A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 15:36
VIEWED: 755368
PAGE 109 of 725
Quote:Well, yes! That's how nationalized oil works! The government licenses who gets to drill where. IN THE REAL WORLD, THAT'S EXACTLY HOW IT WORKS!
You seem to have understood zero of what I posted - I may not get use to that.Quote:
You'd want the US gov to run our oil and gas? You expect anyone to believe that? - GSTRING
Did I say that? No, I didn't. How about this: THE GOVERNMENT becomes the ultimate "rentier" for natural resources, and companies pay THE GOVERNMENT for the right to "develop" these natural resources. That would allow the government to stop collecting income taxes, for example. If you don't think that's a realistic idea, that's how things work in MOST oil- and gas-producing nations, including Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iran, and the North Sea nations Norway, Britain, Denmark, Germany, Nederlands.Quote:
Do you think all rental land owners are parasites?- GSTRING
Yes. Next? SIGNY
More examples of your "let's just wing it" thinking, completely devoid of any real logic or real world experience. You say you didn't say you want the Gov to run our oil business, just own and rent the land. Then you say you think all land renters are parasites. Owning the land and renting it would in effect put them in charge of our oil since they would be the arbiters of who gets to drill where, how and other such rules.- GSTRING
Quote:Why? Just because I pointed out something that you, with you lack of real world experience, didn't know?
I continue to think you are just eating up our time here with no real intent other than to practice your typing.= GSTRING
Quote:By working and saving.
Where would people live if they couldn't rent or lease? - GSTRING
In their own homes, which they could afford if they weren't being parasitized from morning to night? - SIGNY
How would they earn enough capital to afford these housing resources?- GSTRING
Quote:Well, it seems like whenever I bring up tariffs, you and SECOND whinge about how "expensive" things will get, without recognizing that the people who produce goods and service will be paid commensurately more.
Clearly, in your vigorous defense of "consumers" (instead of "producers") you too consider yourself to be a parasite. No wonder you defend parasitism so vigorously! - SIGNY
Another complete miss - just the opposite. I never defended consumers. I pointed out that you and Kiki never (that I recall) hold them accountable for their actions. I have no idea what you mean by "parasite" - it seems to keep shifting and might even be used just as a place holder for "insult." - GSTRING
Quote:
PARASITE: In evolutionary biology, parasitism is a relationship between species, where one organism, the parasite, lives on or in another organism, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.[1] The entomologist E. O. Wilson has characterised parasites as "predators that eat prey in units of less than one".
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"just try to put 1.3 million soldiers patrolling up and down the streets of the country"
I wasn't thinking of any military-style work. Just work on public lands like restoration and conservation, or for public projects like infrastructure, or in public hospitals in underserved areas.
I'd rather see unemployed citizens get those jobs. The Dems are proposing Gov jobs, but it will probably be shot down and maybe even for good reasons.
Well if we got the decrease in military like almost all of us want in here, there are going to be a lot more unemployed people.
I'd say this should also go to the underemployed as well as the unemployed.
I'd hate to think that I would get passed up for a great job because I finally got a mediocre one that pays 1/5th of what I used to make.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Since we're already spending the money for the military, it makes sense to simply give them different assignments.
As for this being a "good job", "the initial monthly pay for the lowest rank, E-1, is $1,531.50 per month" or somewhat less than $6.50 an hour. And then, you live on base, go to bed when they tell you to, get up when they tell you to, run when they tell you to, eat what they give you, and so on. On top of that, they have some very specific rules covering things you and I might think of as our personal life, like no adultery. Violating that, and other rules they have, will get you kicked out.
There's one individual advantage to my plan above and beyond military service and above a private job, which is the training to get good skills. A potential social advantage is that females may be more attracted to a non-combat army, and would acquire weapons expertise, putting them in a less disadvantaged position to men re guns in civilian life.
SECOND is a troll because it constantly misrepresents what people post, fails to address their actual positions, and resorts to personal attacks when its brain isn't working (which is most of the time).
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Since we're already spending the money for the military, it makes sense to simply give them different assignments.
As for this being a "good job", "the initial monthly pay for the lowest rank, E-1, is $1,531.50 per month" or somewhat less than $6.50 an hour. And then, you live on base, go to bed when they tell you to, get up when they tell you to, run when they tell you to, eat what they give you, and so on. On top of that, they have some very specific rules covering things you and I might think of as our personal life, like no adultery. Violating that, and other rules they have, will get you kicked out.
There's one individual advantage to my plan above and beyond military service and above a private job, which is the training to get good skills. A potential social advantage is that females may be more attracted to a non-combat army, and would acquire weapons expertise, putting them in a less disadvantaged position to men re guns in civilian life.
One thing women aren't attracted to are men that make $6.50 an hour. That's a fact.
Putting military into infrastructure work and paying them the same wage that KMart pays their employees won't work for a lot of reasons.
First of all, the training is worthless if those skills are learning things that could only get you a job making $6.50 an hour. Now instead of shipping our jobs overseas, we'd be taking one of the biggest opportunities for creating work at home that cannot in any way be outsourced and we'd be massively undercutting what the pay for that work should be with our own taxpayer dollars.
At that rate of pay, nobody would do it. It's hard work. Sometimes even grueling work. I can't think of a single person who would do it for $6.50 an hour when they could go to Walmart and push carts for almost twice as much money.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Fake News, that's a Fake Fact.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:One thing women aren't attracted to are men that make $6.50 an hour. That's a fact.
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Since we're already spending the money for the military, it makes sense to simply give them different assignments.
As for this being a "good job", "the initial monthly pay for the lowest rank, E-1, is $1,531.50 per month" or somewhat less than $6.50 an hour. And then, you live on base, go to bed when they tell you to, get up when they tell you to, run when they tell you to, eat what they give you, and so on. On top of that, they have some very specific rules covering things you and I might think of as our personal life, like no adultery. Violating that, and other rules they have, will get you kicked out.
There's one individual advantage to my plan above and beyond military service and above a private job, which is the training to get good skills. A potential social advantage is that females may be more attracted to a non-combat army, and would acquire weapons expertise, putting them in a less disadvantaged position to men re guns in civilian life.
Your delusions, ignorance, and Libtard Maths are showing.
Pay grade for E-1 in 2018 is reportedly 1,638 per month. Which would be about $9.45/hr at 40 hours/week. E-2 is $1,836/mo, or about $10.59/hr.
E-1 lasts 6 months max, unless the recruit starts at E-2, and that lasts 9 months max.
After 3 months of Boot Camp, the accumulated pay is issued in one check. So those not promoted have 3 months remaining at E-1, usually in further training.
Twice per month, The Eagle Poops and they get paid, with nothing to spend it on. Bills? None. Food? Already fully Fed, as much as you can eat. Lodging? Already supplied. Work clothes? Already in the closet. Fitness clubs? Gyms on every base. Discount pricing at every PX and base theater. Maybe your stoner bimbos cannot comprehend, but many 18 year old women understand that having $400 per week (less taxes) to spend on nothing but women can color a guy attractive. A lot of Marines are Babe Magnets, lots of eye candy seen around. Marine graduation from Boot Camp generates a huge influx of the hottest babes you'll see at any given time. Some women also think a guy who has a few future years of steady employment and pay is further enticing.
Some thought is required to find stuff to throw your cash at. Buying food is merely a way to avoid standing in line at the Chow Hall. When you can't find enough targets, you end up with something like 10 paychecks to sift through whenever you want to cash one, which actually presents problems.
I'm sure the Spacey bimbos you hang with cannot stand healthy, trained, steadily Employed, organized men with pockets full of untethered cash, but those do not account for all women.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Why are you in such a hurry to start another war?
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:Well if we got the decrease in military like almost all of us want in here, there are going to be a lot more unemployed people.
Originally posted by captaincrunch:Quote:I'd rather see unemployed citizens get those jobs. The Dems are proposing Gov jobs, but it will probably be shot down and maybe even for good reasons.
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"just try to put 1.3 million soldiers patrolling up and down the streets of the country"
I wasn't thinking of any military-style work. Just work on public lands like restoration and conservation, or for public projects like infrastructure, or in public hospitals in underserved areas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Fake News, that's a Fake Fact.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:One thing women aren't attracted to are men that make $6.50 an hour. That's a fact.
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Since we're already spending the money for the military, it makes sense to simply give them different assignments.
As for this being a "good job", "the initial monthly pay for the lowest rank, E-1, is $1,531.50 per month" or somewhat less than $6.50 an hour. And then, you live on base, go to bed when they tell you to, get up when they tell you to, run when they tell you to, eat what they give you, and so on. On top of that, they have some very specific rules covering things you and I might think of as our personal life, like no adultery. Violating that, and other rules they have, will get you kicked out.
There's one individual advantage to my plan above and beyond military service and above a private job, which is the training to get good skills. A potential social advantage is that females may be more attracted to a non-combat army, and would acquire weapons expertise, putting them in a less disadvantaged position to men re guns in civilian life.
Your delusions, ignorance, and Libtard Maths are showing.
Pay grade for E-1 in 2018 is reportedly 1,638 per month. Which would be about $9.45/hr at 40 hours/week. E-2 is $1,836/mo, or about $10.59/hr.
E-1 lasts 6 months max, unless the recruit starts at E-2, and that lasts 9 months max.
After 3 months of Boot Camp, the accumulated pay is issued in one check. So those not promoted have 3 months remaining at E-1, usually in further training.
Twice per month, The Eagle Poops and they get paid, with nothing to spend it on. Bills? None. Food? Already fully Fed, as much as you can eat. Lodging? Already supplied. Work clothes? Already in the closet. Fitness clubs? Gyms on every base. Discount pricing at every PX and base theater. Maybe your stoner bimbos cannot comprehend, but many 18 year old women understand that having $400 per week (less taxes) to spend on nothing but women can color a guy attractive. A lot of Marines are Babe Magnets, lots of eye candy seen around. Marine graduation from Boot Camp generates a huge influx of the hottest babes you'll see at any given time. Some women also think a guy who has a few future years of steady employment and pay is further enticing.
Some thought is required to find stuff to throw your cash at. Buying food is merely a way to avoid standing in line at the Chow Hall. When you can't find enough targets, you end up with something like 10 paychecks to sift through whenever you want to cash one, which actually presents problems.
I'm sure the Spacey bimbos you hang with cannot stand healthy, trained, steadily Employed, organized men with pockets full of untethered cash, but those do not account for all women.
I was going with the numbers that Kiki posted. I didn't do any research on it.
This would all be a lot different if we were talking about putting military to work in non military infrastructure jobs at home.
I for one, would not support the free room and board for these people on taxpayer dime. It would be far too close to having a standing army on our own shores. And as I said before, if people (not you) think the gun nuts are bad now, they'd have a field day with this one.
I would only support this for soldiers who have finished their tour of duty and chose to have a job when they came back home. It would have to be a good paying one though, and $10.xx/hr isn't shit when you have to buy your own housing and food.
Women aren't attracted to men who make $10.00 and have nothing left to spend on them after basic survival bills are paid for. Even if they were, you could go to Walmart and make that money pushing carts and have a much easier job.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:In 1966, which was one of America’s more exciting years, NASA was spending $43,554,000,000 in 2014 constant dollars. That is twice as much as NASA spends today, but America got one thousand times more bang per dollar because it was doing something interesting. The astronauts were the few military guys working at NASA and the rest were scientists and engineers. The Moon was made of American Cheese. Very exciting times if you lived near Johnson Space Center.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I was going with the numbers that Kiki posted. I didn't do any research on it.
This would all be a lot different if we were talking about putting military to work in non military infrastructure jobs at home.
I for one, would not support the free room and board for these people on taxpayer dime. It would be far too close to having a standing army on our own shores. And as I said before, if people (not you) think the gun nuts are bad now, they'd have a field day with this one.
I would only support this for soldiers who have finished their tour of duty and chose to have a job when they came back home. It would have to be a good paying one though, and $10.xx/hr isn't shit when you have to buy your own housing and food.
Women aren't attracted to men who make $10.00 and have nothing left to spend on them after basic survival bills are paid for. Even if they were, you could go to Walmart and make that money pushing carts and have a much easier job.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA
In 2017, NASA was not exciting because what NASA does is so dull. That’s mostly because its budget was reduced to $18,866,000,000. Somewhere the Republicans took over a vital part of the US economy and turned it into a dull jobs program centered around the crappy Space Shuttle. Nowadays the only exciting space stuff centers around SpaceX and Blue Origin, both run by billionaires willing to spend whatever amount of money it takes, very unlike the Federal government. But Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos don't have the power of the White House. But then again, Musk and Bezos aren't as dumb as Trump about space.
www.forbes.com/sites/carolpinchefsky/2012/04/18/5-horrifying-facts-you
-didnt-know-about-the-space-shuttle/#5d685f4df9d4
Who stopped America from going to the Moon? Nixon. The cheapskate President with no imagination:
Haldeman: “So you do want to cancel [Apollo] 16 and 17?”
Nixon: “Yes, I do want to cancel them, and do other things.”
Haldeman: “Do we want to follow his point, coupling [the cancellation with] the
announcement that we’re going to fund the space shuttle?”
Nixon. “That’s right, and let the other two [Apollo missions] go . .. the other two shots. . . . 1 just don’t think we should take the risk of a possible goof off in the damn thing.” Haldeman: “The other thing you could do is postpone them.”
Nixon: “Postpone and then cancel them, if you could get away with it . . . That’s right, no shots in ’72.”
https://goo.gl/o1wpJy
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
For wealthy Texas Republicans relied upon by national party officials for vital campaign cash, the GOP’s inability to repeal Obamacare last summer wasn’t just a disappointing legislative low point.
It became a reason for them to turn off the money spigot.
“It was super frustrating,” said Houston energy executive Dan Eberhart, a Trump supporter and national GOP donor. “They used that line for 10 years: ‘Repeal and Replace.’ They raised money on it, and then they just flopped.”
But since then, Eberhart has come around.
“I feel like maybe I’ve done a full revolution,” he said. “In October, I was very upset. I felt like ‘You guys raised all this money and just completely failed on Obamacare repeal and replace.’ That’s where my head was at. Once they passed tax reform, I guess maybe I fell in line and came back into the fold.” . . .
Texas Republican donors tightened their wallets in 2017 when they saw little return from the Trump administration’s early chaotic months with Congress.
But some top donors say that changed with December’s tax cut bill, which also ended the individual mandate penalty under the Affordable Care Act. Big Republican money has started flowing again, starting with Texas, the honey-pot of national GOP fundraising.
www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Republican
-donors-beginning-to-reopen-the-money-12911446.php
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump never delivered his much-promised plan to release a “terrific” Obamacare alternative that would cover everyone. Instead, he backtracked on his promise to protect Medicaid from cuts.
Trump dropped the promise to negotiate lower prescription drug prices for Medicare, dropped the promise to break up big banks, dropped the promise of a $1 trillion infrastructure bill, and dropped the promise to develop a tax program that would leave the rich paying more — and, of course, his version of “draining the swamp“ has brought a level of corruption to official Washington that would have embarrassed the congressional barons of the Gilded Age.
Trump never took on the National Rifle Association, he never delivered a solution for the DREAMers, and of course Mexico isn’t going to pay for the wall.
Everyone knows this, which raises the question of why everyone is pretending to believe that Trump may make a diplomatic breakthrough with North Korea.
A good clue that we are being set up for some bullshit is that not only is the Trump administration’s North Korea policy being headed up by Donald Trump, but it has been conducted so far like you would expect a bullshitter to conduct policy.
For decades, leaders in North Korea have been seeking a personal meeting with an American president. Trump decided to make exactly that large, unilateral concession to the North Koreans. Except rather than defend the president’s dovish new direction, Republicans — including the White House itself — are spinning the meeting as a concession by the North Koreans. “Trump’s Tough on North Korea Approach Is Working,” according to a press release from the RNC, and this kind of spin has gotten picked up by Fox News. When a notorious liar does something dramatic and new and starts immediately lying about what it is that he’s doing, a sensible reaction is to become alarmed and suspicious — not to suddenly become credulous and naive.
www.vox.com/2018/5/14/17343860/donald-trump-korea-diplomacy
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME