Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)
Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 11:06 am
Jack McOck wrote: YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE BLUE EYES.
Jack McOck wrote: YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE BLUE EYES.
Dude! You called me dishonest based on another man's comments. You also persist on pigeonholing me with this socialist thing. I don't like Beyonce, but I wouldn't call her socialist. And, of course, when I called you out on your bullshit, rather than actually answering me like a grown, independent man would, you're simply "duding" me.TomViolenz wrote:Dude! You are right man, you ARE confused!
How is talking about your "kind" (meaning right wing conservatives, who use the word "socialist" to mean EVERYTHING they don't like) in any way racist? And I have no idea where the blue eye stuff comes from.
And yes, the whole airplane stuff came from my exchange with bastien, I just used it because it underlines the issues discussed very well.
My last post was actually the first semi serious one adressed to you, to see if just maybe it is possible to talk like an adult to your kind (there I said it again). I won't be making that mistake again...
TomViolenz wrote:Ah got'ya, you were talking about Airbus the French/German conglomerate providing about 50% of all passenger planes in the world.bastien wrote:Aye. Planes bolted together in Toulouse though.TomViolenz wrote:Pretty sure Easyjet is British...
Good example of France not being behind on technology, NOT such a good example when you talk about corporate "socialism" and waste of tax payers money though...
(Not that Boeing (the other 50%) is any different in this regard though!)
We are obviously talking way past each other here, let's leave it at that for now. No need for us to get even more aggravated.Jack McOck wrote:Dude! You called me dishonest based on another man's comments. You also persist on pigeonholing me with this socialist thing. I don't like Beyonce, but I wouldn't call her socialist. And, of course, when I called you out on your bullshit, rather than actually answering me like a grown, independent man would, you're simply "duding" me.TomViolenz wrote:Dude! You are right man, you ARE confused!
How is talking about your "kind" (meaning right wing conservatives, who use the word "socialist" to mean EVERYTHING they don't like) in any way racist? And I have no idea where the blue eye stuff comes from.
And yes, the whole airplane stuff came from my exchange with bastien, I just used it because it underlines the issues discussed very well.
My last post was actually the first semi serious one adressed to you, to see if just maybe it is possible to talk like an adult to your kind (there I said it again). I won't be making that mistake again...
Be as "serious" as you like, if you can't read, think, take a joke, or understand metaphor, then I see no more point to debating you than I do in having sex with a tree stump. And we all know that tree stumps are intrinsically pointless.
Because they're stumps.
Geddit?
I may be a sexist-republican-racist-right wing-facist-libertarian-manly-man-dick... but I'm also fair.TomViolenz wrote:We are obviously talking way past each other here, let's leave it at that for now. No need for us to get even more aggravated.Jack McOck wrote:Dude! You called me dishonest based on another man's comments. You also persist on pigeonholing me with this socialist thing. I don't like Beyonce, but I wouldn't call her socialist. And, of course, when I called you out on your bullshit, rather than actually answering me like a grown, independent man would, you're simply "duding" me.TomViolenz wrote:Dude! You are right man, you ARE confused!
How is talking about your "kind" (meaning right wing conservatives, who use the word "socialist" to mean EVERYTHING they don't like) in any way racist? And I have no idea where the blue eye stuff comes from.
And yes, the whole airplane stuff came from my exchange with bastien, I just used it because it underlines the issues discussed very well.
My last post was actually the first semi serious one adressed to you, to see if just maybe it is possible to talk like an adult to your kind (there I said it again). I won't be making that mistake again...
Be as "serious" as you like, if you can't read, think, take a joke, or understand metaphor, then I see no more point to debating you than I do in having sex with a tree stump. And we all know that tree stumps are intrinsically pointless.
Because they're stumps.
Geddit?
I really appreciate btw that you removed those links again!
bastien wrote:TomViolenz wrote:Ah got'ya, you were talking about Airbus the French/German conglomerate providing about 50% of all passenger planes in the world.bastien wrote:
Aye. Planes bolted together in Toulouse though.
Good example of France not being behind on technology, NOT such a good example when you talk about corporate "socialism" and waste of tax payers money though...
(Not that Boeing (the other 50%) is any different in this regard though!)
Hey I'm not knocking it at all... The A380 wings are made in Bristol and believe me Bristol would be proper fucked without that money coming in. Proper fucked.
Put it another way, if we don't give our manufacturers a load of pork barrel, some other country will be giving it to theirs... And I strongly believe charity begins at home
Cool...Jack McOck wrote:I may be a sexist-republican-racist-right wing-facist-libertarian-manly-man-dick... but I'm also fair.TomViolenz wrote:We are obviously talking way past each other here, let's leave it at that for now. No need for us to get even more aggravated.Jack McOck wrote: Dude! You called me dishonest based on another man's comments. You also persist on pigeonholing me with this socialist thing. I don't like Beyonce, but I wouldn't call her socialist. And, of course, when I called you out on your bullshit, rather than actually answering me like a grown, independent man would, you're simply "duding" me.
Be as "serious" as you like, if you can't read, think, take a joke, or understand metaphor, then I see no more point to debating you than I do in having sex with a tree stump. And we all know that tree stumps are intrinsically pointless.
Because they're stumps.
Geddit?
I really appreciate btw that you removed those links again!
That's funny because where I come from socialism is treated like an incurable disease but we regularly give handouts to banks and large corporations when they are in need. In fact if a bank wants a loan from the government they get it for (much) less than 1 percent whereas if a student wants one that will be 6.3 percent, please.Jack McOck wrote:My point was, is and has always been that socialism is all about financing individuals/industries that couldn't survive on their own merits. If they could, they wouldn't need the hand out, and as they do, they don't deserve it.
It is socially neglectful to promote the unsustainable; it is morally reprehensible to encourage the undesirable; and it is financially suicidal to invest in the unsuccessful.
Absolutely. Re-establish some concentration camps and get rid of that weak majority. Burn them in crematories. Like in Auschwitz. No! It would be a huge waste. Don't let them suck your precious corporate juices - make profit of those unsuccessful bastards: MAKE BURGERS OF THEM!Jack McOck wrote:My point was, is and has always been that socialism is all about financing individuals/industries that couldn't survive on their own merits. If they could, they wouldn't need the hand out, and as they do, they don't deserve it.
It is socially neglectful to promote the unsustainable; it is morally reprehensible to encourage the undesirable; and it is financially suicidal to invest in the unsuccessful.
Goddard wrote:Absolutely. Re-establish some concentration camps and get rid of that weak majority. Burn them in crematories. Like in Auschwitz. No! It would be a huge waste. Don't let them suck your precious corporate juices - make profit of those unsuccessful bastards: MAKE BURGERS OF THEM!Jack McOck wrote:My point was, is and has always been that socialism is all about financing individuals/industries that couldn't survive on their own merits. If they could, they wouldn't need the hand out, and as they do, they don't deserve it.
It is socially neglectful to promote the unsustainable; it is morally reprehensible to encourage the undesirable; and it is financially suicidal to invest in the unsuccessful.
Does your boyfriend screw you in your ear, because you seem to suffer of a serious brain damage?
I'm sorry, I'm confused, either you think I'm a girl, or you think it's ok to call someone homosexual as an insult.Goddard wrote:Does your boyfriend screw you in your ear, because you seem to suffer of a serious brain damage?
If you take it as an insult than you're not only homosexual, but also the homophobic one...Jack McOck wrote:it's ok to call someone homosexual as an insult