives covered by insurance, legalize gay marriage, federally legalize marijuana, and finally, get rid of discrimination, and gender-inequality in the workplace. I want EVERYONE to be treated equally. I also want higher taxes on corporations, less taxes on the middle class, penalties for outsourcing valid jobs in the US that don't have to with financial troubles if the business stays in the US. Seriously, there's no fucking reason a company that is doing well to ship jobs oversees. That kind of practice should be punished with fines and tax hikes on companies that do it.

I would like to see this free-market economy collapse. Seriously, it's not working. Capitalism is just fine, but when you're shipping manufacturing jobs to China and therefore reducing the country's status as a manufacturing nation, there's a huge problem. We need to be SELLING products worldwide, not buying them. If we sell more, we can DO more.

However, first thing is first, and that is social equality. I swear to God, if I so much as catch a glimpse of a major news outlet reporting that another gay teen committed suicide from being bullied, or a gay couple being denied the right to marry in a gay-marriage legalized state, Obama's getting a long, well-thought-out ANGRY letter from ME. I have friends and relatives who are gay, and this kind of BULL will NOT fly with me at all.


The time for making a webcomic is now..Introducing...

BBS Signature
Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 28th, 2013 @ 02:20 PM Reply

At 1/28/13 11:29 AM, LemonCrush wrote: Oh, I found it!

An instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.
An incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity.

Exactly, assasinations are not an instance of invasion.

No you didn't. Obama is still giving insurance companies money...by force.

No they have to provide a service (which they don't want to do) in return. That isn't giving them free money it's forcing them to provide for more people.

Pretty big claim to make with no evidence or proof, no?

Easy just hit "LemonCrushs posts"

You're aware that the onset of the Depression happened after the crash of 29, right? (guessing not)

Yet again you don't know what you're talking about. The Great Depression had already been going into effect before the Crash and the earliest stages of it began in 1926 when auto and construction companies began laying off workers. The Stock Market Crash did not cause the Great Depression, hell the Stock Market has crashed several times before and since and no Depression. It certainly gave off signals saying the economy was shit, but the Depression had already gone into full swing by the time it happened.

That is was the kneejerk reaction of the fed cutting the money supply tnhat caused liquidity problems with banks?

HAHAHA, please go read a book that's preferably not written by Ron Paul.

Hmm. Almost anyone I've ever known (and this isn't just people I know personally, but CEOs and billionaires the world over) save the money FOR SOMETHING.

Yah, and that's not good for the economy.

So, Obama does it, he's "saving millions of jobs". Reagan and Bush do it, it's "corporate welfare". Go ahead, please, keep trying to twist facts so that it makes it okay when Obama does it :) It funny to see liberals backpedal and make excuses when their King copies neo-cons (in every single issue) :)

Uh that's retarded and all (as it's fun seeing Libertarians go off, sadly like you they tend to get crazier and crazier instead of more sensible when they're refuted, as what happened with Sadistic Monkey and how he became a racist) but I wasn't saying anything about them nor do I think everything they did was bad nor do I disagree with supply side economics. I'll dispute its effectiveness, but there's not dispute that richer people tend to employ alot of people.

You're okay with the new ~$100 dollars being taken out every month? Man, I thought Obama was going to make thing easier on normal american families. And here he is, stealing even more money from them (in addition to the other theft like Medicare and Social Security), which could be used to buy food, or pay bills.

Are you talking about the end to the Payroll tax break? That was temporary and set to expire anyway, because that's the only tax that's rising on the average person.

Are you actually retarded, or are you just trolling me now?

Well you are actually retarded and/or trolling me so I guess it's kind of hard to tell.

The US Treasury takes donations. Nothing is stopping anyone from paying more taxes. Bill Gates should put his money where his mouth is, and write a check.

Ok? That doesn't change the fact.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
Ceratisa
Ceratisa
  • Member since: Dec. 8, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Gamer
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 28th, 2013 @ 07:27 PM Reply

If we use the word war instead of invasion can't people get back to the actual debate on it?

scoutthesoldier
scoutthesoldier
  • Member since: Jul. 25, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 28th, 2013 @ 07:52 PM Reply

At 1/27/13 03:46 PM, Camarohusky wrote: No, people are not much smarter now than they were then when it come to politics.

Well, I guess you're right, the average american doesn't really know about politics as much as anyone writing paragraphs on this, but we aren't as stupid as we were in the Great Depression. Education has gotten better and now we know more about politics. Hell, we have some pretty smart people who know what they are talking about, like many economists, lawyers and politicians.


That Scout is a Soldier!

BBS Signature
LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 29th, 2013 @ 12:50 AM Reply

At 1/28/13 02:20 PM, Warforger wrote: Exactly, assasinations are not an instance of invasion.

Oh, they assassinate people WITHOUT weapons now? Damn.

No they have to provide a service (which they don't want to do) in return. That isn't giving them free money it's forcing them to provide for more people.

They DON'T WANT TO? Are you fucking serious? They don't want to make millions of dollars? They don't want millions of new GUARANTEED customers?

Easy just hit "LemonCrushs posts"

Go ahead

Yet again you don't know what you're talking about. The Great Depression had already been going into effect before the Crash and the earliest stages of it began in 1926 when auto and construction companies began laying off workers. The Stock Market Crash did not cause the Great Depression, hell the Stock Market has crashed several times before and since and no Depression. It certainly gave off signals saying the economy was shit, but the Depression had already gone into full swing by the time it happened.

Wow. Talk about revisionism.

HAHAHA, please go read a book that's preferably not written by Ron Paul.

Hmm...people with PhD's and MD's vs. random tard on the internet....I'll stick with the doctors and economists, thanks. You can get your info from corporatism and warmongers. I'll go for the people who are not paid to promote an agenda, and don't kill people. Deal?

Yah, and that's not good for the economy.

New econ policy. Saving money and then buying something is bad. LOL.

Uh that's retarded and all (as it's fun seeing Libertarians go off, sadly like you they tend to get crazier and crazier instead of more sensible when they're refuted

You didn't refute anything. At this point you're just making personal attacks based on your screwy, inaccurate perceptions of a political party.

because that's the only tax that's rising on the average person.

And that is a problem. People are already broke. They don't need the government stealing more money from them

Well you are actually retarded and/or trolling me so I guess it's kind of hard to tell.

Ok. Here's what ACTUALLY happened. GM got money from your pockets. Chrysler sold off to various companies. Ford took ZERO taxpayer dollars.

Ok? That doesn't change the fact.

So, Bill Gates doesn't really want his taxes raised. He's lying.

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 29th, 2013 @ 12:55 AM Reply

At 1/28/13 01:53 PM, KiwiSundae wrote: The first things I personally would like to see done are to get rid of inequality in society. I think we should let abortion be up to the woman, contraceptives covered by insurance, legalize gay marriage, federally legalize marijuana, and finally, get rid of discrimination, and gender-inequality in the workplace. I want EVERYONE to be treated equally. I also want higher taxes on corporations, less taxes on the middle class, penalties for outsourcing valid jobs in the US that don't have to with financial troubles if the business stays in the US. Seriously, there's no fucking reason a company that is doing well to ship jobs oversees. That kind of practice should be punished with fines and tax hikes on companies that do it.

Raising taxes on corporations is the opposite of equality. If you wanted true equality, you would be supporting a flat tax for everyone, regardless of marital status, work status, income status, etc.

Also, Obama does not believe in gay rights, as he has not drafted or even proposed a single piece of pro-gay marriage legislation. Not a damn thing. He's to busy assassinating people and killing kids to worry about equality in his own nation. We all wish for equality. The current president, does not.

I would like to see this free-market economy collapse.

The US has never been a free market economy. Ever. You're talking out your ass, sorry. The US economy is built by the government, not free market economics, and never really has been in it's ~230 years.

However, first thing is first, and that is social equality.

LOL. That's a nice dream but as long as you keep voting for neo-cons like Bush and Obama, it will NEVER happen.

Aletheia
Aletheia
  • Member since: Jan. 28, 2013
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 29th, 2013 @ 09:41 PM Reply

The Electoral College system was designed for small coastal states back in post-colonial America, not the continent-spanning nation we have today. Maybe there's an argument for reform in there somewhere, but I don't have any alternatives (not a fan of the popular vote). I'm more concerned about gerrymandering. There's election reform within your state that needs to happen!


Trouble rather the tiger in his lair than the sage among his books.
--Gordon R. Dickson, The Tactics of Mistake

Ravariel
Ravariel
  • Member since: Apr. 19, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Musician
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 31st, 2013 @ 12:57 AM Reply

At 1/29/13 12:55 AM, LemonCrush wrote: Raising taxes on corporations is the opposite of equality. If you wanted true equality, you would be supporting a flat tax for everyone, regardless of marital status, work status, income status, etc.

Only in the most simplistic, and naive way is that equality. The world is filled with much more nuance than you seem able to grasp, but perhaps when you're older you'll realize that it is not through numbers that equality is achieved, but rather in impact on an individual or family.

Hence: progressive taxation.

Also, Obama does not believe in gay rights, as he has not drafted or even proposed a single piece of pro-gay marriage legislation. Not a damn thing.

I think you're confused as to the job of the executive branch.

The US has never been a free market economy. Ever. You're talking out your ass, sorry. The US economy is built by the government, not free market economics, and never really has been in it's ~230 years.

You started out right, then skewed back into your tinfoil hat. I do love that there seems to be no room in extremists eyes for anything between pure free market and pure socialism. Watching them desperately shuffle goalposts around is great fun.


Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 31st, 2013 @ 01:16 AM Reply

At 1/31/13 12:57 AM, Ravariel wrote: Only in the most simplistic, and naive way is that equality. The world is filled with much more nuance than you seem able to grasp, but perhaps when you're older you'll realize that it is not through numbers that equality is achieved, but rather in impact on an individual or family.

Hence: progressive taxation.

Stealing more or less money from someone based on marital status or income, is discrimination. And in America, should not be legal.

There's is NO reason why I should pay a different amount based than someone else based on my financial status.

I think you're confused as to the job of the executive branch.

No, I'm aware.

You started out right, then skewed back into your tinfoil hat. I do love that there seems to be no room in extremists eyes for anything between pure free market and pure socialism. Watching them desperately shuffle goalposts around is great fun.

I do love how people who don't agree with demo-publican tyrannical policies is "extremist"

I never said anything about socialism. Allow me to clarify. The current (100 years or so) economic system of trickle down economics or more accurately, crony/faux capitalism, is built solely by the government. Very little in the economic cylce is decided by producers and consumers. Producers are dictated what they can sell, by the government and consumers are dictated what they can buy by the government. Throw into the mix that the government shields industry from consumer power, and has a favorable attitude toward industry (over the people).

Obama wasn't kidding when he said "you didn't build that"/

Ravariel
Ravariel
  • Member since: Apr. 19, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Musician
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 31st, 2013 @ 09:05 PM Reply

At 1/31/13 01:16 AM, LemonCrush wrote: Stealing more or less money from someone based on marital status or income, is discrimination. And in America, should not be legal.

There's is NO reason why I should pay a different amount based than someone else based on my financial status.

You're absolutely right! You should pay exactly as much as everyone else, down to the penny. Lesse, how much did Mitt Romney pay in taxes in his last released tax return? About $2million. We don't want to be unfair, so you, too should pay $2million in taxes. It's the only fair way to do it.

No, I'm aware.

Not if you think he drafts legislation, you're not.

I never said anything about socialism.... The current economic system of... economics... is built solely by the government.

You apparently are unaware of what socialism is, also. Please, take some time to do some research (with actual books, not internet blogs), consult some original sources, and talk to some knowledgeable people, because you need some serious expansion in your worldview.

Producers are dictated what they can sell, by the government and consumers are dictated what they can buy by the government. Throw into the mix that the government shields industry from consumer power, and has a favorable attitude toward industry (over the people).

Also amusing: the sheer scale and scope of power and control ascribed to whatever boogeyman someone thinks is responsible for all human ills.


Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 31st, 2013 @ 09:15 PM Reply

At 1/29/13 12:50 AM, LemonCrush wrote: Oh, they assassinate people WITHOUT weapons now? Damn.

What? So you're saying invading a country is the same thing as assassination?

They DON'T WANT TO? Are you fucking serious? They don't want to make millions of dollars? They don't want millions of new GUARANTEED customers?

Because in the insurance industry having more customers means you'll have to spend more money to cover them......

Go ahead

You know I assume you remember what you post but you don't seem to.

Wow. Talk about revisionism.

Well that's what actual experts say as opposed to what Ron Paul says.

Hmm...people with PhD's and MD's vs. random tard on the internet....I'll stick with the doctors and economists, thanks.

What? You haven't stuck with them, in fact you've denounced them constantly as corrupt.

You can get your info from corporatism and warmongers.

Ah there's your Marxist approach shining through!

I'll go for the people who are not paid to promote an agenda, and don't kill people. Deal?

Lolz. You probably don't know what you're writing.

New econ policy. Saving money and then buying something is bad. LOL.

In the short run. Go talk to an economist.

You didn't refute anything. At this point you're just making personal attacks based on your screwy, inaccurate perceptions of a political party.

I've refuted so many of your points, in fact I can tell because you stop debating them and drop them after a while. But your posts are all personal attacks and no debate so you're not exactly that high.

And that is a problem. People are already broke. They don't need the government stealing more money from them

Um what?

Ok. Here's what ACTUALLY happened. GM got money from your pockets. Chrysler sold off to various companies. Ford took ZERO taxpayer dollars.

Ok? How does that change anything?

So, Bill Gates doesn't really want his taxes raised. He's lying.

Wow. Yes he would just lie to say he wants higher taxes because that makes sense.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 31st, 2013 @ 11:03 PM Reply

At 1/31/13 09:05 PM, Ravariel wrote: You're absolutely right! You should pay exactly as much as everyone else, down to the penny. Lesse, how much did Mitt Romney pay in taxes in his last released tax return? About $2million. We don't want to be unfair, so you, too should pay $2million in taxes. It's the only fair way to do it.

Are you an idiot? It's pretty clear to anyone with a brain that I was referring to percentages. I didn't say it specifically, but I figured it was a given.

Not if you think he drafts legislation, you're not.

*rolls eyes* Have you paid much attention to politics in the past 15 or so years?

You apparently are unaware of what socialism is, also. Please, take some time to do some research (with actual books, not internet blogs)

You first?

Also amusing: the sheer scale and scope of power and control ascribed to whatever boogeyman someone thinks is responsible for all human ills.

I don't think it's funny, but I mean, I guess if the concept of someone owning you is "funny", then Obama is a fucking riot.

LemonCrush
LemonCrush
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Jan. 31st, 2013 @ 11:14 PM Reply

At 1/31/13 09:15 PM, Warforger wrote: What? So you're saying invading a country is the same thing as assassination?

Yes. Obama gave the orders to INVADE a sovereign nations borders with the intent to assassinate someone.

Because in the insurance industry having more customers means you'll have to spend more money to cover them......

Which they will make back several times over because cheaper plans are now outlawed.

Well that's what actual experts say as opposed to what Ron Paul says.

No they don't. You know "experts" can be liars too, especially when it comes to history.

What? You haven't stuck with them, in fact you've denounced them constantly as corrupt.

The FUCK?!?!? This is totally out of left field...

Ah there's your Marxist approach shining through!

No, nothing to do with Marxism, as Marxism is anti--- Oh wait...You don't know the difference between proper enterprise and corporatism. I see.

In the short run. Go talk to an economist.

I do. That's how I know your policy (or rather support of policies) of crony capitalism and statism is bullshit.

I've refuted so many of your points, in fact I can tell because you stop debating them and drop them after a while. But your posts are all personal attacks and no debate so you're not exactly that high.

I haven't dropped a single thing, nor have you refuted anything. Nor have I personally attacked you.

Um what?

PEOPLE ARE ALREADY BROKE. THEY DON'T NEED GOVERNMENT STEALING EVEN MORE MONEY FROM THEM! Clear enough?

Ok? How does that change anything?

Well, it throws a big fucking wrench in the "the auto industry needed that money or millions would be unemployees" fear mongering bullshit. The auto industry didn't have a problem. The problem was one greedy company. It as not an industry problem. It was ONE failed company who can't compete because they make shit, and needed govt to change their diapers for them.

Wow. Yes he would just lie to say he wants higher taxes because that makes sense.

Of course. It's called having an agenda. Why doesn't he put his money where his mouth is?

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Get rid of electoral colleges Feb. 1st, 2013 @ 01:31 AM Reply

At 1/31/13 11:03 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Are you an idiot? It's pretty clear to anyone with a brain that I was referring to percentages. I didn't say it specifically, but I figured it was a given.

Then why did he owe only about 13% and I owed close to 35%?

*rolls eyes* Have you paid much attention to politics in the past 15 or so years?

Yeah, and nothing has changed. The President rarely drafts legislation. When he does it is merely a proposal for Congress to monkey with.

You first?

That does not alleviate your general lack of understanding regarding the topics you talk about.

I don't think it's funny, but I mean, I guess if the concept of someone owning you is "funny", then Obama is a fucking riot.

Haha. The funny thing here isn't your cockamamie boogeyman theory of World Politics, it's that you have the capacity to believe such a horrifically implausible, untenable, poorly constructed, and poorly thought out world view.