• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

France Riots-Liberal Policies Don't Work

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Labor unions in France have helped orchestrate riots because the government is trying to make it possible to fire people without a reason. In America, when a company can't afford or doesn't need an employee, they can simply lay them off. We call this normal. French liberals (and American ones) are calling this move "ultra-conservative."

When companies can no longer afford to employ someone, it is better to let them lay them off than to needlessly force the company into bankruptcy. Which costs more jobs?

Europe is in the death grip of obscenely expensive Socialist programs and anti-business laws like the one they are trying to reverse...to create more jobs. It currently takes an average of 5 years for French college grads to find a job.

Socialism doesn't work.



Let's try to keep it civil and on-topic this time.
 
I think we have worn this one out!
 
Norway has no riots-Liberal policies work.
 
Revived from the basement I see? So please, show the facts and your sources Aqua
 
jfuh said:
Revived from the basement I see? So please, show the facts and your sources Aqua
Not revived at all. The old thread is still there. Post #146 was responsible for Kezie sending it there and that's where it died. I invite everyone interested to go see who post #146 belongs to. It's quite telling. This is a brand new thread. Good luck, aquapub.
 
KCConservative said:
Not revived at all. The old thread is still there. Post #146 was responsible for Kezie sending it there and that's where it died. I invite everyone interested to go see who post #146 belongs to. It's quite telling. This is a brand new thread. Good luck, aquapub.
Is that right? #146 doomed it to the basement? Seemed to me that Kelzie was already pretty annoyed at the thread to begin with with a specific warning to Aqua.
Perhaps you would like to contribute something aside from ad homenin to this thread? Perhaps, a post regarding the topic of the thread?
 
jfuh said:
Is that right? #146 doomed it to the basement? Seemed to me that Kelzie was already pretty annoyed at the thread to begin with with a specific warning to Aqua.
Perhaps you would like to contribute something aside from ad homenin to this thread? Perhaps, a post regarding the topic of the thread?

You mean like the contribution you just made above in post #4? Tell us how mentioning the basement "contributes" to this thread. :lol:

Your whining has reached the level of laughable now, and you do it all the while commiting the same fouls you whine about. There were ample opportunities to answer for this funny habit of yours earlier in the week....complete with a few dozen examples, but someone was too embarrassed to own up to it. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
KCConservative said:
You mean like the contribution you just made above in post #4? Tell us how mentioning the basement "contributes" to this thread. :lol:
Is that the only statment I made? Perhaps if you tried reading instead of arrogance, you might learn some useful abilities to debate.

KCConservative said:
Your whining has reached the level of laughable now, and you do it all the while commiting the same fouls you whine about. There were ample opportunities to answer for this funny habit of yours earlier in the week....complete with a few dozen examples, but someone was too embarrassed to own up to it. :2wave:
Ah KC, pissed off for not being able to draw me into your your lame yelling contest?
With the exception of a single post that had relevance to the topic, you're right back down to baiting. I know of your insatiable desire of arguing for the sake of argument for the simple satisfaction of pi**ing them off.
Take some time to grow up before you come back to join the rest of us in actual on topic debate.
 
jfuh said:
Is that the only statment I made? Perhaps if you tried reading instead of arrogance, you might learn some useful abilities to debate.


Ah KC, pissed off for not being able to draw me into your your lame yelling contest?
With the exception of a single post that had relevance to the topic, you're right back down to baiting. I know of your insatiable desire of arguing for the sake of argument for the simple satisfaction of ******* them off. So I say again, grow up.

No it's not the "only" statement you made. But you made it, none-the-less. So stop with your phoney whining about how you abhor it....because you do it too.

Your refusing to acknowledge that thread earlier this week didn't annoy me at all. I expected it. No one, least of all me, expected you to face the facts. The good news is, however, many people got to see your flames assembled in one package. Now they see your hypocracy as you complain about others. You bait while complaining about baiting.

jfuh said:
Perhaps if you tried reading instead of arrogance, you might learn some useful abilities to debate.

I thought you hated this kind of baiting, jfuh. :rofl
 
Last edited:
KCConservative said:
No it's not the "only" statement you made. But you made it, none-the-less. So stop with your phoney whining about how you abhor it....because you do it too.
Now that's a lie. Here's the part that you edited out.
So please, show the facts and your sources Aqua
Aqua has said he has fact to back up his claim. Also this thread had indeed been shut into the basement. Thus there is nothing "baiting" nor "flaming" about what I've posted. The revision of this thread has shown no improvement over the original thread with regards to the first post. This is even amongst all the contrary evidence displayed in the former thread.

KCConservative said:
Your refusing to acknowledge that thread earlier this week didn't annoy me at all. I expected it. No one, least of all me, expected you to face the facts. The good news is, however, many people got to see your flames assembled in one package. Now they see your hypocracy as you complain about others. You bait while complaining about baiting.
I think all ppl saw was you're lame attacks. FYI, it is against forum rules to copy anything from the basement upstairs. You clearly violated that rule when you copied and pasted my statements that were from the basement.

KCConservative said:
I thought you hated this kind of baiting, jfuh. :rofl
This is baiting? No this is pointing out your more than obvious avoidance of intellectual debate.
If you want to post upstairs post something of the topic, if you're sole intention is to flame, go right back down to the basement.
Now I'll say this one last time, do you have something to add to the topic at hand?
 
Read it again, jfuh. I said it is NOT the only statement you made....but you made it none-the-less. You're so eager to call someone a liar, that you forgot to read my post. If you are going to whine about people who flame, then stop your flaming. It's that simple.

Nothing was copied from the basement and brought upstairs. You're making that up. Nice try.

This riff is over. You know you have been caught in your own saliva on this and that's good enough for me. From now on, I am ignoring your "lame flame game." You post more flames than anyone on the forum.

Yes, now back to the topic......
 
Boy aquapub, not content with being proved wrong once, you ask for it a second time. Still spouting inaccuracies (five years for college grads to get a job - yeah right! According to Fox news maybe??? Funny I came here as a foreigner (as did my partner) and we both got multiple job offers straight away!)

Rather senseless to repeat the other thread word for word, other than to reiterate that your refusal to answer direct questions demolished your own argument for you. You have evidently never experienced France and you display a total misunderstanding of what's happening here.

You may think socialism doesn't work - the disadvataged in France who saw the impoverished of New Orleans on their TV screens were probably grateful for their free health care and minimum revenue (the RMI) that's guaranteed to ALL, employed or unemployed. Ask yourself why in the world's richest ecomony, your co-citizens were living in such filth BEFORE Katrina, and couldn't even afford to have their own homes insured? Evidently, capitalism doesn't work.

The street protests here an expression of free speech, and that really is a strange concept to people like aquapub. People here don't want a reversal of sociaist policies precisely because for years they've given them job security, free health care, free education, excellent public transport and state pensions and unemployment benefit that you can actually live off. Of course aquabub values more money in your pocket (for those already better off of course) far more than these values which is why he's a conservative. It's called greed.
 
aquapub said:
Labor unions in France have helped orchestrate riots because the government is trying to make it possible to fire people without a reason. In America, when a company can't afford or doesn't need an employee, they can simply lay them off. We call this normal. French liberals (and American ones) are calling this move "ultra-conservative."

When companies can no longer afford to employ someone, it is better to let them lay them off than to needlessly force the company into bankruptcy. Which costs more jobs?

Europe is in the death grip of obscenely expensive Socialist programs and anti-business laws like the one they are trying to reverse...to create more jobs. It currently takes an average of 5 years for French college grads to find a job.

Socialism doesn't work.



Let's try to keep it civil and on-topic this time.

You're right. Socialism doesn't work and it will NEVER work. Stealing peoples' hard earned money and using it to fund some fat azz to sit home and pop out child after child is rediculous. This country did just fine without socialist programs before, so it can do better without them again. Notice how our economy is booming with the lower tax rate. Now, if we just get rid of welfare and a few other worthless socialist programs we would be just fine.
 
Last edited:
KCConservative said:
You mean like the contribution you just made above in post #4? Tell us how mentioning the basement "contributes" to this thread. :lol:
Well, that is where we last saw a tread with this title. That aside, why do you find a problem with asking aquapub for proof of his lies?

Is it that conservative claims are in trouble when facts are brought into it?
 
jfuh said:
I think all ppl saw was you're lame attacks.
We saw it. It is a great demonstration of how much conservatives are lame-*** cowardly liars.
 
steen said:
Well, that is where we last saw a tread with this title. That aside, why do you find a problem with asking aquapub for proof of his lies?

Is it that conservative claims are in trouble when facts are brought into it?

Facts? What facts? All I see is :spin: and some half-truths.
 
Donkey1499 said:
Facts? What facts? All I see is :spin: and some half-truths.
My point. There were NO facts in aquapup's post. And when the issue of facts are raised, he runs. I am glad that we agree.
 
steen said:
My point. There were NO facts in aquapup's post. And when the issue of facts are raised, he runs. I am glad that we agree.
Actually, I meant the "facts" from the left. Where are they?
And about aquapub, I don't rightly remember what he was talking about, so he doesn't concern me. But if he told a lie then that's his problem.
 
Donkey1499 said:
Actually, I meant the "facts" from the left. Where are they?
And about aquapub, I don't rightly remember what he was talking about, so he doesn't concern me. But if he told a lie then that's his problem.

Just exactly what is a "lie" these days? :confused:
 
Donkey1499 said:
And about aquapub, I don't rightly remember what he was talking about, so he doesn't concern me.
Really? It is the very subject of this tread that you are posting in. And you don't even know? That got to be the most lame cop-out I have heard all day.

But if he told a lie then that's his problem.
Ah, so that is why you came to his defense? Sheesh, pro-lifers apparently MUST always be dishonest. Lame.
 
Donkey1499 said:
Something that isn't true, just like it has always been.
No, that's a falsehood. A lie is to deliberately say something that isn't true.
 
steen said:
Really? It is the very subject of this tread that you are posting in. And you don't even know? That got to be the most lame cop-out I have heard all day.

Ah, so that is why you came to his defense? Sheesh, pro-lifers apparently MUST always be dishonest. Lame.

I didn't go to his defense. I went on offense against liberalism. You pinko! And I only read the first page of this thread before joining it, as I do with all threads. I ain't gonna read the entire thread!
 
Donkey1499 said:
Something that isn't true, just like it has always been.

It is quite obvious to me that truth is perception. I hear what you're saying and I agree. But we both can also agree that these days truth is subjective due to personal perception and intrepretation in many cases?
 
Back
Top Bottom