by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .165166167168169170171. . .269270»

Xyanth wrote:**J. Nobel Dagget rises to address the gathering. He clears his throat.**
I have a communique from Her Majesty, The Queen of England. She writes, "Happy Treason Day, peasants."
All things considered, that was right nice of her, don't you think?

Very nice indeed of Her Majesty the Queen

Phrontisteries and Xyanth

Hi, you probably don't remember me (I used to be Libertatema, and before that, Free People of the World) but I'm back or something...

Hey there, I am the Executive Minister of The International Debating Area, I see our embassy construction has finished. If you're keen on debating you can subscribe to our foreign newspaper, The Debating Times. Right now, we're discussing about the war on drugs, you can debate on our RMB (Embassy posting is allowed).

Remember, don't forget to hop on over, debate, and win yourself a Debating Award :)

A new free america

Hello everyone, I would like to apologize for two things.

1.) The Roleplay was meant to be fun, but it appears it died before it got off the ground. Partially due to my friend, and mapper, Ragnik practically falling off the face of the earth, and partially due to limited interest/time of those involved. While none of these are wholly my fault, I claim at least partial responsibility.

2.) The moderator scandal that occurred when I first arrived. Without getting into details, someone from my old region, of whom I left because of, followed me here and began flaming/baiting me, as the moderator who presided over the case called it. Feeling frustrated and upset, I reported him, and the moderator censored all posts here that had to do with the case. You men are very keen on free speech here, and made it very clear, and completely disregarded it for my own personal humility. For that, I apologize.

My stay here has been short, and I'm not sure where I'll go next, but I thank you all for allowing me to stay.

Dftba-land wrote:Right now, we're discussing about the war on drugs,

Never start a war you cannot win.

The rest of that post was borderline spam.

A new free america wrote:Hello everyone, I would like to apologize for two things.
1.) The Roleplay was meant to be fun, but it appears it died before it got off the ground. Partially due to my friend, and mapper, Ragnik practically falling off the face of the earth, and partially due to limited interest/time of those involved. While none of these are wholly my fault, I claim at least partial responsibility.
2.) The moderator scandal that occurred when I first arrived. Without getting into details, someone from my old region, of whom I left because of, followed me here and began flaming/baiting me, as the moderator who presided over the case called it. Feeling frustrated and upset, I reported him, and the moderator censored all posts here that had to do with the case. You men are very keen on free speech here, and made it very clear, and completely disregarded it for my own personal humility. For that, I apologize.
My stay here has been short, and I'm not sure where I'll go next, but I thank you all for allowing me to stay.

Yes we are very much about free speech here. However, you are still welcome here. No need to leave. Or park a puppet here.

Phrontisteries

Free market paradise

A new free america wrote:Hello everyone, I would like to apologize for two things.
1.) The Roleplay was meant to be fun, but it appears it died before it got off the ground. Partially due to my friend, and mapper, Ragnik practically falling off the face of the earth, and partially due to limited interest/time of those involved. While none of these are wholly my fault, I claim at least partial responsibility.
2.) The moderator scandal that occurred when I first arrived. Without getting into details, someone from my old region, of whom I left because of, followed me here and began flaming/baiting me, as the moderator who presided over the case called it. Feeling frustrated and upset, I reported him, and the moderator censored all posts here that had to do with the case. You MEN(caps, bold and italics added) are very keen on free speech here, and made it very clear, and completely disregarded it for my own personal humility. For that, I apologize.
My stay here has been short, and I'm not sure where I'll go next, but I thank you all for allowing me to stay.

Men?

*Cue the feminism*

I am utterly confused at what's been going on the past couple days.

Phrontisteries, Xyanth, and Braecland

The reason that "collage age people" are "skewed to the left" is not natural biology that will be corrected by ageing (like acne). The reason that so many people support higher government spending and do not value such things as Freedom of Speech is because the education system (including many private schools) is dominated by the collectivists. This will not just self correct - schools and universities provide people with the source of many of their basic ideas and attitudes - yes later experience may correct some of it, but some of it will remain for life. Education should not just be dismissed as unimportant - basic American principle, the philosophy behind the Bill of Rights, is not longer being transmitted to the young.

Phrontisteries and Xyanth

A new free america did end up leaving.

Aja wrote:I am utterly confused at what's been going on the past couple days.

Me too.

Individia wrote:A new free america did end up leaving.

Yes.

Phrontisteries

It is hard to be sure what part of "repeal Obamacare" the Republicans are failing to grasp here. The voters spoke loud and clear on the matter. It is the reason Republicans hold the majority in both houses. It is one of the primary reasons Trump is our President.

But here we are, into July and Obamacare is still the law of the land. The latest installment in this ongoing drama is the Senate version of a bill that is not a repeal as much as superficial edit.

It must be conceded the Senate bill does away with the most offensive portions of Obamacare. That is the mandate on individuals and businesses.

But this version maintains a tax on the upper income brackets to help pick up the insurance tab on low income families.[1][2] This is also known as a transfer of wealth.

The part that really cranks my tail is the people presenting this bill are supposed to be Republicans. You know, dyed in the wool champions of fiscal conservatism.

But yet, they are letting stand a tax specifically on the upper income brackets to pay for someone else's health care.

There ain't no justice...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/13/senate-health-care-bill-republicans-release-draft-new-plan.html
[2] Quote from above linked article: "The new package would keep most of the original bill's Medicaid reductions. But it would retain Obama tax increases on upper-income people and use the revenue to help some lower earners afford coverage."

Reed audio, Phrontisteries, and Libertaei

New poll is up. (My typing gets worse as I get older. Sorry about that.)

Phrontisteries

Xyanth wrote:New poll is up. (My typing gets worse as I get older. Sorry about that.)

I'm relatively young yet my typing is still awful! Don't blame it on your age.

Aja wrote:I'm relatively young yet my typing is still awful! Don't blame it on your age.

Actually, I was blaming the decline in quality on my age.

Xyanth wrote:It is hard to be sure what part of "repeal Obamacare" the Republicans are failing to grasp here. The voters spoke loud and clear on the matter. It is the reason Republicans hold the majority in both houses. It is one of the primary reasons Trump is our President.
But here we are, into July and Obamacare is still the law of the land. The latest installment in this ongoing drama is the Senate version of a bill that is not a repeal as much as superficial edit.
It must be conceded the Senate bill does away with the most offensive portions of Obamacare. That is the mandate on individuals and businesses.
But this version maintains a tax on the upper income brackets to help pick up the insurance tab on low income families.[1][2] This is also known as a transfer of wealth.
The part that really cranks my tail is the people presenting this bill are supposed to be Republicans. You know, dyed in the wool champions of fiscal conservatism.
But yet, they are letting stand a tax specifically on the upper income brackets to pay for someone else's health care.
There ain't no justice...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/13/senate-health-care-bill-republicans-release-draft-new-plan.html
[2] Quote from above linked article: "The new package would keep most of the original bill's Medicaid reductions. But it would retain Obama tax increases on upper-income people and use the revenue to help some lower earners afford coverage."

The problem is that the "good" things such as coverage for pre existing conditions, depend on the mandate. Indeed they depend on a mandate that does not exist - a Swiss style mandate that really does induce the young and healthy to buy insurance (because the penalties are very high if one does not) I do not believe in the mandate (of course not - I am pro liberty), but I understand that the stuff that Senators such as Susan Collins want (the pre existing conditions and so on) can only be funded either by endless subsidies to the insurance companies (corrupt bailout ism) or the mandate - a mandate with real teeth.

People who think Obamacare can be "fixed" miss the point that it is designed to fail. It increases the subsidies and regulations that caused the high cost of health care in the first place - over decades.

Phrontisteries and Xyanth

Xyanth wrote:Actually, I was blaming the decline in quality on my age.

Compared to me you are in the prime of life.

It seems the WA wants to enact the ADA in Nations States land. If you're a WA member and a mind to, might want to vote against the latest ration of fertilizer they propose to inflict on WA members: Enabling The Disabled In Academia

Free market paradise

More people voted for Clinton than Chump so there wasn't "people speaking loud and clear" about repealing healthcare and many voted for Trump for reasons that had nothing to do with healthcare. People aren't necessarily in favor of a repeal. They are more in favor of lower costs, which the ultra corrupt Idiot-In-Chief promised would be so easy and massively cheaper than the current healthcare. The primary reason Chump is in office is due to his promise to spur economic growth. Clinton offered the economic status quo which was highly unpopular across the political spectrum.

The Republican majorities in both Houses are less than they were in 2016. Republican representatives are there more because of gerrymandering than due to any specific issue.

Free market paradise wrote:More people voted for Clinton than Chump so there wasn't "people speaking loud and clear" about repealing healthcare and many voted for Trump for reasons that had nothing to do with healthcare. People aren't necessarily in favor of a repeal. They are more in favor of lower costs, which the ultra corrupt Idiot-In-Chief promised would be so easy and massively cheaper than the current healthcare. The primary reason Chump is in office is due to his promise to spur economic growth. Clinton offered the economic status quo which was highly unpopular across the political spectrum.
The Republican majorities in both Houses are less than they were in 2016. Republican representatives are there more because of gerrymandering than due to any specific issue.

Hey guys. I forgot to come here to nationstates for a whole now, and all my progress has been deleted. So, I decided to join this region!

Phrontisteries

Free market paradise wrote:More people voted for Clinton than Chump

That's "President Chump" to you. And people do not elect the president. The states do. We've talked about this.

But, just because you probably have nothing better to do right now, check out this map showing the election by counties:
http://brilliantmaps.com/2016-county-election-map/

It shows why the Electoral College works. The small areas of ultra dense population were unable to run over the rest of the country. That is precisely why the founders of this nation adopted the Electoral College for selecting our president.

Free market paradise wrote:so there wasn't "people speaking loud and clear" about repealing healthcare

You should go back and read the original post again.

Free market paradise wrote:The Republican majorities in both Houses are less than they were in 2016.

So what? The Republicans held both houses. That victory is primarily due to Obamacare.

Free market paradise wrote:Republican representatives are there more because of gerrymandering than due to any specific issue.

Yeah, there's no way people are pissed off at the wanna be communists running the Democratic Party these days.

Hillopee wrote:Hey guys. I forgot to come here to nationstates for a whole now, and all my progress has been deleted. So, I decided to join this region!

Glad to have you.

Reed audio and Phrontisteries

Free market paradise

Nobody said people weren't pissed off at the way the Democrats, or Republicans are run these days. I did say the result in the House is mostly due to gerrymandering, and not any specific issue. Republican majority fell by 2 in the Senate and 6 in the House. Not exactly a ringing endorsement in a Presidential Election year.

Free market paradise wrote:I did say the result in the House is mostly due to gerrymandering, and not any specific issue.

Yes you did. You have yet to prove it.

Reed audio and Phrontisteries

The Cheyenne Police Department busted a public drunk that was also a panhandler this week. The booking search produced a cash stash of $234.94. Not bad for someone standing on the sidewalk with their hand out. They made a note of that fact on their Facebook page to show how well these panhandlers are doing.[1]

Of course the keyboard commandos of the social justice warrior brigade jumped on this with both feet. The comments on the post are both hilarious and tragic all at the same time.

In 2015 the US Supreme Court ruled on an unrelated case stating the city of Gilbert, AZ could not restrict signs directing people to a non profit organization event if the law did not restrict all signs in the same manner. Since that time the American Civil Liberties union successfully argued that decision applies to panhandling laws.[2][3] The argument being one cannot stop someone from asking for money if asking for a cigarette or directions is allowed in the same place.

What do you think? Is panhandling free speech or does begging for handouts fail that standard?

New poll is up.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] https://www.facebook.com/CheyennePoliceDepartment/photos/a.547403282059048.1073741842.204342533031793/1153648934767810/
[2] http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/courts_strike_down_panhandling_bans_based_on_supreme_court_decision_on_sign/
[3] http://www.the-daily-record.com/local%20news/2017/07/21/columbus-police-stop-enforcing-panhandling-law-because-of-us-supreme-court-ruling

Anyone else been particularly pissed off about the effects of policies lately? A lot of times I'll make a decision on an issue and I'll be surprised and frustrated because the effects aren't what you would have expected them to be. I just passed one where my stance was basically a commitment to free speech and free expression and there were no effects. No increase in civil rights even. Just a blurb that will temporarily show up on my page.

Phrontisteries

«12. . .165166167168169170171. . .269270»

Advertisement