ax1
Legend
I took Brain Force and Survival Shield. Im full proof hiding inside my Russian Compound here in the US I built by hand out of the highest quality Reynolds wrap.
Donald Trump running for president
- Thread starter LiftWithDonuts
- Start date
I took Brain Force and Survival Shield. Im full proof hiding inside my Russian Compound here in the US I built by hand out of the highest quality Reynolds wrap.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
I think Rand Paul would make a much better President than Trump or Hillary. Ron Paul would have been even better though.
ax1
Legend
He might be slightly better than Alex too!
CJNator
Well-known member
I did see that, I'm skeptical of this move and won't see it as a positive thing till he actually makes moves. It's too good to be true just like him saying he'll make concealed carrying legal throughout the US. Everything is too far fetched. Plus I don't care for hold and silver, crypto currencies are the way to go.
ax1
Legend
Saw some Democratic Strategist on CNN on a panel with Don Lemon today....she said that this wasnt a hate crime and that its all Dump's fault this happened.
ax1
Legend
I always thought he would pay for it with our tax dollars and over the years Mexico would be paying for it though tariffs, taxes, etc.....but could be this mild Dick Cheney moment when he said if we spend godzillians of our tax dollars to obliterate Iraq we only will get the money back with all their oil.
justhere4comm
Banned
Take everything confiscated as in drugs. Give them back. Let them be sold. Tax the sales of those drugs. Build a wall.
Businessman huh?
Businessman huh?
ax1
Legend
It's really not that hard to raise billions of dollars through fees and tariffs.
justhere4comm
Banned
In all these pages has any one offered a solution to the sh1t this country is in?
The cost to finish the current wall would be $15-25 Billion. How long would it take to raise that much money through tariffs?
How about we don't build a wall... let the people who cross over illegally keep doing jobs Americans never wanted in the first place, raise tariffs any way and spend that money on important matters?
- Kick out the lobbyists (Those a-holes) out of Washington (They write bills and bought and paid for government votes on them)
- Legalize Drugs, tax them
- Make tobacco and alcohol more expensive with sales taxes, 50%.
- Raise Tariffs if you think it will help
- Open Carry Laws (Carry your gun if you have to, but only for all to see) No Legal Conceal Carry!
- Move all prisons to unpopulated territories where nobody wants to live anyway
- Move towards renewable energy piped from those inhabitable territories including off shore (i.e.,Underwater turbines that use current)
- Kick the Oil, Coal, and Gas companies holding us all hostage in the fcucking nuts.
- Free Healthcare and Education for everyone (Investigate most of those shake n bake degree mills for fraud, "Trump U" anyone?) lol what a joke. Phoenix; Walden; and the rest are not much better.
- Eliminate the Federal Reserve, and the IRS. Flat tax everyone based on purchases. If you buy a Yacht you pay a lot more, if you are just buying food, you keep more of what you earn.
CJNator
Well-known member
If we just let people in the US then it would grow the current welfare state, no one would kick out the lobbyists because they control the market, legalized drugs are fine, making tobacco products and alcohol more expensive will just fill up the pockets of the CEOs, raises tariffs is protectionism which will just make things more expensive, it doesn't really matter where prisons are as long as its US territory, kicking out oil, gas, and coal companies while bringing in renewable energy companies will just create monopolies of renewable energy, no such thing as free healthcare or schooling, without the IRS most of these ideas wouldn't be implemented since the federal government wouldn't exist and the federal reserve is the center of the US fiat currency so without a fiat currency taxes wouldn't exist.
It all sounds good but it wouldn't work nor would it happen.
justhere4comm
Banned
Walmart employs more than enough already no?
I'm giving real solutions and like medicine you can take it or not.
I'm giving real solutions and like medicine you can take it or not.
ax1
Legend
I never supported the wall myself....it can be used to keep us in.
ax1
Legend
I dont think you have been around the entire time in this thread, but people have posted countless solutions regardless of what side they are on.
I would just not build a wall, eliminate all social services and just have regular border patrol which as of late they have been ordered to let immigrants flood in for political gain. Of course my ultra solution is to support libertarian ideas, Austrian economics and the US Constitution to eliminate much of the sh1t this country is currently in. There is much more ideas I have but Ill leave it at that for the moment.
Misfit28
Well-known member
Dear God.
Just read this, seriously. The man makes no sense half the time.
Invalid Link Removed
Here's a little excerpt about wind energy when they asked him about meeting with Nigel Farage about the wind farm being proposed near his golf course:
"TRUMP: Oh, I see. I might have brought it up. But not having to do with me, just I mean, the wind is a very deceiving thing. First of all, we don’t make the windmills in the United States. They’re made in Germany and Japan. They’re made out of massive amounts of steel, which goes into the atmosphere, whether it’s in our country or not, it goes into the atmosphere. The windmills kill birds and the windmills need massive subsidies. In other words, we’re subsidizing wind mills all over this country. I mean, for the most part they don’t work. I don’t think they work at all without subsidy, and that bothers me, and they kill all the birds. You go to a windmill, you know in California they have the, what is it? The golden eagle? And they’re like, if you shoot a golden eagle, they go to jail for five years and yet they kill them by, they actually have to get permits that they’re only allowed to kill 30 or something in one year. The windmills are devastating to the bird population, O.K. With that being said, there’s a place for them. But they do need subsidy. So, if I talk negatively. I’ve been saying the same thing for years about you know, the wind industry. I wouldn’t want to subsidize it. Some environmentalists agree with me very much because of all of the things I just said, including the birds, and some don’t. But it’s hard to explain. I don’t care about anything having to do with anything having to do with anything other than the country."
And this response about mixing personal business with the Presidency:
"TRUMP: O.K. First of all, on countries. I think that countries will not do that to us. I don’t think if they’re run by a person that understands leadership and negotiation they’re in no position to do that to us, no matter what I do. They’re in no position to do that to us, and that won’t happen, but I’m going to take a look at it. A very serious look. I want to also see how much this is costing, you know, what’s the cost to it, and I’ll be talking to you folks in the not-too-distant future about it, having to do with what just took place.
As far as the, you know, potential conflict of interests, though, I mean I know that from the standpoint, the law is totally on my side, meaning, the president can’t have a conflict of interest. That’s been reported very widely. Despite that, I don’t want there to be a conflict of interest anyway. And the laws, the president can’t. And I understand why the president can’t have a conflict of interest now because everything a president does in some ways is like a conflict of interest, but I have, I’ve built a very great company and it’s a big company and it’s all over the world. People are starting to see, when they look at all these different jobs, like in India and other things, number one, a job like that builds great relationships with the people of India, so it’s all good. But I have to say, the partners come in, they’re very, very successful people. They come in, they’d say, they said, ‘Would it be possible to have a picture?’ Actually, my children are working on that job. So I can say to them, Arthur, ‘I don’t want to have a picture,’ or, I can take a picture. I mean, I think it’s wonderful to take a picture. I’m fine with a picture. But if it were up to some people, I would never, ever see my daughter Ivanka again. That would be like you never seeing your son again. That wouldn’t be good. That wouldn’t be good. But I’d never, ever see my daughter Ivanka."
Just read this, seriously. The man makes no sense half the time.
Invalid Link Removed
Here's a little excerpt about wind energy when they asked him about meeting with Nigel Farage about the wind farm being proposed near his golf course:
"TRUMP: Oh, I see. I might have brought it up. But not having to do with me, just I mean, the wind is a very deceiving thing. First of all, we don’t make the windmills in the United States. They’re made in Germany and Japan. They’re made out of massive amounts of steel, which goes into the atmosphere, whether it’s in our country or not, it goes into the atmosphere. The windmills kill birds and the windmills need massive subsidies. In other words, we’re subsidizing wind mills all over this country. I mean, for the most part they don’t work. I don’t think they work at all without subsidy, and that bothers me, and they kill all the birds. You go to a windmill, you know in California they have the, what is it? The golden eagle? And they’re like, if you shoot a golden eagle, they go to jail for five years and yet they kill them by, they actually have to get permits that they’re only allowed to kill 30 or something in one year. The windmills are devastating to the bird population, O.K. With that being said, there’s a place for them. But they do need subsidy. So, if I talk negatively. I’ve been saying the same thing for years about you know, the wind industry. I wouldn’t want to subsidize it. Some environmentalists agree with me very much because of all of the things I just said, including the birds, and some don’t. But it’s hard to explain. I don’t care about anything having to do with anything having to do with anything other than the country."
And this response about mixing personal business with the Presidency:
"TRUMP: O.K. First of all, on countries. I think that countries will not do that to us. I don’t think if they’re run by a person that understands leadership and negotiation they’re in no position to do that to us, no matter what I do. They’re in no position to do that to us, and that won’t happen, but I’m going to take a look at it. A very serious look. I want to also see how much this is costing, you know, what’s the cost to it, and I’ll be talking to you folks in the not-too-distant future about it, having to do with what just took place.
As far as the, you know, potential conflict of interests, though, I mean I know that from the standpoint, the law is totally on my side, meaning, the president can’t have a conflict of interest. That’s been reported very widely. Despite that, I don’t want there to be a conflict of interest anyway. And the laws, the president can’t. And I understand why the president can’t have a conflict of interest now because everything a president does in some ways is like a conflict of interest, but I have, I’ve built a very great company and it’s a big company and it’s all over the world. People are starting to see, when they look at all these different jobs, like in India and other things, number one, a job like that builds great relationships with the people of India, so it’s all good. But I have to say, the partners come in, they’re very, very successful people. They come in, they’d say, they said, ‘Would it be possible to have a picture?’ Actually, my children are working on that job. So I can say to them, Arthur, ‘I don’t want to have a picture,’ or, I can take a picture. I mean, I think it’s wonderful to take a picture. I’m fine with a picture. But if it were up to some people, I would never, ever see my daughter Ivanka again. That would be like you never seeing your son again. That wouldn’t be good. That wouldn’t be good. But I’d never, ever see my daughter Ivanka."
justhere4comm
Banned
Lmfao. Yeah. He's a moron.
Misfit28
Well-known member
I know, right? He rambles incoherently. It's actually pretty scary.
We're screwed, LOL.
CJNator
Well-known member
Real solutions align with reality not Utopianism. Let's say the US opens the borders and allows Mexicans and others from Latin and South America to come in. You understand their culture(s) are different from ours? Some may be self sustaining individuals but the government will take advantage of the non self sustaining ones and grow the welfare state. If they come here with nothing, the government will take advantage of that as they do now. I don't want a closed border nor do I want a open border, in general I don't want a government regulated border.
Misfit28
Well-known member
So his solutions are Utopian and yours are not? You expect everyone here to 100% assimilate and adopt the exact same cultural beliefs? Now THAT'S Utopian.
CJNator
Well-known member
I never said anything about assimilation but I believe in natural segregation, not centrally enforced segregation. I also believe in natural integration not centrally enforced integration.
No, I don't think pure capitalism is utopian but it would be hard to reach with all the cognitive dissonance mixed with government education/Marxist propaganda.
youngandfree
Well-known member
He saw the error of his choice early on in Obama's first term, and didn't drink the koolaid.
youngandfree
Well-known member
Invalid Link Removed
"But but but people had to wait in lines to vote. Trump shouldn't be president."
"But but but people had to wait in lines to vote. Trump shouldn't be president."
justhere4comm
Banned
What "reality" do you think Trump is in. Anyone sane?
hairygrandpa
Legend
The well-fare state is the problem. Here in Bananaland nobody gives you anything, period. We have 2, TWO Syrian refugees, LOL! They came because they had already a family member living here.
The Germans did the same error, the social well-fare state groomed the lazy and attracted millions of Turks and whatnot. Not all of them are abusing it -but a lot of them do. Biggest problem is the long term payment to the jobless. They don't have work because they don't accept certain jobs out of over qualification (example: a teacher don't accept to work in an industrial plant)-or they don't want to work at all.
For my part, I'm an Objectivist, maybe it's an utopian political view -and would never work -but it's appealing to me:
[video=youtube;HKd0ToQD00o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKd0ToQD00o[/video]
Misfit28
Well-known member
Ayn Rand? Really?
hairygrandpa
Legend
Yes, fully! Whats your objection?
ax1
Legend
He used to be on that Apprentice show, now he runs Presidential Puppet Theater.
CJNator
Well-known member
I agree the welfare state is the issue but I also see the possibility of commies and other leftists promoting the welfare state and other leftists ideas coming in. I haven't read into Objectivism but I'm aware ideologically speaking you and I are practically on the same boat. I'm a anarcho capitalist but I think it's possible and non utopian but nothing that can be achieved without any organization.
CJNator
Well-known member
Invalid Link Removed
hairygrandpa
Legend
Awesome read (your link) bookmarked it for further reading, If you don't know much about Rand, please take the time and watch the vid, it's self explanatory.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
The woman herself is not somebody to be looked up to as she used objectivism like it was a cult, but that doesn't discredit her words. I'm curious to hear your issues with her.
CJNator
Well-known member
Will do!
hairygrandpa
Legend
I look up to her.The sharpness of her mind is admirable and I dare to say she was a genius. I think she was hated by the majority for being an atheist and anti theist -and most people think of Objectivism as a philosophy for selfish people (not entirely false -but not completely true either) as it rejects altruism.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
This. Is it not somewhat fallacious logic to discredit someone's points and/or logic because of their personal flaws? A given, hypothetical statement should be considered on its own merit, not by virtue of who is saying it. Of course, someone can say something and absolutely not follow it themselves. That makes them a hypocrite, but it doesn't inherently discredit the validity of the statement. Similarly, someone can spout nonsense the vast majority of the time, but that doesn't mean that everything they every say is inherently nonsense, or that they are incapable of saying something legitimate. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
She was a genius and I admire some of her books. I also know quite a bit about objectivism and agree with most of it. That said, she used her philosophy as a way to convince her husband that she could sleep with her boyfriend. That was the point where I feel she turned the movement into a cult.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
I agree with most of what she put forth. I just don't like her as a person. I feel the same about a lot of people. I can like a person, but hate the movies they make or I can like a song, but hate the person singing it.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
I don't think I can completely agree with any one viewpoint or philosophy. There are some that I find myself agreeing with the majority of, but then vehemently disagreeing with a few parts of. There are others that I reject the bulk of, but still agree with and/or find value in some parts of. I think that sticking entirely to one viewpoint/philosophy can be short-sighted and even potentially dangerous, and leads to closed-mindedness and stagnation. If you don't actually take the time to learn about other viewpoints, how can you claim disagree with them, or even truly agree with your own beliefs (not just out of ignorance)? A lot of my philosophy on philosophy has come from Bruce Lee, who said "Adapt what is useful, reject what is useless, and add what is specifically your own," and also to "empty your cup." That's why I try not to immediately discredit something because of who/where it is coming from. I'm not a liberal or conservative, so I tend to frown upon uber liberal or conservative sites/papers, but I admit that even they can have useful/accurate information at times, I just have to read it more critically and fact-check it, which is something I should be doing anyway. Too many people automatically trust anything that agrees with their personal viewpoints, but will be super skeptical of anything that disagrees with it, when both sides, especially that the extremes, are probably equally likely to be wrong. Anyway, that's my rant, haha.
hairygrandpa
Legend
I understand what you are saying.
I don't know much about her personal life -and I'm not a groupie, LOL. Objectivism is what defines my view best , that's it.
By the way, she cheating on her spouse... well, with her looks she had to grab that opportunity, right?
hairygrandpa
Legend
CJNator
Well-known member
Well not exactly, the problem is that everyone is trying to forced people to live by their own ideologies and their standards of living rather than creating a society that allows us to be productive individuals within society. You are right about the blind allegiances but also there are people who just prefer to live that way.
CJNator
Well-known member
What's the name of the video? I can't hear it on the app.
hairygrandpa
Legend
Mike Wallace interviews Ayn Rand (1959) (full interview)
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
I'm the same way and that goes for politics as well. I think it's a good idea to look at other view points, especially those you think you disagree with.