The Official Conservative Political Thread

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Denaut

Denaut

Trump's Staff
2,739
1,279
Merlin_sl said:
Its quite a stretch to say what works for a region of 25 million people will work for 300 million people.
Click to expand...
Why? I hear this all the time but no one can say what, exactly, is different about the people living in the United States prevents this?

The only barrier I see is culture, and culture can change.
 
Sebudai

Sebudai

Ssraeszha Raider
12,022
22,504
Lyrical, do you understand that we all agree that pure Statism and pure Capitalism are both terrible extremes, and we're all just quibbling over where the most optimal point on that sliding scale is?
 
Shonuff

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
791
TheBeagle_sl said:
So China is great, Norway sucks and GDP growth based on a graph from 2005 is the foundation of your argument. Is that the gist of your argument? Lol, wow.
Click to expand...
It's only almost 20 years of data, and illustrates the real growth that happens when you unshackle economies with ideology that doesn't work. 40% of the population switched to capitalism and look what happened.

I guess it's not big deal that India was bankrupt under the old system, Russia was in trouble, and China absolutely sucked. China allowed capitalism in just a few areas geographically, and no one wanted to live in the old areas. I've provided links on India, there are more one can find if they are willing to not go with the crowd and think on their own. I know, on these boards, there was a vote and 80% of you preferred alternative systems.

40% of the world's population switched to capitalism, and that's no big deal? India can now pay it's bills, when it couldn't afford to even keep the lights on or pay policeman, and it's no big deal?
 
Shonuff

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
791
wormie_sl said:
Wow a country all the way at the bottom of the economic ladder grows faster than an established country with decades of growth already in place. Please tell us more Uncle Lyrical.
Click to expand...
Why was there no growth under the old systems? You make my argument for me.
 
Sebudai

Sebudai

Ssraeszha Raider
12,022
22,504
Yeah, a country being bankrupt sucks. You know what also sucks? Having a populace of unhappy, uneducated, unhealthy, overworked slaves.
 
T

TJ Lazer_sl

shitlord
382
0
Lyrical_sl said:
It's only almost 20 years of data, and illustrates the real growth that happens when you unshackle economies with ideology that doesn't work. 40% of the population switched to capitalism and look what happened.

I guess it's not big deal that India was bankrupt under the old system, Russia was in trouble, and China absolutely sucked. China allowed capitalism in just a few areas geographically, and no one wanted to live in the old areas. I've provided links on India, there are more one can find if they are willing to not go with the crowd and think on their own. I know, on these boards, there was a vote and 80% of you preferred alternative systems.

40% of the world's population switched to capitalism, and that's no big deal? India can now pay it's bills, when it couldn't afford to even keep the lights on or pay policeman, and it's no big deal?
Click to expand...
They only switched to capitalism because millions of people were killed and were forced to switch. It's a shame your bullshit candy coated history lessons here are such a joke. It's wrong to do this with such impressionable minds like trollface and merlin here.
 
T

TJ Lazer_sl

shitlord
382
0
Someones taint needs to be on the other side and that taint is mine. Deal with it.

I mean really, what's so wrong about rubbing my taint up against Merlin's taint. It feels good.
 
TrollfaceDeux

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
TJ Lazer_sl said:
They only switched to capitalism because millions of people were killed and were forced to switch. It's a shame your bullshit candy coated history lessons here are such a joke. It's wrong to do this with such impressionable minds like trollface and merlin here.
Click to expand...
Do you even history, bro?
 
tad10

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,533
599
TheBeagle_sl said:
That same logic can be applied to the founding fathers and the Constitution. Feel free to show me where they mentioned automatic weaponry, 24 hour news cycles, and the internet. Yet you conservatives love to cling to strict interpretations of the Constitution as if it were the holy word of God himself and are unwillinging to compromise in the face of new technological realities. Thanks for demonstrating typical conservative hypocrisy once again.
Click to expand...
Well the Constitution is amendable, and has been Amended as recently as 1970 or so with the drop in voting age to 18. So I'm going to say it's cool to stick with a textual interpretation for the most part, though I'll note most folks seem okay with reasonable interpretations of the text: can't shout fire in a crowded movie theater, no right to bear automatic weapons. It is the supreme court created from nowhere rights like abortion that are suspect. If enough people want that right they can get together and try and amend the constitution instead of packing the court.
 
D

Dumar_sl

shitlord
3,712
4
I know Obama's master plans. Lyrical and I gotta stop this evil mastermind before it's too late. For capitalism. For America.

rrr_img_59805.jpg
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Dumar_sl said:
Who is the best scientist of them all? Nature, International Weekly Journal of Science
Click to expand...
Like I said, flawed metric because scholars of sciences such as physics, biology, chemistry aren't going to be citing previous scholars indefinitely, unlike economics, or sociology.

Find me a peer reviewed article from 2010 onward citing Einstein's paper on general relativity, or a chemist citing Gruub's paper on his catalyst. It is a horribly flawed metric because asshats like you can continue sucking Marx's dick and jizzing over his papers citing him a hundred years later because they are all just opinion and personal observation on society.
 
D

Dumar_sl

shitlord
3,712
4
ZyyzYzzy_sl said:
Like I said, flawed metric because scholars of sciences such as physics, biology, chemistry aren't going to be citing previous scholars indefinitely, unlike economics, or sociology.

Find me a peer reviewed article from 2010 onward citing Einstein's paper on general relativity, or a chemist citing Gruub's paper on his catalyst. It is a horribly flawed metric because asshats like you can continue sucking Marx's dick and jizzing over his papers citing him a hundred years later because they are all just opinion and personal observation on society.
Click to expand...
I'm not getting into another argument about what's 'real' science and what isn't, and that's where this always devolves. If you think economics, sociology and the rest of the social sciences aren't science, that's your opinion, one that isn't shared by academia.
 
tad10

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,533
599
wormie_sl said:
A village is missing their idiot somewhere.
Click to expand...
Yes indeed they are. Upward mobility has only been decreasing since democrats begin the "war on poverty" back in the 60s. That coupled with the rise of the ideologically liberal NEA has doomed the poor. Conservatives didn't come up with the idea of the projects and sticking all the poor together. That was you guys. We tried to encourage school choice and vouchers to allow poor kids to go to better schools, but that is a type of choice that doesn't meet with Democrat approval.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.