OCCUPY WALLSTREET!

[Hasbinbad]

Maybe our resident combat medic could chime in on that subject?

[Diggles]

I'm not a combat medic, but I play one on Global Agenda

[Aadill]

I am an Occupant and am therefore a an expert on pooping and pooping related accessories.

[Aadill]

minus that damn "a" in the middle of that thar set of words.

[Hasbinbad]

I was just making a general statement of contempt in the general direction of any "libertarians" on this forum.

A group of less forward-thinking, less realistic, and less empathetic people I have never encountered.

If they hate the benefits to society that taxes provide every person so much, then they should shit outside and not use roads. They should tell the police officer trying to stop a mugger from mugging them "thank you, no. please go back to arresting others for marijuana, and leave this mugger to mug me as he wishes." They should tell the fireman spraying water on his burning house to go away.

It's funny that no matter how they profess hate and distrust in any amount of government involvement, they still use the things set up to benefit everyone by a redistribution of wealth.

[Aadill]

shut the fuck up and acknowledge my poop joke, Hasbinbad.

[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by Aadill [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

shut the fuck up and acknowledge my poop joke, Hasbinbad.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Hasbinbad]

..and before you give me any of that "state's rights" bullshit, please consider how the very few states were originally organized versus how the many states are now, both demographically and when considering the purpose of each organization.

We are not 13 states with very different goals, confederated in terms of a mutual defense and interest treaty as we were when these things were of paramount importance. In 2011, we are one nation. States rights, along with: the electoral college; the idea of having 2 senators per state instead of a more truly representative senate; the ability to gerrymander districts to effect changes in the vote to set up congress; and many other issues of unfairness which have allowed lobbyists and rules-lawyers to rules-lawyer us into this position are artifacts of a society which is no longer relevant to our current problems, and our current way of life.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

..and before you give me any of that "state's rights" bullshit, please consider how the very few states were originally organized versus how the many states are now, both demographically and when considering the purpose of each organization.

We are not 13 states with very different goals, confederated in terms of a mutual defense and interest treaty as we were when these things were of paramount importance. In 2011, we are one nation.

That's BS and you know it. People in California/Washington clearly have a different lifestyle from those in Tennessee/Kentucky. Why should they be ruled by laws mandated 2500 miles away by people with no knowledge of their day to day lives or no interest in learning about them?

The goal of politicians is to get richer by fleecing Americans, we can agree to that, yes? So don't even start on how they elect representatives and send them to DC. Without any knowledge of the views of the pollsters in KY/TN, this is purely hypothetical, but why should they get a say in whether or not gay marriage or recreational marijuana is legal in CA/WA?

They shouldn't. Neither should anybody in NY, TX, OH, WI, or FL.

We are more fractal now than we've ever been. There are some intrastate economies that are more powerful than ever (Texas), and some that are crumbling internally (California), so why should we trust someone from Massachusetts to try to fix either one?

[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's BS and you know it. People in California/Washington clearly have a different lifestyle from those in Tennessee/Kentucky. Why should they be ruled by laws mandated 2500 miles away by people with no knowledge of their day to day lives or no interest in learning about them?

The goal of politicians is to get richer by fleecing Americans, we can agree to that, yes? So don't even start on how they elect representatives and send them to DC. Without any knowledge of the views of the pollsters in KY/TN, this is purely hypothetical, but why should they get a say in whether or not gay marriage or recreational marijuana is legal in CA/WA?

They shouldn't. Neither should anybody in NY, TX, OH, WI, or FL.

We are more fractal now than we've ever been. There are some intrastate economies that are more powerful than ever (Texas), and some that are crumbling internally (California), so why should we trust someone from Massachusetts to try to fix either one?

I mean, I hear you dude, I understand the concept of the free market and how it is supposed to work.

I don't agree that it's OK that people from one state (which may not have the resources or specific leadership of a more prosperous state) to suffer huge losses while another (which probably does have resources and or better specific leadership) benefits.

Get those people who are doing well to do well for everyone. To do otherwise is immoral.