Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

The DERP PLAN!!!!!!


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DhCx98xV4AEQn2Q.jpg

DERP!!!!!

No but Seriously this "plan" is total Koo Koo Machoo!

gpIxnV5Cnr0

The right is just upset they didn't write this first and use it as stand up comedy at colleges.

Ha someone should write all the details of the new green deal and print it on toilet paper, sure to be a hit!

That would be like wiping your butt with already dirty TP!

I was looking forward to seeing leftists here try to defend this deal. Does nobody wanna take a shot at it? Come on...it'll be funny.

Actual headline:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DzBMkO7XgAABU8t.jpg

Lol you just can't make this stuff up.

Media Runs Interference For Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez After Massive 'Green New Deal' Disaster

I like how she wants to commit genocide on cow...at least the kind that fart.

Ocasio-Cortez, Adviser Caught Making False Statements About Documents They Published

Lol

I like how the headlines whenever Democrats make some ridiculous policy proposal are:

"Republicans criticize democrats over policy positions, how low-brow"

***** isn't that what you're supposed to do in politics?

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I like how the headlines whenever Democrats make some ridiculous policy proposal are:

"Republicans criticize democrats over policy positions, how low-brow"

***** isn't that what you're supposed to do in politics?

It's always "Republicans attack" or "Republicans pounce".

The woman is a moron, of course, but I suspect she got elected as a congresswoman for the same reasons Trump was elected president.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
The woman is a moron, of course, but I suspect she got elected as a congresswoman for the same reasons Trump was elected president.

Yes, reading through that proposal, I am a little surprised as to how unrealistic, and dumb it is....

I had to look up what this was. I've only looked at the climate change side of it. Ambitious and the kind of thing every government should aspire to. If you have the fiscal means to change to a carbon neutral or negative economy why wouldn't you? Massive infrastructure programmes are also a proven way to stimulate the economy in tough times. Why not do it in such a way as to help future proof your country? Investment in fusion, LFTR and renewables could create jobs in parts of the country that need them the most. It would ensure domestic energy security. It would mean that oil and gas could be repurposed into other organic chemistry industry necessities and would last a lot longer for those industries such as lubricants, plastics, asphalt etc. You could offer tax incentives for companies who currently profit from solely fossil fuels if they invest and diversify away from those uses so they aren't financially damaged during the transition.

Where there's will, there's a way.

Unfortunately the will is currently in short supply.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Yes, reading through that proposal, I am a little surprised as to how unrealistic, and dumb it is....

Got a link to it? I couldn't actually find one to the DEAL it self in its entirety. Just Articles with pieces of it.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Got a link to it? I couldn't actually find one to the DEAL it self in its entirety. Just Articles with pieces of it.

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5729033-Green-New-Deal-FINAL

Earlier version: https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5729035-Green-New-Deal-FAQ

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I had to look up what this was. I've only looked at the climate change side of it. Ambitious and the kind of thing every government should aspire to. If you have the fiscal means to change to a carbon neutral or negative economy why wouldn't you? Massive infrastructure programmes are also a proven way to stimulate the economy in tough times. Why not do it in such a way as to help future proof your country? Investment in fusion, LFTR and renewables could create jobs in parts of the country that need them the most. It would ensure domestic energy security. It would mean that oil and gas could be repurposed into other organic chemistry industry necessities and would last a lot longer for those industries such as lubricants, plastics, asphalt etc. You could offer tax incentives for companies who currently profit from solely fossil fuels if they invest and diversify away from those uses so they aren't financially damaged during the transition.

Where there's will, there's a way.

Unfortunately the will is currently in short supply.

Spot on, Jaden.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Yes, reading through that proposal, I am a little surprised as to how unrealistic, and dumb it is....

Bingo, and anyone who thinks it's realistic is retarded.

Students Love Green New Deal... Until Hearing What's In It

MoziALuwbtg

Lol.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I had to look up what this was. I've only looked at the climate change side of it. Ambitious and the kind of thing every government should aspire to. If you have the fiscal means to change to a carbon neutral or negative economy why wouldn't you? Massive infrastructure programmes are also a proven way to stimulate the economy in tough times. Why not do it in such a way as to help future proof your country? Investment in fusion, LFTR and renewables could create jobs in parts of the country that need them the most. It would ensure domestic energy security. It would mean that oil and gas could be repurposed into other organic chemistry industry necessities and would last a lot longer for those industries such as lubricants, plastics, asphalt etc. You could offer tax incentives for companies who currently profit from solely fossil fuels if they invest and diversify away from those uses so they aren't financially damaged during the transition.

Where there's will, there's a way.

Unfortunately the will is currently in short supply.

Thanks for the breakdown.

Didn't think the usual suspects/chodes had her meaning/ideas down correctly.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5729033-Green-New-Deal-FINAL

Earlier version: https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5729035-Green-New-Deal-FAQ

10-Q-2-U.

Originally posted by Robtard
Thanks for the breakdown.

Didn't think the usual suspects/chodes had her meaning/ideas down correctly.

The issue here is not a single thing he typed changes the fact the green deal is dumb. But you tried

Surt's mad and belligerent again it seems.

Originally posted by Robtard
Surt's mad and belligerent again it seems.

I love when you resort to this, it's what you do when you have no real argument. Good stuff

Maybe just put me on ignore then?

Originally posted by Robtard
Maybe just put me on ignore then?

Why? You're entertaining as hell kiddo. Keep up the good work

Surt's clearly not mad and trying to make a fight. Clearly.

Originally posted by Robtard
Surt's clearly not mad and trying to make a fight. Clearly.

I'm trying to make a fight? Lol...good stuff again

The climate side of it is only dumb to people who either don't know about technologies which currently exist (in some cases for decades) that can help reduce and eventually eliminate the need for burning carbon fuels for energy or are so politically entrenched that they have a pathological aversion to anything "green" because they see these issues through the prism of partisan politics rather than pragmatism.

They try and justify that stance by citing the costs of moving away from fossil fuels not understanding that climate change and the inevitable more extreme weather events will actually be far more costly and economically damaging than the technological and infrastructure costs.

The Stern Review published by the London School of Economics stated that climate change is the greatest and widest ranging market failure ever seen. So far only carbon taxation has been implemented from its recommendations 13 years ago.

Then there's the more abstract arguments like that moving away from inefficient, antiquated combustion technology is the only way to move up the Kardashev Scale and ensure long term human survival.

If you agree that her "green new deal", by all means explain how it would be possible to meet her deadlines.

If I agree that her green new deal what?

That sould have been "If you agree with her "green new deal".

Like I said, the climate aspect is ambitious but something every government should aspire to.

The other aspects I haven't looked at (healthcare, jobs guarantee etc)

How will they meet her climate change deadlines?

Originally posted by Silent Master
How will they meet her climate change deadlines?

Ask "them".

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Ask "them".

So you support a plan despite not knowing how it will be implemented?

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Like I said, the climate aspect is ambitious but something every government should aspire to.

The other aspects I haven't looked at (healthcare, jobs guarantee etc)

Ok, that's where I want to say that if the topic was infrastructure, technologies, reducing carbon emissions I would get on board.

You then see a lot of crossover into the govt doing a lot of social engineering and ignoring the current climate as it relates to the global economy.

Thirdly a pet peeve is also when they cite examples in their documents to support said bill they should have to reference said studies.

The fact that the I.C.E. is still used today is laughable look no further than computers and how we have advanced with them because someone saw $$$.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
The climate side of it is only dumb to people who either don't know about technologies which currently exist (in some cases for decades) that can help reduce and eventually eliminate the need for burning carbon fuels for energy or are so politically entrenched that they have a pathological aversion to anything "green" because they see these issues through the prism of partisan politics rather than pragmatism.

They try and justify that stance by citing the costs of moving away from fossil fuels not understanding that climate change and the inevitable more extreme weather events will actually be far more costly and economically damaging than the technological and infrastructure costs.

The Stern Review published by the London School of Economics stated that climate change is the greatest and widest ranging market failure ever seen. So far only carbon taxation has been implemented from its recommendations 13 years ago.

Then there's the more abstract arguments like that moving away from inefficient, antiquated combustion technology is the inevitable more extreme weather events will actually be far more costly and economically damaging

Good post. Three points here I'd like to touch on:

"pathological aversion to anything "green" - This is a huge problem from mostly one side. I recall when the Prius (2nd gen) really started making waves in the early 2000s as the car of the future and how certain climate change deniers attacked it. Because using less fuel than virtually any other car at the time was somehow a threat and a bad thing?

"inevitable more extreme weather events will actually be far more costly and economically damaging" - Again, usually one side that refuses to see or acknowledge this. Though I suspect top politicians and heads of industry do know the truth here, but it's a "let the next generation deal with it; I'm getting mine and my kids. grand kids etc will be set financially" mindset.

"inevitable more extreme weather events will actually be far more costly and economically damaging" - It was you a few years ago that said humanity will die on this planet and you're probably right. It'll be 2020 in less than a year and we still have politicians/lawmakers (even the Trump admin now jumped on this) saying shit like "we don't have to worry about the planet, God is taking care of it."

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
The climate side of it is only dumb to people who either don't know about technologies which currently exist (in some cases for decades) that can help reduce and eventually eliminate the need for burning carbon fuels for energy or are so politically entrenched that they have a pathological aversion to anything "green" because they see these issues through the prism of partisan politics rather than pragmatism.

They try and justify that stance by citing the costs of moving away from fossil fuels not understanding that climate change and the inevitable more extreme weather events will actually be far more costly and economically damaging than the technological and infrastructure costs.

The Stern Review published by the London School of Economics stated that climate change is the greatest and widest ranging market failure ever seen. So far only carbon taxation has been implemented from its recommendations 13 years ago.

Then there's the more abstract arguments like that moving away from inefficient, antiquated combustion technology is the only way to move up the Kardashev Scale and ensure long term human survival.

Then she shouldn't have grouped it in with a whole bunch of stupid shit.

Originally posted by Silent Master
So you support a plan despite not knowing how it will be implemented?

I said it's something to aspire to. "It" being the transition away from a fossil fuel based primary energy source. I even contextualised that statement with basic technological and economic examples to show how the idea is feasible.

Is that an endorsement of every minutiae and timescale set out in the plan?

I would say clearly not.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I said it's something to aspire to. "It" being the transition away from a fossil fuel based primary energy source. I even contextualised that statement with basic technological and economic examples to show how the idea is feasible.

Is that an endorsement of every minutiae and timescale set out in the plan?

I would say clearly not.

When you say shit like this it sounds kinda like her "it's better to be morally right than factually right" bullshit.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I said it's something to aspire to. "It" being the transition away from a fossil fuel based primary energy source. I even contextualised that statement with basic technological and economic examples to show how the idea is feasible.

Is that an endorsement of every minutiae and timescale set out in the plan?

I would say clearly not.

My question was specifically about if you support her green new deal. not if you just agree in general to getting away from fossil fuels.

Do you support the specific plan she put forward?

Originally posted by Silent Master
My question was specifically about if you support her green new deal. not if you just agree in general to getting away from fossil fuels.

Do you support the specific plan she put forward?

I don't know because I haven't read all of it.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I don't know because I haven't read all of it.

You should know she put a bunch of other shit along with it. If she was serious about the climate stuff I don't see why she did this.

Originally posted by Surtur
You should know she put a bunch of other shit along with it. If she was serious about the climate stuff I don't see why she did this.

I know she did because I already mentioned that I didn't read those parts. Nor do I intend to because, while the climate change aspects have potentially global implications, the social policies are a US domestic issue.

I'll grant you that it is strange to throw so many things into 1 proposed piece of legislation. I don't know how common it is to do that in US politics but its certainly odd to me as our parliament have what are known as private member's bills that are put forward by non-government and non-shadow cabinet MPs and are usually very specific. They're also almost never implemented and are merely a way to get certain issues debated in the house.

Unrelated boating in bills is very common here, how things get approved/passed often.

Originally posted by Robtard
Unrelated boating in bills is very common here, how things get approved/passed often.

Well I think this boat is more overloaded and in danger of sinking than one full of immigrants in the Mediterranean.

Oh it's not necessary rare for this shit to happen here, but it's sheisty politics.

I feel like if she was serious she'd see this and make it separate. I don't know what she's doing. If she was gonna just be like any other politician she is doing the right things.

To add to something that I said about the lack of will. It's actually quite sad, to me anyway. The US used to be the country with both the vision and the cold hard cash to make big leaps. Consider JFK's speech about going to the moon.



Imagine having the defeatist attitude throughout history of "if we can't do it right now then we shouldn't even try".

You'd still be lighting the streets with whale oil nevermind gas lamps then electricity. You'd never have the transcontinental railroad and other huge infrastructure projects.

This is partly what I mean when I say the US is stagnating with regards to technological innovation. Meanwhile China and France and plowing ahead with huge investment in fusion energy and LFTR while political dogma and powerful lobbying interests infest the US corridors of power.

Disheartening, frankly.

When it comes to Climate Change, Southpark hit it right in the head with their ManBearPig skit. "It's a lie!" gets shifted to "Well, it's likely too late to do anything about it now, so why bother."

0AW4nSq0hAc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AW4nSq0hAc

Better get cryogenically freezing Elizabeth Sobek's DNA now then.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
To add to something that I said about the lack of will. It's actually quite sad, to me anyway. The US used to be the country with both the vision and the cold hard cash to make big leaps. Consider JFK's speech about going to the moon.



Imagine having the defeatist attitude throughout history of "if we can't do it right now then we shouldn't even try".

You'd still be lighting the streets with whale oil nevermind gas lamps then electricity. You'd never have the transcontinental railroad and other huge infrastructure projects.

This is partly what I mean when I say the US is stagnating with regards to technological innovation. Meanwhile China and France and plowing ahead with huge investment in fusion energy and LFTR while political dogma and powerful lobbying interests infest the US corridors of power.

Disheartening, frankly.

Actually now that I think about it you can disregard all this because SPACE FORCE!!!

If only we could make the Ice Age Last Forever...

Darn that Science.

Originally posted by Robtard
^Another libtard who fell for the "Chinese hoax" of climate change.

The thing about climate change is that most people *do* acknowledge it, the question is over just exactly how much of an impact we're having and what to do about it.

And I don't think it's wrong to wonder how correct the science has been when it comes to these predictions, etc.

Shit like "Climate-gate" didn't help.

Originally posted by Surtur
The thing about climate change is that most people *do* acknowledge it, the question is over just exactly how much of an impact we're having and what to do about it.

And I don't think it's wrong to wonder how correct the science has been when it comes to these predictions, etc.

Shit like "Climate-gate" didn't help.

It would be nice if instead of coming at it from "green" we simply decide that as a nation we want to advance as quickly as possible future technologies and infrastructure.

It doesn't take rocket science to see that many of the less developed countries will dump more trash and pollute more simply due to their populations and massive poverty.

What about places like China too? Aren't they increasing their coal usage?

If we wanna have a meaningful impact it seems like every country would need to get on board.

The 10 year goal the green deal sets just doesn't seem plausible. And I see Corey Booker saying stupid shit in response to these kinds of criticisms like "they said going to the moon was impossible too".

Originally posted by Surtur
What about places like China too? Aren't they increasing their coal usage?

If we wanna have a meaningful impact it seems like every country would need to get on board.

The 10 year goal the green deal sets just doesn't seem plausible. And I see Corey Booker saying stupid shit in response to these kinds of criticisms like "they said going to the moon was impossible too".

It doesn't take rocket science to see that many of the less developed countries will dump more trash and pollute more simply due to their populations and massive poverty.

China dumps so much pollution into the world that if we are going to use that as a measuring stick to how we want to measure the USA we already failed.

Does that mean if you can't change the world you would never better yourself?

Originally posted by Surtur
What about places like China too? Aren't they increasing their coal usage?

If we wanna have a meaningful impact it seems like every country would need to get on board.



China generates more electricity from renewables than any other country on the planet and more than twice as much as the no 2 country (the US) and it's % of power from renewables increases every year.

It's the top country in the Clean Development Mechanism from the Kyoto Protocol.

It's one of the only countries in the world increasing its nuclear energy capacity.

There are 3 countries that didn't sign up for Kyoto. One of them was the US.

There are only 2 countries that didn't ratify the Paris agreement. Syria and Nicaragua. Only 1 is threatening to withdraw from it...the US.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
China generates more electricity from renewables than any other country on the planet and more than twice as much as the no 2 country (the US) and it's % of power from renewables increases every year.

It's the top country in the Clean Development Mechanism from the Kyoto Protocol.

It's one of the only countries in the world increasing its nuclear energy capacity.

There are 3 countries that didn't sign up for Kyoto. One of them was the US.

There are only 2 countries that didn't ratify the Paris agreement. Syria and Nicaragua. Only 1 is threatening to withdraw from it...the US.

Right, and yet...are they or are they not increasing their coal usage?

EDIT: Kinda sounds like they showed some environmental restraint in the past and now it's kinda changing.

Originally posted by Surtur
Right, and yet...are they or are they not increasing their coal usage?

EDIT: Kinda sounds like they showed some environmental restraint in the past and now it's kinda changing.

Their coal usage peaked in 2016, declined in 2017 and their 2018 haven't been published yet afaik.

China's Coal Use Climbs Despite Pollution Plans

This article doesn't paint the situation as going very well. And this is from a left leaning website with a "high" factual reporting rating...according to the website some here love to use to judge media outlets.

Originally posted by Surtur
China's Coal Use Climbs Despite Pollution Plans

This article doesn't paint the situation as going very well. And this is from a left leaning website with a "high" factual reporting rating...according to the website some here love to use to judge media outlets.

Increasing energy demands from their massive economic growth in recent years fuelled a lot of it. The hope now is that their growth is slowing to more sustainable levels that their policies on reducing the need for coal will kick in. They've also enacted a 3 year coal reduction plan this year. Last year they also introduced much stricter legislation on pollutants from coal use.

It's targets are to reduce its % of power generated from coal by 7% in 3 years. Increase its renewables by 50% from 10% total to 15% total by next year and 30% by 2050.

Been said back when Trump first took office, but his war against renewable energy and love of coal and oil really put the US back in being at the very front of renewable sources like solar and wind power. China's going to be the one selling cheaper and more efficient solar cells and wind turbines to the world when it could have been the US being the seller and that industry is only going to grow and grow as it works along with existing sources and eventually starts to replace them more and more as the technology progresses.

Still not too late, but playing catch-up to China isn't good. They're usually the ones knocking off others' tech advancements; know they're spearheading.

Originally posted by Surtur
The thing about climate change is that most people *do* acknowledge it, the question is over just exactly how much of an impact we're having and what to do about it.

And I don't think it's wrong to wonder how correct the science has been when it comes to these predictions, etc.

Shit like "Climate-gate" didn't help.

The Trump admin doesn't. Their policy is "it's a hoax by China" and "we don't have to worry about the planet, a higher power is taking care of it (aka God).

Recent long term study found that insect populations are dying in larger and larger numbers, mostly due to pollutants (from agriculture) and weather changes. Insects die, that impacts that rest of the food chain on up on a god-level scale. Humans are in that same food chain. No, it's not happening tomorrow, but that doesn't mean we just go "let our grand kids deal with it".

We should IMPLEMENT the GREEN DEAL NOW!

It is the Only way to save The WORLD!!

"Where is this idea that conservatives are obsessed with AOC coming from? Sounds like a false-flag to me." - DMB

Originally posted by Tzeentch
"Where is this idea that conservatives are obsessed with AOC coming from? Sounds like a false-flag to me." - DMB

Ah yes, discussing the new deal her and other democrats are trying to push is being called obsession. Interesting.

Democrats Panic After McConnell Urges 'Green New Deal' Vote. They Get Mocked.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
"Where is this idea that conservatives are obsessed with AOC coming from? Sounds like a false-flag to me." - DMB


When almost every little thing AOC does shows up almost everywhere on the internet, in my face, all the time, from not-even primarily political places, you have to wonder if your rhetoric is either terribly ignorant or if you're just trolling.

Go visit r/all on reddit, any politics on Instagram, any trending on Twitter, etc. Let me know how many anti-Trump, anti-GOP, pro-Democrat, or pro-AOC posts you see that get voted to the top 20 pages or "currently trending."

What I called a false flag was the dance video "controversy"

Originally posted by dadudemon
Go visit r/all on reddit, any politics on Instagram, any trending on Twitter, etc. I don't go on pleb sites, sorry. Interesting to know that you get your politics from instagram though.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
I don't go on pleb sites, sorry.

You're on KMC.

KMC is high-culture. Afterall, you post here.

I have seen more Culture in a Petri Dish....

Originally posted by Tzeentch
I don't go on pleb sites, sorry. Interesting to know that you get your politics from instagram though.

I don't. I don't even use Instagram.

But I don't live under a rock, either. I'm a cultured and knowledgeable man.

Return to me with another comeback. Something more directly relevant. It might be difficult, though, because i mentioned multiple top 20 most trafficked web-domains so it's kind of hard to backpedal, now, innit? awesome

Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't. I don't even use Instagram. Lol, sure.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Lol, sure.

No Facebook.

No Twitter.

No Instagram.

Not even Myspace.






Peanut Butter and Jelly?



Edit - Do have multiple Slack accounts and multiple Discord accounts/usernames. That's better, IMO.

So it's settled, the Right and especially Trumpers are obsessed with AOC. Her power will only grow, as will their obsession and she's flattered.

https://media.breitbart.com/media/2018/07/Alexandria-Ocasio-Cortez-1-640x480.jpg
<3

just Give her the Hitler Mustache and Facist Lefitst Tards like Robbie will Kill for Her.

Cause People like Robbie are Phucking Walking Shit.

It wasn't the right that voted for her or called her the future of the party or who brought her to other states to fundraise for democrats. It wasn't the right who gave her a netflix documentary lol. Nor did we then put her on a financial committee.

She's newsworthy now whether we like it or not. The stupid shit she says and does is going to be talked about. It's not a sign of fear or obsession no matter how many times the left cries it is.

https://media.giphy.com/media/l0IyhKF1MNYjKSVs4/giphy.gif

She's one of the Fresh Faces guys! So Fresh so Face!

Just wait until she gets a key job in the 2020-2028 Dem Presidential Admin and then runs for President herself after that or not long after that. The triggers will just keep on intensifying.

Originally posted by Robtard
Just wait until she gets a key job in the 2020-2028 Dem Presidential Admin and then runs for President herself after that or not long after that. The triggers will just keep on intensifying.

New York is redistricting and I'm not sure if it will affect her in the 2020 elections or not at this point.

Originally posted by Robtard
Just wait until she gets a key job in the 2020-2028 Dem Presidential Admin and then runs for President herself after that or not long after that. The triggers will just keep on intensifying.

Indeed! She will say stupid shit, get criticized, and people like you will be sadly triggered over it. A shame, but it's amusing.

Originally posted by Surtur
It wasn't the right that voted for her or called her the future of the party or who brought her to other states to fundraise for democrats. It wasn't the right who gave her a netflix documentary lol. Nor did we then put her on a financial committee.

She's newsworthy now whether we like it or not. The stupid shit she says and does is going to be talked about. It's not a sign of fear or obsession no matter how many times the left cries it is.

https://media.giphy.com/media/l0IyhKF1MNYjKSVs4/giphy.gif

If she says and does so much stupid shit I'm surprised the right aren't lining up to vote for her. I mean, they were for Dubya, Palin and Trump.

Surt's not gonna like that one at all. Not. At. All.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
If she says and does so much stupid shit I'm surprised the right aren't lining up to vote for her. I mean, they were for Dubya, Palin and Trump.

I noticed you aren't surprised the left are voting for her. Good stuff.

Originally posted by Surtur
I noticed you aren't surprised the left are voting for her. Good stuff.

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/australianconservatives/pages/5615/meta_images/original/strawman.png?1548212472

There is a difference yeah. Under more free market principles, the idiots we elect to office aren't meddling as much in the economy, whereas with AOC if she were in the halls of power, someone of her... uhhhhh... intellect... would be running a centrally planned economy.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/australianconservatives/pages/5615/meta_images/original/strawman.png?1548212472

Nice!

Originally posted by Emperordmb
There is a difference yeah. Under more free market principles, the idiots we elect to office aren't meddling as much in the economy, whereas with AOC if she were in the halls of power, someone of her... uhhhhh... intellect... would be running a centrally planned economy.

She'd "hire the best people"
There "would be so much winning you'd be tired of winning"
We'd all "have the best things"

And you know what, I will say, I like Trump economically when he gets the government's hand out of the economy, don't like him when he sticks it back in.

Lower corporate taxes? Great, makes the US market more competitive, more money for investments and hiring and shit, I'm in.

Removes the state tax deductible from federal income tax? Generally I'm not a fan of more tax, but I'm happy he got rid of a federal incentive for people to increase their state taxes more knowing it would be offset by a federal deduction. It's not fair that somewhere like California or New York can tax their citizens to shit and expect the federal government to get Texas to pick up the slack.


Protectionist Trade War Bullshit? No **** off Trump, don't interfere with private business and the market like that, only gonna hurt our economy by shouldering greater costs onto the consumer.


I'll be consistent on that principle.

Still Trump hasn't proposed anything as economically psychotic as "lets guarantee everyone a job!" That's actually insane. The idea that you can use taxpayer money to artificially create jobs the demand forces of the market didn't ask for.

Originally posted by Robtard
She'd "hire the best people"
There "would be so much winning you'd be tired of winning"
We'd all "have the best things"

The best part is leftists like you would eat it up, all while screaming that Trumpers are cultists. It's beautiful lol.

Originally posted by Surtur
The best part is leftists like you would eat it up, all while screaming that Trumpers are cultists. It's beautiful lol.

You're trying to equalize me with the the Trump nonsense you fell for and continue to fall for. Your attempt has been denied.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Lower corporate taxes? Great, makes the US market more competitive, more money for investments and hiring and shit, I'm in. Oh, my sweet summer child.

Do you genuinely believe that the more money a corporation makes, the more money they'll spend on creating jobs?

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Oh, my sweet summer child.

Do you genuinely believe that the more money a corporation makes, the more money they'll spend on creating jobs?

Of course, it takes more stockbrokers to make sure all their stock buybacks hit in time

Originally posted by Robtard
So it's settled, the Right and especially Trumpers are obsessed with AOC. Her power will only grow, as will their obsession and she's flattered./B]

You have it wrong.

The left, leftist media, and social media are obsessed with AOC.

Crowder Calls it Again!

Zu4o0k4lRIg

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Oh, my sweet summer child.

Do you genuinely believe that the more money a corporation makes, the more money they'll spend on creating jobs?

Trickle-down Economics, bro.

What they don't realize is the trickle they feel is the golden, warm and salty piss from the mega corporations and the uber wealthy who are taking the majority of those tax cut savings and passing it onto the board members, stock holders and other personal wealth increasing tactics.

Remember when AT&T gave crumbs to it's employees and said they were investing back after Trump Tax passed and Trumper retards here hooted and hollered?

Reality: 'They're liquidating us': AT&T continues layoffs and outsourcing despite profits Womp, womp, indeed.

Yes. All Jobs can only be created by the Government.

Originally posted by dadudemon
You have it wrong.

The left, leftist media, and social media are obsessed with AOC.

Yep, the conservatives are reacting to the crazy way the left is treating this girl lol.

Some shit gets overblown, like the whole dancing thing where it was like one or two people and the media acted like it was bigger than it was.

I briefly looked and found 3 threads in the GDF about her.

None of them were made by the board's "leftists".

...

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I briefly looked and found 3 threads in the GDF about her.

None of them were made by the board's "leftists".

... That's just threads. There's numerous post made about her as well in various threads and you'll be shocked here, but they're not typically made by the people labeled as "Leftist" either.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I briefly looked and found 3 threads in the GDF about her.

None of them were made by the board's "leftists".

...

Neat, the only problem is I'm not referring to just this board, but thank you for your input! It doesn't negate anything I've said, but it is appreciated

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I briefly looked and found 3 threads in the GDF about her.

None of them were made by the board's "leftists".

...

But, we talk about the stuff that it is talked about. So they are creating topics that are talked about by 99/100 lefitst media.

Originally posted by Surtur
Neat, the only problem is I'm not referring to just this board, but thank you for your input! It doesn't negate anything I've said, but it is appreciated

I'm not trying to negate anything you've said. I'm merely pointing out a fact.

People can then use those facts to draw conclusions.



You're only replying cos you were one of them.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I'm not trying to negate anything you've said. I'm merely pointing out a fact.

People can then use those facts to draw conclusions.



You're only replying cos you were one of them.

Oh you were trying to negate it though, why lie? No need to do so. You were trying to imply she's posted a lot about here by people who aren't leftists, thus the problem isn't with the left.

Again: why lie about your intentions?

Originally posted by Surtur
Oh you were trying to negate it though, why lie? No need to do so. You were trying to imply she's posted a lot about here by people who aren't leftists, thus the problem isn't with the left.

Again: why lie about your intentions?

I wasn't implying anything. She's posted about a lot HERE (your wording) by people who aren't leftists. That was my point. You literally just restated my argument.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
You really love making up other people's arguments in your head, don't you?

Okay fair enough, the only other explanation is you were under the mistaken impression people were referring only to KMC members. Is that the case? You were confused and thought I meant only KMC?

Your confusion is forgiven.

Originally posted by Surtur
You were trying to imply she's posted a lot about here by people who aren't leftists,


"Here"

I presume that means. On KMC.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
"Here"

I presume that means. On KMC.

Indeed, you were confused and thought people were referring only to posts on KMC. I forgive you, no hard feelings.

Originally posted by Surtur
Indeed, you were confused and thought people were referring only to posts on KMC. I forgive you, no hard feelings.
In fairness, I don't know how much she's on US news media. With not being from the US and not watching their media.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
In fairness, I don't know how much she's on US news media. With not being from the US and not watching their media.

I'm not even being sarcastic when I say that's a fair point. But she's talked about a lot here. The latest is her claiming a victory over this amazon shiznit.

I don't even want to know. 😂

93 trillion

gaiqMMel76U