A leftist progressive's paradise

[MrWonka]

Be a productive person, or be a Thug.

This notion is so unbelievably ignorant it just disgusts me. There are millions of so called "productive" people in the world causing ten times more harm to society than most of the prison population. In fact most of the prison population is in prison because they were very productive. They sold products that millions of people want, but which were made illegal for absolutely no rational reason. In many ways they are the ultimate capitalists. Taking risks to serve customers.

The United States of America has more people in prison than any other country on earth. Not just in terms of quantity, but in terms of a percentage of a the population. How the **** can we sit here calling ourselves the land of the free when we put more of our population behind bars than any other country in the world. There's nothing wrong with the morals of those people. The only people I see with a ****ed up moral compass are the ignorant **** sticks like yourself who happily let perfectly good people rot in jail while you sit around praising the great "land of the free."

 

[D_NATURED]

It was written in plain English, what part of plain English do you not understand?

What you wrote was "Your leftist bias shrouds your every post with absurdities.". Is that plain English where you come from? What, are you part of a traveling, troop of Shakespearian wannabees and you don't know when to quit with the fluffy language? If my posts are SHROUDED by my leftist bias, how can you tell there are absurdities?

No, what you call "plain English" I call pseudo-intellectual babble. It's really meaningless. It's just a bunch of what a hillbilly would think are two-dollar words, shoved together randomly in the pretense of actual thought.

Jesus never promoted bilking the taxpayers to use the proceeds to bribe the vote of the poor.

Give unto Cesar...

“VOLUNTARY” socialism is the teachings of Jesus. “FORCED” socialism is the work of Satan!

Here again we have the thrill of watching a true craftsman carving a cross out of a turd. You speak of socialism as if it's a verb and not a noun. It's not an individual choice, it's a group decision. It's a political ideology, not an epithet. Are you arguing that Jesus was against groups of people doing good things for the poor, the elderly and the sick? If your individual jesusy socialism had worked, the orphanages and poor houses and hospitals teeming with sick people who can't pay would not have existed, necessitating true socialism.

Satan, if he requires socialist policy is a hell of a lot more moral than a Jesus who demands you watch people suffer on principle.

Income gaps are only determined by a willingness to take risk and the ambition level of the particular human being. All humans are not created equal relative to talents, ambition, beauty or intellect. All humans are only created equal relative to their individual rights under constitutional rule of law.

Jesus, do you ever say anything of substance? Why even mention the constitution if you're going to argue that some people deserve to starve. Yes, I can see how you might mistake that for Jesus's position on individual socialism. I guess all of the orphanages and poor houses and cemetery plots are really just judgements upon creation, god's little mistakes. How cruel of your god to bless some of us with the ability to care so little and walk that moral wire with such confidence. That explains a lot about the right.

Poverty is mostly the byproduct of government. Socialist vote bribery, the inner city public housing slave quarters and crony capitalism all the byproducts of politicians.

So, without government there would be no poverty? Do you actually say these things to people's faces or do you reserve such wisdom for the online victims of your misinformation? I wonder if you're even aware of the irony of joining a political party that doesn't believe in political parties? Words escape me.

Oh! Then the blacks, Latin Americans, College kids and Blue Hairs are all wealthy or middle class supporters of the leftist cause in every election then, right?

Again, wow! You're one of those "more is less" sort of guys, I see. Obviously, when the poor old, brown people show up to the polls, left leaning people get elected. As a percentage, they still struggle to match what middle class white America does politically in most elections, though. When the majority don't show up, the minority vote in teabaggers and such.

Talking out of one’s ass is the profound talent of the left.

The "profound" talent of the left? LOL. I think what you meant is that the profound talent of the left is shrouded in esoteric observations. The right, conversely, is an open book...where morons have scribbled their hatreds in crayon, for everyone to see.

 

[TheHammer]

QUOTE=D_NATURED;1065937328] If my posts are SHROUDED by my leftist bias, how can you tell there are absurdities?[/quote]

Because all leftist ideology is ”ABSURD.”

No, what you call "plain English" I call pseudo-intellectual babble. It's really meaningless. It's just a bunch of what a hillbilly would think are two-dollar words, shoved together randomly in the pretense of actual thought.

That’s the definition of leftism, hillbillies are much smarter than that.

Give unto Cesar...

Your biblical skills are wanting! It’s “render unto Cesar that which is Cesar’s, and unto God that which is God’s.”

Correlating Christ’s verse therewith today, he said render unto the government that which is government’s, and unto God that which is God’s.

The 10th amendment makes it perfectly clear that the social and corporate welfare state has no authority at a federal level.

Also, Christ was simply telling his followers to obey the law in the instance of “taxation,” he never justified human law as being righteous, i.e. the evil of bilking taxpayer’s and using the proceeds thereof to bribe the vote of the lesser productive among us. Christ preached voluntary charity as the work of God. The Involuntary/forced social/corporate welfare state is the work of Satan designed to keep the poor, poor and divide and conquer the population.

Here again we have the thrill of watching a true craftsman carving a cross out of a turd. You speak of socialism as if it's a verb and not a noun. It's not an individual choice, it's a group decision.

Exactly! You’re problem therewith is the fact that America was designed as a Constitutional representative Republic guaranteeing the rights of the individual and minorities and was never intended to be a “democracy” mob rule to impose the will of a biased gang of mental midgets and morons hell bent on deposing individualism and lynching minorities.

Are you arguing that Jesus was against groups of people doing good things for the poor, the elderly and the sick? If your individual jesusy socialism had worked, the orphanages and poor houses and hospitals teeming with sick people who can't pay would not have existed, necessitating true socialism.

As I said, Jesus preached VOLUNTARY social charity. He never preached the human State as God’s anointed tax collector and distributor of the bribery of a corporate and social welfare state.

Where on earth can we find the “true” socialist State governed by a totally agreeable population sharing freely and making the necessity of government irrelevant?

Satan, if he requires socialist policy is a hell of a lot more moral than a Jesus who demands you watch people suffer on principle.

You as usual have is ass backwards again! Capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings following the gospel of the Christ supporting voluntary social charity.

Socialism is the equal sharing of the misery and the work of the Satan!

Jesus, do you ever say anything of substance? Why even mention the constitution if you're going to argue that some people deserve to starve. Yes, I can see how you might mistake that for Jesus's position on individual socialism. I guess all of the orphanages and poor houses and cemetery plots are really just judgements upon creation, god's little mistakes. How cruel of your god to bless some of us with the ability to care so little and walk that moral wire with such confidence. That explains a lot about the right.

Don’t worry, I’ll never accuse you of understanding anything about VOLUNTARY social charity and admitting that the social and corporate welfare state is the work of leftist swindlers and Satin worshipers.

So, without government there would be no poverty?

You’ll post my quote showing where I said that, right?

 

[Redness]

Then you prefer NO written guarantee between the people and government? You’re an anarchist, right? So how would your NO rule of law society work?

Anarchists oppose rulers (archos). My thought on laws (nomos) is autonomist: I oppose the delegation of lawmaking to extra-social authorities like "the people" (18th century former English colonial American landlords or their rulers) or "government" (said rulers' appointees to the Constitutional Convention).

Capital dictates economy. Your problem with wealthy States attracting ambitious self reliant folks is what?

You've got it backwards. Wealth is now the relatively mobile factor, and States attract it by outbidding each other what few assets they have left, including their peoples insofar as migration is costly. There are a couple of problems with it. First, it redistributes surplus from relatively democratic States to absolutely plutocratic capitals. Second, it's inefficient due to positional externalities.

For example, let's say some capital investment under current environmental regulation is worth $3 to the capital and $3 to the state ($6 total), and under some lower level of regulation would be worth $4 to the capital and $1 to the state ($5 total). The optimal strategy is to deregulate, despite the reduction in total surplus, because deregulating captures the investment (and thus the state surplus) from competing states.

 

[TheHammer]

Anarchists oppose rulers (archos). My thought on laws (nomos) is autonomist: I oppose the delegation of lawmaking to extra-social authorities like "the people" (18th century former English colonial American landlords or their rulers) or "government" (said rulers' appointees to the Constitutional Convention).

Of course you do because you believe there’s such a thing as “true” socialism. A pie-in-the-sky pipe dream whereby a fantasy population sees the light of total cooperation and agreement of absolute sharing of the wealth and every man and woman contributes to the heaven-on-earth community and no government of any kind is necessary.

You’ll of course tell the class where on earth that insane fantasy has ever been a reality, right?

You've got it backwards. Wealth is now the relatively mobile factor, and States attract it by outbidding each other what few assets they have left, including their peoples insofar as migration is costly. There are a couple of problems with it. First, it redistributes surplus from relatively democratic States to absolutely plutocratic capitals. Second, it's inefficient due to positional externalities.

For example, let's say some capital investment under current environmental regulation is worth $3 to the capital and $3 to the state ($6 total), and under some lower level of regulation would be worth $4 to the capital and $1 to the state ($5 total). The optimal strategy is to deregulate, despite the reduction in total surplus, because deregulating captures the investment (and thus the state surplus) from competing states.

If BS was music, You’d be a brass band!

 

[Redness]

Of course you do because you believe there’s such a thing as “true” socialism. A pie-in-the-sky pipe dream whereby a fantasy population sees the light of total cooperation and agreement of absolute sharing of the wealth and every man and woman contributes to the heaven-on-earth community and no government of any kind is necessary.

Whether government of any kind is necessary is beside the point. Clearly, entrenched constitutions are unnecessary, and I've already given examples of free countries that lack them.

 

[TheHammer]

Whether government of any kind is necessary is beside the point. Clearly, entrenched constitutions are unnecessary, and I've already given examples of free countries that lack them.

"Free" countries" is a subjective assertion. Free to do what? "Entrenchment" of America's Constitution is also a subjective accusation considering how both the left and right have violated and perverted it and even ignored it.

Of course you'll always have your dream world fantasy where written guarantees are just an unnecessary obnoxious phobia of the unrighteous non-trusting profit seekers of yesteryear.

 

[der]

Thats really what leftism boils down to. A bunch of people with slave morality who want to remove meritocracy and freedoms to bring people down to their level. This has got to be partly genetic, as a sort of survival strategy for the betas and the omegas of the pack to be able to secure themselves a higher place in society. Thats why you see mostly weak and feminine males supporting liberal candidates.

 

[Redness]

"Free" countries" is a subjective assertion. Free to do what?

Freedom of speech and freedom to bear arms were your requirements, and I easily found you autonomous countries in which such freedoms are at least as real as in the US.

"Entrenchment" of America's Constitution is also a subjective accusation considering how both the left and right have violated and perverted it and even ignored it.

Then your guarantee isn't worth the paper it's printed on, thus making the question of its necessity irrelevant.

Of course you'll always have your dream world fantasy where written guarantees are just an unnecessary obnoxious phobia of the unrighteous non-trusting profit seekers of yesteryear.

On the contrary, the Founders themselves were autonomous. It is their descendants who childishly copy them.

 

[D_NATURED]

QUOTE=D_NATURED]

Because all leftist ideology is ”ABSURD.”



That’s the definition of leftism, hillbillies are much smarter than that.





Your biblical skills are wanting! It’s “render unto Cesar that which is Cesar’s, and unto God that which is God’s.”

Correlating Christ’s verse therewith today, he said render unto the government that which is government’s, and unto God that which is God’s.

The 10th amendment makes it perfectly clear that the social and corporate welfare state has no authority at a federal level.

Also, Christ was simply telling his followers to obey the law in the instance of “taxation,” he never justified human law as being righteous, i.e. the evil of bilking taxpayer’s and using the proceeds thereof to bribe the vote of the lesser productive among us. Christ preached voluntary charity as the work of God. The Involuntary/forced social/corporate welfare state is the work of Satan designed to keep the poor, poor and divide and conquer the population.





Exactly! You’re problem therewith is the fact that America was designed as a Constitutional representative Republic guaranteeing the rights of the individual and minorities and was never intended to be a “democracy” mob rule to impose the will of a biased gang of mental midgets and morons hell bent on deposing individualism and lynching minorities.



As I said, Jesus preached VOLUNTARY social charity. He never preached the human State as God’s anointed tax collector and distributor of the bribery of a corporate and social welfare state.

Where on earth can we find the “true” socialist State governed by a totally agreeable population sharing freely and making the necessity of government irrelevant?









You as usual have is ass backwards again! Capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings following the gospel of the Christ supporting voluntary social charity.

Socialism is the equal sharing of the misery and the work of the Satan!





Don’t worry, I’ll never accuse you of understanding anything about VOLUNTARY social charity and admitting that the social and corporate welfare state is the work of leftist swindlers and Satin worshipers.





You’ll post my quote showing where I said that, right?

Some times a reply is disorganized, nit-picky and defensive enough to be the equivalent of surrender. There isn't much in your post worth responding to. I will clarify, however, that focusing on whether Jesus used the word "give" or "render" is the sort of hilariously inane response I've come to expect from you. As for worshiping (and this is the brilliant part because you don't even know how to spell the name of the evil being you believe exists) "satin", I assure you that silky fabrics are not at all inspirational to me.

Well, that's about all your post deserves. Cheers!

 

[TheHammer]

Freedom of speech and freedom to bear arms were your requirements, and I easily found you autonomous countries in which such freedoms are at least as real as in the US.

"Freedom" is subjective as it always depends on what the powers that be determine should be free. The problem with your "true" socialism pipe dream is there's always a "power that be." There is no human genome inherent in all human kind opposed to "TAKING CHARGE." True socialism denies greed, ignores jealousy, poo-poos laziness, believes that exceptional talents and ambition is unworthy of exceptional reward and incentive is only related to a fantasy land collective handshake and a moon-eyed insane majority can and will bring along the minorities that know they're insane simply by lawless persuasion. The idea that you're only worth and entitled to what you earn and the truly disabled are best cared for by the family and or private charity, is somehow an evil and neanderthal cruel and racist philosophy.

Then your guarantee isn't worth the paper it's printed on, thus making the question of its necessity irrelevant.

Agreements are only as good as the honesty and loyalties of those who make them and as enforceable as the willingness to enforce them and honestly of those charged with the duty to enforce them. The fact that America's Constitution is being rendered to little more than toilet paper by the criminal minds of humankind is just more proof of the absurd fantasy of "true" socialism that relies on the cooperation, honesty and loyalty of the masses and those who oversee the "truth" of the socialist scam, who by ideological determination of the insanity of the socialist agenda is "overseers" that don't need to exist. Socialism is a contradiction wrapped in an absurdity and the invention of the insane.

On the contrary, the Founders themselves were autonomous. It is their descendants who childishly copy them.

Autonomy within the confines of a constitutional agreement/contract, as ratified by the State's representatives of the people.

There's no such thing as "NO" government, there's always those who will "TAKE CHARGE."

 

[TheHammer]

Some times a reply is disorganized, nit-picky and defensive enough to be the equivalent of surrender.

I agree! Your post here is a wonderful example of same.:lol:

There isn't much in your post worth responding to.

Interpretation: I, D NATURED having NOT the intellect to make a rational argument with your post, I shall surrender to your superior intellect and brilliant post!:2wave:

I will clarify, however, that focusing on whether Jesus used the word "give" or "render" is the sort of hilariously inane response I've come to expect from you.

That's because you don't understand that by the context it was used "render" denotes "surrender," while "give" denotes a willing/charitable donation.:roll:

As for worshiping (and this is the brilliant part because you don't even know how to spell the name of the evil being you believe exists) "satin", I assure you that silky fabrics are not at all inspirational to me.

Well, that's about all your post deserves. Cheers!

So because you have no rational arguments, you're a "spelling Nazi." Humorous!:2rofll: