It would not surprise me if they did ignore it, but this happened 3 days ago - so it probably wouldn't show on the front page as of this moment.
Surprising difference from Reddit then. Were you actually IP banned then?
And tomorrow you'll link this post and say that it shows he saw this and that he still 'refuses to budge'?
Here's an idea: as much as you think you've been treated unfairly, try being civil and acting normal. You'd have a better chance like that.
Right. Like I said, I'm not persuaded that you are, but simply denying it is not the same as 'correcting' the claim. It's not as if a denial is a hard refutaton.
Firstly, thanks. I think. ;)
Can't be a surprise to you, given my invitation to <censored>.
<list of various taxes>. Taxation in general is, at best, a necessary evil. But at the very most choose one type. We're currently being at the very least quadruple dipped.
Of course, that would mean that the one type would have to be extraordinarily high, and that the burden would fall far more on certain groups, and also discourage a given economic activity far more than others.
Now I know you will say: we should also spend less, so less need for taxes. Even assuming that people are going to give up their Social Security and Medicare and the war machine, and the variety of other very popular programs, it is not clear to me why hitting one 'type' would be superior than having light taxes everywhere. It might be annoying and exasperating, like you are not able to do anything without incurring a loss, but for the reasons specified in paragraph 1, this is probably better. (I can't believe I'm saying that about the current system...)
How is this not theft?
Well, to be technical, it would be robbery - as it's theft with the threat of violence. But I also think that it's a somewhat banal, as it's not even accompanied by a point. "Taxation is necessary, but since it's theft, it should be minimized as much as possible." That's an argument. Just "it's theft"? OK, and then? None of us don't like taxes, and I like it even less considering the terrible purposes on which it is spent, but that's hardly the same as there should be none.
No taxation without representation, and I don't believe we currently have representation.
This part is absolutely true.
If we did, then we could talk. I still think it should be voluntary, but we'd at least be doing better.
Voluntary? And how would you solve the 'free rider' problem?
Here's a question. If meritocracy is good on the individual level, why isn't it good on the governmental level? Should people have to earn their way? If so, is the government exempt? If so, why?
It's great, but not really practical. "Pay taxes if you want" simply isn't going to work. If you can not pay taxes and still enjoy all the benefits of what taxes pay for, then no one will pay taxes. If Microsoft could have the work of all great software engineers without paying them, it would do that! But they can exclude Microsoft from using their work, while public works by their very nature cannot.
Not sure what it's like where you are, but to use the 'muh roads' argument...my roads are fucking shit.
Well, they're great. Problem is, everything else here is worse than sh*t. So whenever I complain about taxes to other people here, they use the roads argument. They never say: it's great that we pay taxes so we can bomb third world countries every day of they year. Or let in 'refugees'. Or any of the other evil things that are done with my taxes.
I'm not saying libertarians (small "l" for the record) are right about everything; they're not. But they're right to hate and distrust the government, in its current form. It's a fucking joke, and I'll never apologize for that.
You shouldn't. But that's the easiest possible argument to make. I'm not sure anyone is happy about the performance of government.
Not to get all Ayn Randy, but there is some truth to the idea that something given/taken has no value. If you give these fuckers permission to just take your money, they're under no obligation or expectation to use it wisely. And they generally won't use it wisely.
There's great truth to that. It's very easy to spend other people's money. Waste and abuse is legendary where there is no accountability. And while I agree that we are in such a mess that anything would seem better, do we have a superior alternative?
I'm being extorted by the City, State, and Federal level
Well, I'm extorted by just the 'federal' level (at least equivalent). It's not exactly better. Then they distribute it to these various executing agencies. Meaning, there is even less accountability because the money is coming from above.
Let's assume I am rational. Perhaps I have a point in my distrust for government and the current system, right?
You'd be completely insane if you did not trust the current system.
Here's a question: Is there any - any - evidence that governments do a better job that groups of people or corporations?
Insofar as tasks of governments can be done by corporations, they are. E.g. mail delivery, which is completely privatized in Europe. But I don't see police, roads, etc. and other public goods done by people and corps. Yes, I can imagine some scheme where private security firms act as some sort of police, but it's a bit fanciful, don't you think?
Gubmint fucking sucks when it comes to roads. I go out there and fill the potholes, dig the ditches, on my street. Because the government doesn't. I don't get paid. I do it for free, as the saying goes.
I'm pretty sure I'd get arrested if I filled potholes. Fortunately there aren't that many.
Hey didn't we already skip these middle-posts
I understand that you really, really don't want to talk about why you use Wikipedia and present is as a reliable source, but no deal. You must think everyone else is stupid.
It's a list of claims and sources.
So just to be clear, you copy-pasted what you say is a 'claim', that you in no way verified? That is your defense?
I think your non-reply on whether the PDF would be significant to you answers both of our questions about natural motive, if you think about it. I lack the motive to talk about it much more than I already have.
Are you alright? This sounds like you just overdosed on weed.
The full quote is "the customer is always right in matters of taste".
What? No, it's not. Are you just trolling? Pretty good troll, gotta admit.
The reality is that the vast, vast majority aren't just okay with but actively enjoy crowd cam moments.
And these were not. And they have every right to complain about it, and I have every right to back them up. What is so difficult about this? I don't understand.
I'm not persuaded that you are that other fellow, but how exactly did you 'correct' it? Do you mean denying it? Of course, every alt denies being an alt, like every non-alt does.
Also, if you want to get something done, acting like a lunatic doesn't exactly help your case. Calm down, and present such evidence as you have, instead of just posting insults and trying to incite a mob. People dismiss anything that is brought by yelling and acting like a lunatic.
I'm pretty sure there's no such thing as an IP ban.
And why are you reposting this?
What would be the precise definition of 'fedposting'?
That's the point of pushing everyone's face into this sort of thing. Rainbow flags being everywhere is done for the same reason as swastikas were put everywhere in the Third Reich.
Had me worried for a moment based on the title, that these degenerates actually got you depressed. Seeing degeneracy all around should make normal, decent people actually more thankful that they're not like that.
When are you going to provide something that isn't infantilisation of adults? You haven't got a valid argument other than "I don't like it".
When I pay for a ticket to watch a crappy game, "I don't like it" is a pretty great argument. If you recall what I told you, the customer is always right.
Now you're just being a contrarian and actually admitting to it even with that "just to see" crap. That's not healthy, it's just fucking weird.
It's not what I'm doing in this case, but I do enjoy it.
Let's skip a few posts. If you had a PDF of the book in question and of the code for libel in the USA, would that be meaningful to you or affect your natural biases or your opinion on any of the subject matter in any way?
I'm not asking about that. I'm asking why you decided to cite Wikipedia as though it is in any way a reliable source. And why are you defending it?
I'll admit that I have done so as well, but it has always been paired with an expression of shame for my despicable behavior. I'd never dream of doing it and then doubling down.
just as someone who happened to be on the other side of the pond would have a perfectly natural motive to deny, discredit, or simply ignore the very same information.
What is that motive exactly?
I was fairly confident in the French election, but unfortunately, the establishment incited a giant truckload of normies - turnout is higher now than it has been for a long time for legislative elections. However, it seems that the damage is somewhat limited.
Never be surprised about the willingness of the French state to try to control anything. It's not called the dictatorship of forms for nothing.
I think polls very close to an election are banned, but now Google refuses to show me any information regarding it.
That would actually be great. It would be an even greater disaster than Ampel, and discredit the whole political class rather than just the phony center and the phony left - France's CDU (LR) would have to participate in it.
This is just a very incomplete projection, because there's an upcoming second round.
Well, according to them, Genghis Khan is a hero for killing so many people that Climate Change(tm) was slightly reduced for a while.
Caesar was famous for his clementia. He proposed life imprisonment rather than death for the Catilinian conspirators, which was not done at the time. He pardoned even men who fought against him, who ended up murdering him.
So ironically, he probably would get milkshaked twice.
He's definitely a nutcase. He has somewhat of a history.
This nutcase supported doxxing Libs of Tiktok and stalking Kavanaugh in public.
��@DavidSacks @libsoftiktok Anyone running an at-scale anonymous blog or social account is accountable to the public
It is in the public’s interest to understand who is behind these accounts (& many have been Russian!)
Completely fair game for coverage, on the right, left, or any where in between� link - archive.org - archive.today
“Kavanaugh lost the right to eat a ribeye in public
Oh, the humanity!” link - archive.org - archive.today
“@mmeador Doxing is very dangerous and illegal.
Peaceful public protest is a key aspect of any functional democracy.” link - archive.org - archive.today
Are you challenging the veracity of the source?
I'm challenging you. If you have an actually reliable source, why did you use Wikipedia?
maybe the converted jewish author of the book deliberately misquoted
Did you copy-paste from 'the book', whatever book that is, or did you copy-paste Wikipedia?
deliberately misquoted the gentle, Christian-loving pornographer Mr. Goldstein
You know many Christian-loving pornographers? I believe Lexington Steele if I got his name right is one.
I'm guessing he was bullied by this horrible woman before she died.
Imagine dying while being subjected to your daughter's TDS screeds.
"Give me something for the cringe and let me die."
A camera in a public space is equivalent to raping a person
It isn't, what do you think 'extend that logic' means?
If you think a victim of any given event is to blame for placing himself in that situation, why should that not apply to rape as well?
Tell me, are you weeping for all the men that have been filmed over the many, many years? Or is that different?
I don't think people should be filmed, period, not individually, and preferably not even as a crowd. They're going out there to enjoy a game, not to be filmed by money-grubbing corps.
You're being a fucking loser here
Only here?
This just in: The only reason to film a person for 20 seconds is for sexual reasons.
........I already said a couple of times that for me, this isn't about the 'sexism/sexualization' blathering.
The FBI?