Total posts: 98
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
...we do not make the million dollar IOU represent any of the country's wealth.
So no federal reserve, I'm on board with that.
In my scenario, it is imperative that we do not disturb the existing financial structure.
Why would we keep welfare if we're distirbuting $350m to everyone evenly? Isn't this a kind of replacement? What good would the money do if people can just continue to live off the government and not do shit? Giving them one lump sum of money will at least light a fire under their ass to do something productive.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
That's so true. It's sad seeing people extensively fact-checking people like Alex Jones and trying to find one shred of evidence that suggests what he says isn't 100% accurate in every imaginable way, but they'll take anything megacorportions like CNN say at face value.
We live in a time of "you're probably right because I have the same opinion."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Imabench
I'm not an Alex Jones fan by any means, but Owen Shroyer was great and he was one of the lead reporters for Infowars. They actually got quite a bit of quality content out.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the DNC or something of the sort paid off Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube to ban his accounts, as he was one of the reasons Trump got so much positive publicity.
Either way, him being banned by three unrelated platforms at the exact same time is basically proof that these megacorporations have not-so-hidden political agendas that they're pushing on us.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Let's do it.
Scrap all welfare and food stamp programs.
Have a one day course (or even print a booklet) that comes with the money - instructions how to invest safely and buy smart. Tell the receivers the ball is in their hands.
People who are dumb will lose their million dollars and end up in poverty, tough shit, better luck next life.
People who aren't dumb will invest and live off the returns, or something of the sort.
/thread
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Why can't we have unisex bathrooms in high school?
Because insanely hormonal teenage boys will take advantage of the fact that there won't be security or cameras to catch them doing whatever they do in there when girls are in there as well.
Unless of course, you're talking about handicapped washrooms, which are available to all genders and has a lock on the door for privacy and safety, which is good enough.
Also, the cost to implement additional washrooms into buildings that are already built with two washrooms would be way too much for any building owner to want to pay. Implementing an additional unisex washroom to buildings being built could make more sense, but then it would just be filled with rapists and Tumblr Feminists, two demographics nobody wasnts to be around. LOL
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
I completely agree, I actually posted a similar argument in favour of regulated brothels in another forum thread.
The thing men could learn is maybe a better way to read body language? Or women could learn how to just say no if they don't want to do something instead of going along with it then making a big mistake.
I do agree that men should take body language into account, and if they're continuing to do something even though the girl is being quite hesitant, there's something wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DBlaze
Exactly, plus like you said with competition it will cause prices to drop for the sake of a competitive market, meaning we don't need to pay $300 for an hour anymore! It's a win for everybody haha
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
And how would you, as a third party, ascertain their voluntary choice?
That's pretty difficult. In cases of rape, it's mostly "he said, she said." I'm talking about ways to prevent it, not ways to convict rapists. And like Buddamoose said, it's quite difficult to have good sex while having to gain consent every five seconds, and at the same time can lead to people feeling like they aren't trusted.
Just because I don't have a solution doesn't mean I can't criticize others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
Are you the smae kind of person that calls people who support Trump "Russian Trolls"?
Just accept the fact that not everyone has the exact same opinion as you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tejretics
What are your thoughts on the idea that legalizing prostitution would increase sex trafficking?
I don't think that idea makes much sense. It'd be like saying legalizing marijuana will increase smuggling it over the borders. Governments running prostitution will mean that sex traffickers won't have much of a market anymore. Girls being sold for sex illegally will be so incredibly rare when someone can pay for sex legally and not worry about going to prison for a hundred years. At the very most, sex trafficking will stay the same, but I can't see that happening.
Do you think a system where all brothels/prostitution is state-run and regulated, i.e. nationalized, is workable?
Yes, totally. I've been in favour of this for as long as I can remember - it'll take the danger risk away from the girls as well as the johns, and it will generate a fuck of a lot of money for the country/state.
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
I think the point that rightists are making is that we actually have a solution we can implement to cut the violence in half. It's not that we ignore home grown terrorism or ignore citizens comitting crime, it's that we implement so many laws and punishments to people that do, yet they continue comitting crimes. If it's illegal immigrants or immigrants from one demographic that are responsible for a huge percentage of crime, we can implement a temporary ban on immigration, or extreme vetting, which will instantly cut the number of violent crime down by a huge percent.
Unfortunately leaders of countries need to put their country first. If one demographic from another country continues to immigrate to my country and commit crime at significantly higher rates than my countries' native population, I want to preserve the best interest of my country and its citizens. If this means closing the doors to immigrants from one specific crime prone country, so be it. A policy like that can definitely be looked at as unfair to the immigrants who are peaceful, but so far that's the best course of action.
Many European countries have gone to absolute shit because of the "migrant" crisis, crime rates skyrocketing, rape and sexual assault are rampant, acid attacks and female genital mutilation are recurring issues that have never even existed in those countries before.
We aren't trying to divide anyone, we're simply pointing out facts (immigrants from certain parts of the world are significantly more prone to comitting crime), and applying the best possible solution we currently have (end immigration from those areas or dramatically increase vetting and background checks and whatnot). That isn't divisive, it's logical.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
And the libtard Germans filled with white guilt and holocaust guilt will continue to mindlessly beg these people to stay in their country. I'll never understand.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I'm okay with terrifying people into not saying no? lol what?
No, I'm not. But if someone chooses to go along with something that they don't want to, then that shouldn't be a punishable crime.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Ugh I've heard this enough up here in Canada, all the lefties seem to think illegals should be granted citizenship without any background check because they assume they're simply looking for a "better life" or something. Fuck everyone who came here legally or who was born here, right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
So instead you decide to give up on trying to end it and then criticize others for their solutions?
I'm not giving up on trying to end it, I just call out a ridiculous option when I see one. Like I said, a "solution" like this will do nothing but make everything awkward. Rapists don't give a shit if someone says no.
If someone doesn't want to have sex, they shouldn't have sex. I speak from multiple personal experiences when I say the majority of the time, neither of us ask if we want to have sex. It just happens, it's completely nonverbal. If someone doesn't want to have sex, all they have to do is say no. Implementing a law that requires someone to ask if every single action is "okay" isn't going to cause the person responding to all of a sudden say no, as they chose not to say no before this hypothetical law came into place.
Consent can be pretty easily straight forward - say no if you don't want to do something.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Then, why when you approach the scenario described by the OP, do you immediately jump on the "criticize consent" bandwagon?
Because it's silly and pointless. You basically asked "would you rather kill all rapists or let them live?" Obviously I'd rather rid the world of rapists, but the option you provided won't work. It'll just cause a lot of discomfort and annoyance between sexual partners.
If there was a more reasonable solution to ending rape (which is sex against someone's will - someone regretting doing something because they decided not to say no is not rape), I would be completely on board with it. Unfortunately, rape is incredibly hard to prove and deter to begin with, so I'm not too sure what we can really do to put an end to it.
You're also taking away from natural human instinct and hurting the way we communicate naturally by forcing vocal interactions when nonverbal interactions have been our way of life forever.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
The better world would be the one where there is no rape and consent is validated every eight seconds.
However that won't end rape, and is beyond unrealistic. That situation usually only applies to the women who regret it after, and is not necessarily rape, but a poor decision or a lack of communication.
If someone is taking their clothes off and continues with whatever is going on, that's called "implied consent," and considering the majority of communication between humans is via body language, classifying that situation as rape simply goes against human nature.
Sick fucks will continue to forcibly have sex with others against their will even if verbal consent every few seconds is mandatory. It's unfortunate, but a harsh reality. If we could find a way to end shit like that, I'd be more than happy to be a part of that movement.
Created:
-->
@Imabench
I just find it silly to use the length of time it takes for someone to respond to an argument against them. However yeah he's a silly goose as well.
mhm, sure you did.
"NOBODY ON MY SIDE EVER DOES SOMETHING DUMB!"
Created:
-->
@Type1
Because I don't want an obligation to something that has a time limit, I have other shit to do.
If we didn't have to post arguments on the weekend, I'd be more than happy to have one a week, but I'm either drunk or hungover when it's my turn and it turns into an annoyance to have to report to a meaningless debate site during my free time.
However I do want to have the debates we were talking about at some point with you, socialism and whatever else lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Or maybe men need to stop raping women?
Yeah, and people should stop stealing, and murdering, and assaulting, and dealing drugs, and laundering money....
I've always hated this response. "Why don't men just not do bad things?" It's not that simple, get a grip on reality.
In response to OP, I agree completely, and I've been thinking the same thing for ages. Sex is no longer an enjoyable act with these ridiculous new feminist ideas that we need to constantly ask "is it okay if I do this?" every eight seconds. Same with people saying if you've had any alcohol at all (even if the man has too) it's fucking RAPE punishable by a decade in prison if they have consensual sex.
It's almost as if feminists don't understand there's a difference between being black out drunk and having a couple martinis, do they really have that little faith in their fellow woman?
Created:
-->
@Imabench
I don't give a shit about the topic at hand but it's kind of sad that you count the time it takes for someone to respond to an insult.
I'm sure people have lives that don't revolve around some random meaningless debate site.
On a side note, I told my liberal coworker about this and her response was "yeah but he's done a bunch of other stupid shit today."
Fuckin hell, give credit where it's due.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
But to use that information to act in a discriminatory manner against blacks: racist.
That's true, I'm not arguing against that. Pointing out differences of the average IQ scores between the two races is not racist.
If he said Keith was right that blacks are inferior, then I would consider him racist, as that's a blanket statement and he hasn't backed it with facts.
Created:
-->
@vagabond
Looks like we're missing two sources from you now, I'll wait here while you fetch those.
Created:
-->
@vagabond
There were a heap of people calling for the death of Jews, Muslims and dark skinned people in Charlottsville
[Citation needed]
...in the end they could only kill one white woman, fucking heroes.
When the guy drove his car into the group of literal domestic terrorists, it could have been because 1) a university professor waved his fucking gun at him (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2aPCmuX1lo), (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz9mKPiDrv4), or 2) he's a piece of shit.
Either way, you're trying so desperately hard to shift the focus away from the topic at hand. Get back on point - Muslim preachers call for the deaths of pretty much everyone, and worldwide the majority of Muslims want an oppressive, inhumane law to rule the land, which gives no rights to homosexuals, women, non-Muslims, and so on. I'm not saying all Muslims want this, I'm not saying some Christians don't, I'm just pointing out facts.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@vagabond
Well it sure took a fuck of a long time to find any statistics at all, but here's an in-depth study into conviction rates of citizens vs illegal immigrants in Arizona
As you can see on Table 3, there were a total of 3994 murders between 1985 and 2017 - 508 of those were committed by illegals, whereas 3461 were committed by citizens.
I'd say 12.7% of the murders being committed by a preventable source is pretty damn high. And sure, I'd be happy to say that if we can find a way to get people to stop killing each other in general that we should do that if it makes sense, but it doesn't look like anything really works. At least with illegals, we can deport them and increase border security, taking a big cut out of the murder rate.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
You're being too generous. The only example he gives of something it's acceptable to call "racism" is on the Hitler level.
So? He gave an example of an actual racist, that doesn't mean he believes that Hitler is the only racist on Earth.
Presenting only the most extreme example is a very poor way of doing that.
No, it isn't. I understand what he means. Just because you don't understand doesn't mean he's doing a poor job at explaining the differences between racism and factual information comparable between ethnic backgrounds.
I think Analgesic.Spectre made a good point that you're just over simplifying everything. He even replied saying I'm right, so looks like we've made progress and should be able to see eye to eye now, yeah?
Created:
-->
@vagabond
Preachers? There isn't hard evidence for something like that, but considering the majority of Muslims worldwide want the highly oppressive Sharia Law imposed in their land (http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/), I'd say quite a bit more than Christians.
But here's a bunch of preachers calling for the deaths of Jews - http://www.thetower.org/5904-why-are-american-imams-saying-kill-the-jews/
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@vagabond
Biggest red herring I've seen on this site yet.
I never said I don't care about citizens murdering other citizens, but that's significantly harder to put an end to than illegals murdering citizens. When it's as simple as enhancing border security (something Trump has done which has resulted in great results), I'd look into that to quickly put an end to illegals killing citizens.
Preventable crimes should be taken into consideration before less preventable crimes. I'm not just going to throw my hands in the air and say fuck it because crime is committed by legal citizens too. Come on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
Yeah, Fox is biased in a right-leaning way, the sky is blue, CNN, NYT, WSJ, AJ, WP etc. are biased in a left-leaning way. What's your point?
Also, I'd think an illegal alien that kidnapped and murdered an innocent girl is more important than a couple guys getting charged with tax fraud etc. I'm more concerned with people in the country illegally that are murdering innocent people than someone avoiding paying taxes to the government that YOU FUCKIN PEOPLE HATE ANYWAY.
Fox is biased, MSN, NBC, CNN etc is biased. This isn't a new ground breaking discovery.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yeah it's hilarious, I loved getting in arguments with him. He'd always cry and shit his pants when someone wasn't a feminist, didn't support BLM, wasn't a far left socialist who loved illegal immigrants, etc.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
Right, equating mundane racist comments to Hitler isn't good, but that's clearly not what OP was saying. They were simply saying the hatred of one race (Hitler, for example) is not the same as comparing IQ's. Pretty sure they were just giving an example of an actual racist.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
He's saying to conflate Hitler with noticing biological differences between races is detrimental, and we need to distinguish between pointing out facts and being blatantly racist.
I disagree that we should invent a new term, but I think people need to stop labeling everything racist that doesn't make them happy. By "Hitler variety," he means actual racists, not literally only genocidal maniacs.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
He's giving an example of actual racism, he isn't say the systemic extermination of an entire race is the ONLY form of racism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Smithereens
If someone can get BrianTheLiberal to this site I'll have a fuckin field day arguing with him about literally everything.
Honestly if you guys can find a way to get the far left/right people to come here I'd love it. I unfortunately only befriended people on Facebook a few months ago and lost track of everyone that used to make the site great.
Good to see Wylted and other fun people here though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@linate
We did a video on a guy who worships Trump as a God, if you want to check it out lel
Created:
-->
@linate
Better than the Muslim preachers who want to throw them off of buildings or stone them to death.
Good thing he only has a few followers and everyone in the civilized world won't put up with his shit.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
Nice strawman, lol
On a side note, Maxime Bernier (lost the leadership race for conservative party of Canada) made some spot-on perfect points about multiculturalism and immigration, and was instantly labelled a racist by liberals and practically every leftie in Canada. His accurate and meaningful points were completely disregarded because he brought up culture and preserving Canadian identity, which had nothing to do with race.
More and more frequently nowadays, people (including myself) are shut down without the opportunity to engage in conversation because we simply discuss culture/ethnicity/religion/whatever and are branded a "racist" for bringing up anything (even factually based) that doesn't put minorities (can't forget that whites aren't capable of being victims of racism) on a pedestal.
Created:
Posted in:
I unfortunately have Kabib winning this, as much as I love Conor and would love to see him make an epic return by defeating Kabib who's fuckin 26-0, I can't see Conor knocking him out and that would be the only way he could win. Kabib will land significantly more blows and his wrestling is superior to Conor.
Super excited though, going to be the fight of the century :D
Created:
-->
@linate
he says things that are racist, but that doesn't mean he is one.
No, he doesn't say things that are racist.
he says a mexican judge can't be neutral because he is mexican.
Considering the majority of Mexicans in the US showed a hatred toward Trump for being against illegal immigration (wtf right?), it's not an unfair assumption or caution to take to assume someone from that demographic will be biased against him.
he said obama wasn't born in the usa
There were a million conspiracy theories about this during the entirety of Obama's presidency, Trump looking for a way to slander the Democrats does not make him racist.
the only thing basis in both cases that trump had to say anything was color of skin. it's an unjustified prejudice, even if he's not fully aware of it.
He didn't mention "color of skin" in either of your examples... his questioning and concern was completely justified.
what reasons do you have to think he's racist? not a racist?do you think he has no racist views?
I think he's not a racist because he's never done or said anything racist. He's against illegal immigrants (like anyone who cares about their country should be), and that isn't racist. You're the racist (not you, specifically, Linate) for equating Mexicans to illegal immigrants.
Created:
Posted in:
Great post.
I find that nowadays it's significantly more common to hear people just blindly call you a "racist/bigot/____phobe" instead of engage in productive conversation or debate. We wont make it very far if we allow society to continue to decline to this form of communication.
I can't even wear my MAGA hat to an anti racism rally to show support and solidarity and to show that people with different political views can stand alongside these guys because I'll be instantly branded a racist and cast away from the event.
I can't have a conversation with my coworker because when she brings up the high police shooting rate with blacks, I bring up the high crime rate with blacks and then she calls me racist and ends the conversation.
We won't get anywhere if these terms are used to silence and demonize people. If anything, modern use of many of these "social justice" words are trivializing the actual terms which were originally used to describe people who have a deep blanketed hatred toward an entire ethnic demographic, regardless of individual merit.
Meh, the world is slowly seeing what bullshit it all is and more and more people are taking the red pill, so we're gaining numbers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@triangle.128k
Actually yeah good point I take that back, I'm referring to basically every other country the refugees come from. Most of Africa and the Middle East has a pretty backwards way of life.
I guess it just so happens that every refugee tends to be the worst people of each country they're from LOL
Created:
Posted in:
I started there in 2014 when it was breathing its dying breath. Had some good fun for just over a year with people like BrianTheLiberal and PetersSmith, engaging in constant flame wars, but after all the lefties ran off it turned into a circle jerk of centre-right conservatives/libertarians and mindless 10 year old kids asking which pokemon is the best.
Made some good friends on there too, who I've already found here. Good to see us giving life to our cause (Y)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@triangle.128k
I'm mainly spiting the argument about "muh poor refugees" that the left uses as an emotional appeal to take them in.
Yeah with that I agree. Started off with one dead kid on a beach to push the narrative that it's children and women escaping war-torn countries, then they send the masses of their 20-30 year old healthy men to take over beautiful European cities and spread the disgusting culture they had to flee from to begin with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
The fact that you'll most likely be physically assaulted for bringing up these FACTS in public is the reason our side is gaining more and more support by the minute.
Soon enough we'll have enough support that we won't be afraid to face the viscous, violent lefties who think they can silence anyone with a different (or factually accurate) opinion.
Created:
Posted in:
The left wants to mindlessly accept millions of people from shitholes because 1) they genuinely feel bad for them, somewhat fair point, and 2) they want votes.
Our countries cannot handle mass immigration when we already have homeless problems among other issues. It also doesn't help that the majority of these "migrants" do not conform and adapt to our way of life. They run from their shithole then turn the countries they immigrate to into their past shithole.
There's a difference between accepting a couple thousand a year and keeping a close eye on them, making sure they aren't violent, conform to our way of life, etc, and blindly allowing hundreds of thousands to flood in without any vetting. Several Western European countries which were once the epitome of happiness, safety and low crime rates are now hot spots for rape and grooming gangs, daily riots and senseless violence, and literal no-go zones where people and police won't patrol because Sharia Law has become the law of the land due to a takeover in sheer numbers.
I however don't necessarily agree that the refugees should be required to fight for their country. I agree that it's selfish and cowardly not to, but I don't think it should be mandatory. I definitely would, as I love my country and would die to protect it, but I don't think that should be mandatory. However because not every country can accommodate them, it should be strongly recommended or pay out a big reward.
Created:
-->
@linate
No.
People are morons and will cry about anything, regardless of policy. Trump has low approval ratings because he's said a couple rude things and the media blew that out of proportion as they're funded by Democrat supporters. Stupid people blindly listened to the media and started to hate Trump.
He's lowered taxes across the board, took out most of ISIS, repaired relations with Russia and North Korea (who were both huge threats to the US before he was elected), helped the North and South Korean countries come together, increased border security, addressed the fake news epidemic and much more... yet his approval ratings are down because 1) people don't like Republicans, 2) people are too dumb to do their own research, and 3) he's said a couple mean things in his lifetime.
This also applies to right-wingers blindly hating Hillary, although "vote for me because I'm a woman and I'm not Trump" wasn't the best platform to run on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
I'm here from Debate.org (a failing site getting bombarded with Indian sex hotline and football betting spam lel) and I was very active in the "Polls" section.
For those of you who don't know, it's essentially multiple choice questions about a wide variety of topics (who'd be a better president, is feminism beneficial, etc).
I loved the idea and it was a great little fun-on-the-side kind of thing when waiting for an opponent to post their debate round, or a way to just get more involved in the community. We had some pretty heated arguments at times back when debate.org was popular and had people from the far sides of the political spectrum.
I haven't done anything at all on this site but so far it's incredibly smoother and well organized than debate.org and I have a feeling if things pick up here and debates aren't the only thing to do, it could be something great. I love the interface too.
Also, a "add friend" instead of "favourite" option could be good, but meh.
Thanks and looking forward to being a part of this thing.
Created: