Total Posts:52|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

why Republicans should be pro choice

Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 7:50:18 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

but but...adopted babies go to conservatives!!! one one one
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:05:34 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

If God intends for the free-market to provide bread, it will be so.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:08:26 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

In a completely libertarian society, there would be less poverty.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper etc.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:11:27 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:05:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

If God intends for the free-market to provide bread, it will be so.

It already has, in controlled markets such as soviet russian, bread was hard to come by.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:26:47 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.

Actually bringing criminal charges for poisoning food would prevent that as well as the ability to sue.

Murder and child labor would be illegal in a free market, and in fact it would be impossible to have employees treated so bad in a free market which would have tons of competition for getting employees.

The current climate makes employers nore likely to abuse employees, because of the lack of competition caused by government intervention
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:29:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.

In fact the government helped with cruel employee treatment. Back in the day Rockafeller had employees striking at one of his coal mines and the government came in and ysed the national gaurd to force them back to work.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:35:48 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:29:13 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.

In fact the government helped with cruel employee treatment. Back in the day Rockafeller had employees striking at one of his coal mines and the government came in and ysed the national gaurd to force them back to work.

Good lord man, you are talking about a strike that LEAD to the reforms described.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:37:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:26:47 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.

Actually bringing criminal charges for poisoning food would prevent that as well as the ability to sue.

Funny. Cause it didn't in the past.

Murder and child labor would be illegal in a free market, and in fact it would be impossible to have employees treated so bad in a free market which would have tons of competition for getting employees.

They're illegal? Oh, suddenly the government is involved! Funny how that works.
With no restrictions, the free market has ONE job. Making money. Which means they have no need to be attractive to people because EVERY market will prioritize making money. And people need wages to survive, so they will be FORCED - the free market uses more force than any other institution - to work in unsafe conditions for low pay.

The current climate makes employers nore likely to abuse employees, because of the lack of competition caused by government intervention

Because the government intervention is inefficient. It needs to be improved.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:44:23 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:37:13 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:26:47 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.

Actually bringing criminal charges for poisoning food would prevent that as well as the ability to sue.

Funny. Cause it didn't in the past.

The past had too many laws which prevented it from happening. A good lesson to learn about having too many laws.

Murder and child labor would be illegal in a free market, and in fact it would be impossible to have employees treated so bad in a free market which would have tons of competition for getting employees.

They're illegal? Oh, suddenly the government is involved! Funny how that works.

Yes, the courts are government institutions, nobody debies that they should be. The issue is with regulations that violate the principles of negative rights

With no restrictions, the free market has ONE job. Making money. Which means they have no need to be attractive to people because EVERY market will prioritize making money. And people need wages to survive, so they will be FORCED - the free market uses more force than any other institution - to work in unsafe conditions for low pay.

As I've explained numerous times before. The government regulations has actually caused fields to be less competitive. In a truly free market society many jobs would be competing over the same individual. Compare the founding of America when it was more free market Nd everybody was a mom and pop business to now when everything is a multinational corporation as a result of government intervention.

The current climate makes employers nore likely to abuse employees, because of the lack of competition caused by government intervention

Because the government intervention is inefficient. It needs to be improved.

That's the problem. You guys want to keep tweeking a system that doesn't work, but each tweak creates more problems. Why not just support a sytem that works instead of tweaking a system that doesn't. I can make as many repairs to my beat up pick up truck as I want, but it will never be a Cadillac
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:47:20 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Good lord man, you are talking about a strike that LEAD to the reforms described

Every government intervention that violates the principle of negative rights is done for the benefit of the big guy at the cost of the little guy. This time it was the national gaurd drawing guns on private citizens, the reforms that came after that fixed the need to screw the little guy in this way, by screwing them in ways they wpuld notice less
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:50:30 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:44:23 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:37:13 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:26:47 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.

Actually bringing criminal charges for poisoning food would prevent that as well as the ability to sue.

Funny. Cause it didn't in the past.

The past had too many laws which prevented it from happening. A good lesson to learn about having too many laws.

Oh, too bad people don't have money to do lawsuits without THE GOVERNMENT.

Murder and child labor would be illegal in a free market, and in fact it would be impossible to have employees treated so bad in a free market which would have tons of competition for getting employees.

They're illegal? Oh, suddenly the government is involved! Funny how that works.


Yes, the courts are government institutions, nobody debies that they should be. The issue is with regulations that violate the principles of negative rights

Positive rights are routinely violated by the free market.

With no restrictions, the free market has ONE job. Making money. Which means they have no need to be attractive to people because EVERY market will prioritize making money. And people need wages to survive, so they will be FORCED - the free market uses more force than any other institution - to work in unsafe conditions for low pay.

As I've explained numerous times before. The government regulations has actually caused fields to be less competitive. In a truly free market society many jobs would be competing over the same individual. Compare the founding of America when it was more free market Nd everybody was a mom and pop business to now when everything is a multinational corporation as a result of government intervention.

Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

The current climate makes employers nore likely to abuse employees, because of the lack of competition caused by government intervention

Because the government intervention is inefficient. It needs to be improved.

That's the problem. You guys want to keep tweeking a system that doesn't work, but each tweak creates more problems. Why not just support a sytem that works instead of tweaking a system that doesn't. I can make as many repairs to my beat up pick up truck as I want, but it will never be a Cadillac

You just want a system that fvcks everyone and pretends that the fvcking isn't rape.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 8:57:00 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

Not true. Wages are higher in a free market. Remember how I showed that regulations made it harder for small businesses to stay open while having almost no effect on big businesses? Well if instead of having Mcdonalds burger king and subway compete over your labor as yoh do now, imagine a city where 100 mom and pop businesses compete for your lavor instead. That's how a free market actually works. Look at America's early days before slaves were brought on board (because the principle of negative rights was ignored). Everyone was a mom and pop business owner. That's what the market would look like. Will you as a business owner treat your employee (yourself) bad?
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 9:01:11 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:57:00 PM, Wylted wrote:
Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

Not true. Wages are higher in a free market. Remember how I showed that regulations made it harder for small businesses to stay open while having almost no effect on big businesses? Well if instead of having Mcdonalds burger king and subway compete over your labor as yoh do now, imagine a city where 100 mom and pop businesses compete for your lavor instead. That's how a free market actually works. Look at America's early days before slaves were brought on board (because the principle of negative rights was ignored). Everyone was a mom and pop business owner. That's what the market would look like. Will you as a business owner treat your employee (yourself) bad?

Yes true. In a genuine free market, a monopoly will form because all those mom and pop businesses will be driven out. That's how a free market actually works. No workplace safety laws. No child labor laws. No hours. None of that.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 9:03:50 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 9:01:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:57:00 PM, Wylted wrote:
Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

Not true. Wages are higher in a free market. Remember how I showed that regulations made it harder for small businesses to stay open while having almost no effect on big businesses? Well if instead of having Mcdonalds burger king and subway compete over your labor as yoh do now, imagine a city where 100 mom and pop businesses compete for your lavor instead. That's how a free market actually works. Look at America's early days before slaves were brought on board (because the principle of negative rights was ignored). Everyone was a mom and pop business owner. That's what the market would look like. Will you as a business owner treat your employee (yourself) bad?

Yes true. In a genuine free market, a monopoly will form because all those mom and pop businesses will be driven out. That's how a free market actually works. No workplace safety laws. No child labor laws. No hours. None of that.

Hpw would a business that did that attract people away from working in those jobs to drive mom and pops out? This is just stupid. Monopies form as a result of government intervention as I have displayed multiple times. Free markets have more mom and pops and barely any if any multinationals
liltankjj
Posts: 430
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 9:21:01 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
I don't see why this should matter to anyone outside of the individuals involved. I believe in personal freedoms. If you do something that will not affect me directly, it's none of my business. I hate controlling and dictating others.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 9:24:22 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 9:03:50 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:01:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:57:00 PM, Wylted wrote:
Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

Not true. Wages are higher in a free market. Remember how I showed that regulations made it harder for small businesses to stay open while having almost no effect on big businesses? Well if instead of having Mcdonalds burger king and subway compete over your labor as yoh do now, imagine a city where 100 mom and pop businesses compete for your lavor instead. That's how a free market actually works. Look at America's early days before slaves were brought on board (because the principle of negative rights was ignored). Everyone was a mom and pop business owner. That's what the market would look like. Will you as a business owner treat your employee (yourself) bad?

Yes true. In a genuine free market, a monopoly will form because all those mom and pop businesses will be driven out. That's how a free market actually works. No workplace safety laws. No child labor laws. No hours. None of that.

Hpw would a business that did that attract people away from working in those jobs to drive mom and pops out? This is just stupid. Monopies form as a result of government intervention as I have displayed multiple times. Free markets have more mom and pops and barely any if any multinationals

I'm so tired of pointing out how history disproves you. The only time in US history without government intervention was the age of monopolies.

The free market rewards ruthlessness. Only the most efficient will gain any traction. So when one shop on the street acquires more resources and assumes more of the base production, it will grow beyond the others. It will gain a larger labor force and boost production, putting the others out of business. And it will do this while doing the least amount possible to provide for its employees.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 9:26:18 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 9:24:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:03:50 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:01:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:57:00 PM, Wylted wrote:
Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

Not true. Wages are higher in a free market. Remember how I showed that regulations made it harder for small businesses to stay open while having almost no effect on big businesses? Well if instead of having Mcdonalds burger king and subway compete over your labor as yoh do now, imagine a city where 100 mom and pop businesses compete for your lavor instead. That's how a free market actually works. Look at America's early days before slaves were brought on board (because the principle of negative rights was ignored). Everyone was a mom and pop business owner. That's what the market would look like. Will you as a business owner treat your employee (yourself) bad?

Yes true. In a genuine free market, a monopoly will form because all those mom and pop businesses will be driven out. That's how a free market actually works. No workplace safety laws. No child labor laws. No hours. None of that.

Hpw would a business that did that attract people away from working in those jobs to drive mom and pops out? This is just stupid. Monopies form as a result of government intervention as I have displayed multiple times. Free markets have more mom and pops and barely any if any multinationals

I'm so tired of pointing out how history disproves you. The only time in US history without government intervention was the age of monopolies.



The free market rewards ruthlessness. Only the most efficient will gain any traction. So when one shop on the street acquires more resources and assumes more of the base production, it will grow beyond the others. It will gain a larger labor force and boost production, putting the others out of business. And it will do this while doing the least amount possible to provide for its employees.

Lol, I've already proved this is wrong by showing how it's regulations that cause monopolies. Before the FDA most of our food came from local providers. Before all the banking laws? Most banking was done at mom and pop places etc.

Nice try though
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 9:39:38 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 9:26:18 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:24:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:03:50 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:01:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:57:00 PM, Wylted wrote:
Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

Not true. Wages are higher in a free market. Remember how I showed that regulations made it harder for small businesses to stay open while having almost no effect on big businesses? Well if instead of having Mcdonalds burger king and subway compete over your labor as yoh do now, imagine a city where 100 mom and pop businesses compete for your lavor instead. That's how a free market actually works. Look at America's early days before slaves were brought on board (because the principle of negative rights was ignored). Everyone was a mom and pop business owner. That's what the market would look like. Will you as a business owner treat your employee (yourself) bad?

Yes true. In a genuine free market, a monopoly will form because all those mom and pop businesses will be driven out. That's how a free market actually works. No workplace safety laws. No child labor laws. No hours. None of that.

Hpw would a business that did that attract people away from working in those jobs to drive mom and pops out? This is just stupid. Monopies form as a result of government intervention as I have displayed multiple times. Free markets have more mom and pops and barely any if any multinationals

I'm so tired of pointing out how history disproves you. The only time in US history without government intervention was the age of monopolies.



The free market rewards ruthlessness. Only the most efficient will gain any traction. So when one shop on the street acquires more resources and assumes more of the base production, it will grow beyond the others. It will gain a larger labor force and boost production, putting the others out of business. And it will do this while doing the least amount possible to provide for its employees.

Lol, I've already proved this is wrong by showing how it's regulations that cause monopolies. Before the FDA most of our food came from local providers. Before all the banking laws? Most banking was done at mom and pop places etc.

Nice try though

And. History. Proved. No. Regulations. Equals. Monopoly.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 10:37:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 9:39:38 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:26:18 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:24:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:03:50 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 9:01:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:57:00 PM, Wylted wrote:
Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

Not true. Wages are higher in a free market. Remember how I showed that regulations made it harder for small businesses to stay open while having almost no effect on big businesses? Well if instead of having Mcdonalds burger king and subway compete over your labor as yoh do now, imagine a city where 100 mom and pop businesses compete for your lavor instead. That's how a free market actually works. Look at America's early days before slaves were brought on board (because the principle of negative rights was ignored). Everyone was a mom and pop business owner. That's what the market would look like. Will you as a business owner treat your employee (yourself) bad?

Yes true. In a genuine free market, a monopoly will form because all those mom and pop businesses will be driven out. That's how a free market actually works. No workplace safety laws. No child labor laws. No hours. None of that.

Hpw would a business that did that attract people away from working in those jobs to drive mom and pops out? This is just stupid. Monopies form as a result of government intervention as I have displayed multiple times. Free markets have more mom and pops and barely any if any multinationals

I'm so tired of pointing out how history disproves you. The only time in US history without government intervention was the age of monopolies.



The free market rewards ruthlessness. Only the most efficient will gain any traction. So when one shop on the street acquires more resources and assumes more of the base production, it will grow beyond the others. It will gain a larger labor force and boost production, putting the others out of business. And it will do this while doing the least amount possible to provide for its employees.

Lol, I've already proved this is wrong by showing how it's regulations that cause monopolies. Before the FDA most of our food came from local providers. Before all the banking laws? Most banking was done at mom and pop places etc.

Nice try though

And. History. Proved. No. Regulations. Equals. Monopoly.

Nope, I actually gave real examples of the state causing them. No example of one without the state causing it exists
Objectivity
Posts: 1,073
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 10:49:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.

Lol, cherry picking the few positive instances of government intervention in the market. What about not being able to buy raw milk? What about the fact that pretty much the only class of attorneys seeing an increase in demand are compliance attorneys? Is that because the government is stopping evil corporations from killing people or because they are micro managing private property? I think I'll take the latter, I'm more afraid of government that can take my life, liberty and property than a few greedy businessmen.
Objectivity
Posts: 1,073
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 10:51:11 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 8:50:30 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:44:23 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:37:13 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:26:47 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.

Actually bringing criminal charges for poisoning food would prevent that as well as the ability to sue.

Funny. Cause it didn't in the past.

The past had too many laws which prevented it from happening. A good lesson to learn about having too many laws.

Oh, too bad people don't have money to do lawsuits without THE GOVERNMENT.

Actually you can't sue the government.. nice job proving our point that the government is too big and unaccountable.

Murder and child labor would be illegal in a free market, and in fact it would be impossible to have employees treated so bad in a free market which would have tons of competition for getting employees.

They're illegal? Oh, suddenly the government is involved! Funny how that works.


Yes, the courts are government institutions, nobody debies that they should be. The issue is with regulations that violate the principles of negative rights

Positive rights are routinely violated by the free market.

Positive rights aren't real rights lol

With no restrictions, the free market has ONE job. Making money. Which means they have no need to be attractive to people because EVERY market will prioritize making money. And people need wages to survive, so they will be FORCED - the free market uses more force than any other institution - to work in unsafe conditions for low pay.

As I've explained numerous times before. The government regulations has actually caused fields to be less competitive. In a truly free market society many jobs would be competing over the same individual. Compare the founding of America when it was more free market Nd everybody was a mom and pop business to now when everything is a multinational corporation as a result of government intervention.

Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

The current climate makes employers nore likely to abuse employees, because of the lack of competition caused by government intervention

Because the government intervention is inefficient. It needs to be improved.

That's the problem. You guys want to keep tweeking a system that doesn't work, but each tweak creates more problems. Why not just support a sytem that works instead of tweaking a system that doesn't. I can make as many repairs to my beat up pick up truck as I want, but it will never be a Cadillac

You just want a system that fvcks everyone and pretends that the fvcking isn't rape.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 11:19:31 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 10:51:11 PM, Objectivity wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:50:30 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:44:23 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:37:13 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:26:47 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:17:19 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:10:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:04:06 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/2/2016 8:03:12 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:54:36 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:53:05 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/2/2016 7:47:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
Abortion is great way to reduce the number of Democrats.

Nearly 58% of Democrats are pro-choice, versus 22% of Republicans. Clearly a reduction in leftist ideology is a good thing, since entitlement programs are a real drag on our economy. Who knows, maybe we can actually abort our way to a balanced budget by reducing the number of babies born with their cute little hands out for gub"ment assistance. Once again, Planned Parenthood is doing us all a favor.

Kidding aside - yea Republicans SHOULD be pro-choice. Know how much it costs to abort vs. deliver? How about the additional strain on assistance programs.

Republicans want to cut 100% of assistance programs, so thag is not a selling point

Starving childeren in the streets has always been a sign of a healthy society, right?

But but but but but the free market never creates poverty!!!!

I'm sure some exists, but a few good filial responsibility laws would fix that, so far intervention in markets has kept capitalism from being able to eradicate poverty. It has already done so much like increase the average lifespan, reduce infant mortality, invent toilet paper

The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them down into coal mines, and subsequently murder them. The government has kept the free market from continuing to employ children, send them into factories, and work them for 16 hours a day with no breaks and no real wages. The government has kept the free market from putting cyanide and lead into our food supplies.

Actually bringing criminal charges for poisoning food would prevent that as well as the ability to sue.

Funny. Cause it didn't in the past.

The past had too many laws which prevented it from happening. A good lesson to learn about having too many laws.

Oh, too bad people don't have money to do lawsuits without THE GOVERNMENT.

Actually you can't sue the government.. nice job proving our point that the government is too big and unaccountable.

Most can't afford to sue anyone without government support. And you can sue federal employees if wronged, so.

Murder and child labor would be illegal in a free market, and in fact it would be impossible to have employees treated so bad in a free market which would have tons of competition for getting employees.

They're illegal? Oh, suddenly the government is involved! Funny how that works.


Yes, the courts are government institutions, nobody debies that they should be. The issue is with regulations that violate the principles of negative rights

Positive rights are routinely violated by the free market.

Positive rights aren't real rights lol

Yes they are.

With no restrictions, the free market has ONE job. Making money. Which means they have no need to be attractive to people because EVERY market will prioritize making money. And people need wages to survive, so they will be FORCED - the free market uses more force than any other institution - to work in unsafe conditions for low pay.

As I've explained numerous times before. The government regulations has actually caused fields to be less competitive. In a truly free market society many jobs would be competing over the same individual. Compare the founding of America when it was more free market Nd everybody was a mom and pop business to now when everything is a multinational corporation as a result of government intervention.

Without regulations, the free market will drop wages to near zero. Since every business will, the people will have no alternative. They'll be forced to choose one. The free market on its own is unmitigated evil. It needs the government.

The current climate makes employers nore likely to abuse employees, because of the lack of competition caused by government intervention

Because the government intervention is inefficient. It needs to be improved.

That's the problem. You guys want to keep tweeking a system that doesn't work, but each tweak creates more problems. Why not just support a sytem that works instead of tweaking a system that doesn't. I can make as many repairs to my beat up pick up truck as I want, but it will never be a Cadillac

You just want a system that fvcks everyone and pretends that the fvcking isn't rape.
imabench
Posts: 21,229
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2016 11:37:51 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/2/2016 10:51:11 PM, Objectivity wrote:

Actually you can't sue the government.. nice job proving our point that the government is too big and unaccountable.

The government and federal government agencies can and get sued all the time for negligence

http://www.nolo.com...
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015