Представьте себе, что все люди на земле подарят вам по 1 рублю, им будет это не сложно, а Вы в одночасье станните Миллиардером.Здорово!Вопрос в том, как побудить их это сделать.Став участником Международной Системы Финансовой Взаимопомощи,Вы будете ежедневно получать на свои счета сотни денежных переводов.И не по 1 рублю, а по 5$ 10$ и 15$. htp : // gmgalick.goldline. pro (скапируйте ссылку в браузер и уберите пробелы)СЕРТИФИКАТ № GA16921 ПОДАРЮ ПО 10$ КАЖДОМУ, ГАРАНТИРУЮ! скайп: gmgalick
@ReeferTim - You are obviously an angry, uneducated, and immature person. Baby Boomers are statistically the wealthiest group of people in America. 23% of government spending is on welfare and includes aid for any mental illness. And if these people wish to spend $200 for lunch and can afford it, guess what.....that is a good thing!! That money is being taxed...TWICE! First as sales tax, than as income tax! It's money helping the economy!
Sometimes the arrogance of the overindulgent lunch crowd in The Financial district of San Francisco spending 200 and 300 bucks for lunch and Dinner while mentally disturbed baby boomers scrounge for food in refuse receptacles and receive nothing but SCOWLS from the ONE PERCENT who use valet parking to avoid the RIFF RAFF.
Tadich Grill Wayfare Tavern George's Michael Mina';s and Perbacco they have so many choices and are so arrogant they let mentally disturbed citizens LINGER and never help
I'm willing to bet that he is actually part of the 1%!!! BTW You are a member of the 1% if you your net worth is basically $1 Million or higher. Quite frankly, it is not hard to be worth a million dollars! I know many farmers who bank less than 50G's a year that are millionaires because they own land. They are the 1%. People need to stop concerning themselves with hating the rich and do something with their lives to try and achieve it.
Here in Canada, someone getting minimum wage in 1970 had more buying power then someone who makes 20 dollars an hour today. Food was SO MUCH cheaper, same with housing. The only things that were costly back then were appliances, but at least they would last you 30-40 years unlike what you buy today for cheap.
All this hourly wage talk is B.S. It isn't how much you earn, its how much you keep! Get off your ass and go learn how money works! IF you invest properly (not some gay 1% GIC-RRSP) there is no freaking reason you can't retire. This is down right ridiculous. People are complaining about ALL the wrong things. EDUCATE YOURSELF ON MONEY, and STOP waiting for hand-outs!!!
USA = Bunch of whiney pukes who blame everyone but themselves like a spoiled 10 year old!!
@zuralias10 your comment shows how stupid you are, you are one of the 1% who think that everything is happy and great and ALOT of people protesting have jobs and save money so maybe you should open your eyes. ow and I am a 14 year old girl and even I realize that.
PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION ! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE ! PLEASE !
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE ! Copy and paste this everywhere"
feuding among Lower-middle class, Middle class & the Upper-middle class(99%) the Upper-middle feel they're close to being rich, play crony to the rich and stop tax & banking regulations pro lower-classes, but YOU'RE NOT RICH UNTIL YOU'RE RICH, remaining in the same tax bracket not getting the benefits of the rich & shouldering the burden that all non wealthy do, they're hindering ALL OF OUR (99%) economic progression; if this continue, U.S. will have 3rd world economic structure Rich & Poor
The "evil" 1% that are still paying most of the taxes in the US. The way he words it makes it sound like the rich are being taxed SMALLER percentage of their income than poor people are. Not true. It's a smaller percentage of their incomes compared to their PAST INCOMES, not a smaller percentage of incomes compared OTHER peoples incomes.
This means that the disparity of PERCENTAGES between rich and poor is MORE equal today than it was before!
They do pay less % as well, but the reason they still contribute allot of money in $, not %, is BECAUSE they got so much more wealth amassed to themselves.
If I have 1000$ and pay 10% its 100$ tax.
If you have 10$ and pay 10% its 1$ tax.
In $ I would be paying more, but I could also argue that the reason I pay so much more in plain $ is because I spent millions lobbing the system to keep your wage down... and its stuff like that the graph shows.
@tamu77095 It's no one's job to create jobs, jobs are created in proportion to the demand the market has for jobs. Anyway, we let the government have free reign and what happens? They ignore corporations not paying taxes and give massive bailouts to those they deem "too big to fail". That is not how capitalism works, my friend.
@LudusVan if it's no one's job to create jobs and if jobs are only created due to changes in the market then republicans (republican base)shouldn't use this faulty reasoning as their base. Now, where did I say give government more power? I'm a supporter of small government, but I'm a supporter of higher taxes (at the state level, not federally). Unfortunately america's government is too powerful already and it will only end one way now: badly
Fight on America. We Canadians have your back. The city where I live and dozens of others are organizing our own protests to show our support, and to tell PM Harper that we don't appreciate him shoving his head up the ass of the American government. I've been depressed about the state of our two nations for a long time, but the Occupy Wall Street movement makes me damn proud to have people like you in my neighboring country.
@MrLotion69 Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
@tstruss912 The people ruining this country are the people who want everything for free! Pay for your own damn stuff, there's easy ways to make money if you're not a dumbass!
@kosomoto Social spending is 200 billion per year....vs 800 billion on defense and hundreds of billions wasted on privatized healthcare. Get it? Cut defense in half over 10 years and offer college money to the troops for retraining in their new chosen field and get universal healthcare and we can save over 600 billion per year, not to mention the PRODUCTIVE INCREASE that would spark. Our measly social spending is not the problem, but it is an easy target since it's defended by the weak.
@tstruss912 Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
@tstruss912 Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
I'm sorry, I don't understand. If a company doesn't pay enough for you to accept the responsibilities, then find another job. I know my wages have been going up since I started working in 1997. Maybe their issue is with inflation. I wonder what causes inflation. Could it be the Federal reserve???
@abfmariachi Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
@abfmariachi Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
1. Cenk is such an idiot. wow you think the rich are the problem? honestly if you think the rich owe you thier money than you have issues because it's not them its the government that is destroying the poor who tax's you??? who tax's you at gun point??? who exactly spends trillions of your dollars on wars???/ wow how can people be so stupid when knowledge is all around us.
@Tethloach1 Are U THAT stupid? Who do you think neglects to tax the rich like they do everyone else? The point is that the tax system and the wage system are biased against the 99%, of which I'd bet you are one. Nobody is saying the rich should no longer be stinkin' rich, if they work hard, or inherit, whatever, they deserve to still be rich, but we still have a country to run, which I'm sure you'll benefit from, i.e., medicare, social security, disaster....
@Shelby596 I know but vote Ron paul if he is a man of his word their wont be an income tax. You will get to keep more of your money rich people and middle class people can hire more workers. it' seems more competition and less monopoly. class war fair wont solve anything. the 99% tax money gets used to bail out the rich. welfare for the rich, why create welfare why not just invest in people who are looking to create jobs instead their is welfare for the rich and the poor
@Tethloach1 lol no sorry. U maybe will able to keep u tax but all the municip. meters, water and electric companies will be privatised and your bills will go up so fast u income tax not gonna suffice. BTW, rich ppl would like to hire u and I and someone else they just dont want to pay us a living wage. they prefer slave labor. see a lot of them went else where bc its easy to explot workers in others countries. they just lock them in factories for 14 hours for 10cent an hour. its a good deal
@dharmaatdawn Im glad you raised that point, thier would be no monopoly, I would not have to work for any corporations when i can start my business, companies would compete for customers. the only reason those people work for slave labour is because they don't have as much skill and education as all of us. no taxes also means employers can hire more people to get the work done faster. competition thier wont be slave wages. monopoly = slave wages. Americans were much richer back in the 1950s.
"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
.
Someone should remind the rich that every plutocratic ruling class imposed on every society throughout history have been overthrown and mass-mutilated.
@Jex134 it's the government not the rich. If you want to fight the rich especially in politics it wont end well. If you use the politicians to pick on the rich its class bullying, they will bully you right back, not only that they will rap thier fingers around everything to the point were you have no power, pay taxes and you paying for ilegal wars, monopoly, and more violence. socialism is fine but it's not good to pick on the upper class because they picked on you!
@mycomama No, its imaginary worth goes down due to inflation of currency in circulation. Inflation causes devaluation---the fact that it has no real monetary value is another topic entirely, and not as tied into inflation as you seem to think.
I tended to believe in the people of the States to react to this blatant disparity and at least try to vote the people who are capable of tax raise. When in 2004 Bush got re-elected as the president of the States, I simply gave up. No one can save the country if the people are so dumb and fail to resist the rich abusing them.
Just by giving a poor guy a nickel you make him ignore the rich getting astronomical gains and the fact that taxpayers like the poor guy ultimately pay for it all.
As a person paying 37cents/$1.00 in income tax & entitlement deductions on every dollar earned, then 8.875 cents/$1.00 in sales tax on every dollar spent*, then 15 cents/$1.00 for every dollar invested/saved*, then god (& politicians) alone knows how many cents/$1.00 in fees & hidden taxes (& me not being in any way rich & therefore paying less than they pay), I am sick to death of the 'entitled class' telling me anyone should pay more taxes.
@aaronpolitical I grew up in a single parent household, with a mother who had to supplement our income by taking on a second job from time to time. I got my first paying job at 14 to help out and I haven't been out of work since. I'm now 42.
I got a job at a commercial moving company in my middle twenties, and have busted my ass, sometimes working multiple jobs and going to school as well, to get to the position I have now (operational manager) with that same company.
@UtubeMyAccountName I need to know nothing about you, only that you clearly have no concern for those of your roots, or any concept of the rarity of your rising out of those circumstances. We can't all be Steve Jobs, or you for that matter. Shame on you for losing the compassion upon which your mother relied.
@aaronpolitical Compassion? My mother relied on no compassion. She raised a son & two daughters by working. No one gave my mother anything, nor did she ask anyone to. She earned her own way, and so do her children.
What do you know about the people I grew up with? What are you talking about rare? Why do you think these fantasies you are constructing, are real outside of your head? Most of the people I grew up with are doing okay. No they're not any of them a Steve Jobs, but so what?
I know those people. I grew up with them, I have lived near them, and I see them every day. Get the fuck out of here, you clearly care nothing for reality.
@UtubeMyAccountName If it were so easy for folks like you, and apparently the other people you grew up with, to be "doing okay", then we wouldn't have the poverty rates we have right now. If you can't answer the questions you just asked me, you are an idiot.
Maybe I don't even need to give you the benefit of that qualifying statement, libertarian. Keep dreaming about getting rich, it'll never happen for you. LMAO
@aaronpolitical Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus.
@kosomoto we can also cut 700 billion dollars by getting out of a freakin war. A war in a country we have essentially conquered costs almost as much as providing assistance to 60 million recipients of SS in the U.S. You want a revolution? Cut SS and you got one. Look at what France did when they raised the age to receive SS.
@slev09 I agree, we should NOT have any war spending. Defense spending is understandable, but ONLY defense, as in protecting our homeland. And people currently on SS or about to get SS will remain on it, but young people should break the cycle. Having one generation pay for another is a stupid idea with population fluctuations, but it's even MORE stupid to have others pay for each other whatsoever! Independence creates LIBERTY and FREEDOM.
@kosomoto Defense spending IS directly war spending. That refers to spending by the DoD who has under their jurisdiction...the US Army!
I am fine with rehauling the SS system because it does function poorly, but cutting it creates new problems
Its more stupid to have others pay for each other? Than who pays the firemen or teachers? We have to have some socialism in this country, or else we don't have a functioning democracy
@slev09 I should have specified. FORCED spending is what should not occur. States can set their own terms for law enforcement. There should not be federal mandates, except when the entire country is at risk from a threat. As for teachers, they should be privatized. Education is a service and makes up GDP, so it should cost money directly from the person using that service. Defense is not war spending. Building a system to shoot down missiles is defense.
@kosomoto I would love to hear this plan to privatize education. Please elaborate how you can privatize education and at the same time make it affordable for everyone. We live in a hierarchal society where you have to reach education standards to have any sort of well-paying job. How do you propose you could privatize education without discriminating against the poor? how do you deal with GEDs?
Do I have to say it again? "Defense spending" is spending by the DoD which controls the army.
yeah... well... when Bourgeoisie is becoming extremly wealthy and the rest of the country is getting crumbs, that leads to a communistic movement. as we can see going around more and more lately. that's why they don't want us to know history. 'cause it repeats it self.
Abolish the government, open the free markets!! I mean, yes, lots of people gonna die. But, its just natural, social darvinism. But ppl gonna be FREE, FREE, freedom and liberty!!! I have the same right as B. Gates and Koch. if one of them decides to buy my whole town and my electric bill will be very high. I will take them to court, im sure constitution has sm to say about that. Let see whose gonna be freeer and have more liberty. Gates or me ?
Okay, so if all the rich leave when you want to take their money, what then? Who pays for all your "free" stuff you idiots? Maybe we should STOP paying for poor people so we have enough resources for everyone to live well.
@kosomoto No, you're the idiot, taxes aren't "taking" rich peoples money. Rich people need to stop BITCHING and morons like you need to stop defending them.
@Piriathy Taxes DO take the rich people's money. How the hell can you argue taxes don't take money? If I earn 10 dollars, and taxes are 3 dollars, 3 dollars were taken from my income.
@kosomoto what i MEANT was that people act like taxes are stealing or confiscation, unjust, when infact it is not. rather than simply paying their taxes like everyone else some people (often wealthy people, which makes little sense) bitch and moan about it and try to buy politicians to get their taxes lowered, like investment bankers having to pay fifteen percent on some other their earnings.
@Piriathy Taxes ARE theft when it comes to people and politicians calling for higher tax rates on certain people. It's robbing them BECAUSE of what they have, which is the same logic a thief uses when he steals.
People who call for higher taxes don't deserve to have jobs computers, TV's or any other fruits of capitalism, because they are the enemies of the system which produces those things. Their efforts seek to destroy the risk-reward system that creates jobs and makes capitalism work .
@gilbet You didn't think that through did you? If the "undeserving" as you've labeled dissenters were not permited to PARTAKE IN CAPITALISM then our economy would stall even more so. You can't have a capitalist system without consumers.
Why is it theft to give back to your country? Have you no national pride or sense of obligation whatsoever? If the bush tax cuts were repealed, it would immediately begin to help us work our way out of our incredible debt started by bush & worsened by him & obama
@Piriathy Yes, that brings up a dilemma about the fraction of consumers who are socialists. A few socialist consumers would not harm businesses because their purchases would add to the sales. But if socialists gained political power, they would begin to destroy businesses with their policies. Every step a socialist wants to take is in the opposite direction of what is good for businesses, jobs, and even tax revenues- Countries with business-friendly environments always have higher revenues.
@kosomoto Where exactly do you think they are going to go? The US has some of the lowest taxes in the first world when it comes to Corporate taxes. It would cost more money to move and set up shop somewhere else then to just pay the taxes. And There isn't "Free stuff" EVERYONE pays taxes. And you're acting like the poor can't contribute to society. Tons of lower income households simply lack funds to go to college to make something of themselves. You're a corporate apologist shill.
@Jamez773 I love the fox news shit, with the "The productive class" and when i heard that i thought of the lower class, but no, they referred to that as "the moocher class." And that Ann Coulter bitch going on about how welfare and tax breaks on the poor will create socially inept animals.
@Jamez773 Seriously,don't bother. You should have stopped typing your response after he said "so if the rich leave when you want to take their money" because it's just so ludicrous that he should have stopped after typing it.
He's a fucking moron that listens to the same strawman arguments propped up by the republican establishment.
@Jamez773 They can go anywhere. I don't mean setting up shop. They can fire everybody and make off with a few billion dollars and retire. Then Americans will see those people pay for all their services we get from taxes. We will beg the rich to come back. Poor people are a NET LOSS on society. They cost more in transfer payments than they pay into the system. Stop paying for them. Poor people don't need welfare, they need intelligence!
@kosomoto "They can fire everybody and make off with a few billion dollars and retire" Oh yes, because firing your entire workforce is good for your company's reputation. Business practices like that are a good way to lose trading partners and destroy any government deals. They won't beg the rich to come back. All they have done is waste tax dollars and exploit the working class.
@kosomoto And let me get this straight, you don't want ANY government aid for the poor but you expect them to get an education. Do you know how stupid that sounds? Need based Grants like Pell Grants, free school lunch programs for the poor, and other Government institutions and polices are designed to HELP poor people get an education.
@kosomoto I don't think you understand that sudden economic conditions often prevent formerly well off households from giving their kids an education. Take for example a family where a parent gets laid off. Suddenly that family lacks the funds for tuition. THATS why Pell Grants exist.
@kosomoto "If you don't have the money for college set aside, then don't have kids!" (facepalm)
Do you not understand that even WITH that money set aside that the majority of students from both middle and upper income households STILL need loans to pay for everything? Do you not understand that the recession has crippled families who already HAD that money to send their kids to college AFTER they had kids?
@kosomoto "NO GOVERNMENT AID for anybody." Okay, I hope you like having no police force, fire department and water treatment. Tell your parents and Grandparents to say bye bye to their Social security. Feel free to tell Veterans that they won't get any benefits or that they can't take advantage of the GI bill. Oh and don't forget to tell 90% of college students that they don't get their College Loans. Are you playing a joke or are you really this psychotic and dumb?
@Jamez773 Police and fire departments can easily be created at the local level, people pay private companies for water, grandparents should have saved, and parents should pay for children's college and if they can't afford it they shouldn't have children, TRY HARDER>
@kosomoto " Police and fire departments can EASILY be created at the local level" HA you have OBVIOUSLY no clue how much money is needed to fund those types of organizations. Have you bothered to EVER go to a town hall meeting in your life. yeah, see what you can do with that small of a budget.
@Jamez773 Police DON'T require much money. Ever heard of a militia? People volunteer in their free time to enforce the law, using their own weapons. Police with a bureaucracy attached DO require money, because our government loves to waste our money.
@kosomoto "Police DON'T require much money. Ever heard of a militia?" You tried that once after the revolutionary war. And guess what...? IT FAILED. You had private armies fighting with the army. It was feudalism light and it was the cause of some of the worst revolts and riots in American history. Your ignorance has stopped being funny and started being painfully stupid.
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
- Thomas Jefferson
The same way the Greeks could grab thier family sword and armor to fight for their nation was the same way an American could grab his firearms and report to Boot Camp.
@Salvysahagun "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
You do realize that Jefferson actually called for funds to back the creation of a stronger Navy, used Federal troops to stabilize the Louisiana Purchase, and even helped in the transition AWAY from militias and towards a National military right?
@Salvysahagun "The same way the Greeks could grab thier family sword and armor to fight for their nation"
Learn your history, Greece was a collection of separate states most of which were highly militarized. Even Athens had an actual military and only used a draft like system in desperate measures. Or did you miss the part where Macedonia used professional Greek troops to conquer everything up to India?
No Alexanderos led the army with Macedonians into Persia.
Greeks, Persians, Myceneans all had family weapons and Armor. Have you read the Illiad? Achilles used the same armor in ALL of his wars. The Romans where the first to have uniform militaries.
@Salvysahagun "No Alexanderos led the army with Macedonians into Persia."
Alexander conquered Greece and brought their pre existing armies into his own. They had Family Weapons and armor BECAUSE the we a trained fighting force NOT a militia. "Have you read the Illiad?" Yes nice work of FICTION.
"The Romans where the first to have uniform militaries."
Yeah...Try China and India a few hundred years before even the Roman Kingdom formed.
@Salvysahagun "Chinese and india would run drafts in time of great peril seldom did they require mandotry entry. Again Just enough to keep the invaders at bay."
Uhh, no. Chinese and Indian state based civilization actually was FORMED because of professional armies. They were both highly militaristic nations with centralized empires and highly trained professional fighting forces loyal to their respected kings.
@Salvysahagun "When did I ever say the word militia?" The Creation of a military by civilians is a militia and after the Presidency of George Washington they idea that America could be a stable nation with only a militia was thrown out the window after several armed groups revolted against the government.
Your implication that their should be no national army through your previous comments shows that you prefer a militia based system.
His actions as President show that wasn't the case. He went disregarded congress when purchasing Louisiana from the French, Controlled trade through the Embargo Act, and passed the law preventing Slave trade in 1807. Sorry but if you think controlling the market and side stepping congress to make a land deal is in line with Libertarian ideals than you don't know history.
Embargo Act was focused on Europe because of the tensions rising with Napoleon. Jefferson had to go back on his small government ideals because he wanted to get France out of America but at the same not loose trade relations. The Louisana was hitting two birds with one stone. Most of the Lousiana was paid for Bonds.
Basically thou Louisana only proved the Hamilton was right and in order to expand we had to spend money.
@Salvysahagun The Embargo act made it impossible for merchants to legally trade with England and would cause american Business to suffer. Deciding who you can and can't trade with is about as anti libertarian as it gets.
@Salvysahagun You missed the point. Libertarianism entails that the Government SHOULDN'T regulate commerce. So preventing trade with someone is against libertarianism. You're right, I'm not going to beat you because you already beat yourself about 3 responses ago. You have no idea what the terms your using mean. You're making first year mistakes and going off of assumptions you make off of Europe. If you put this in a research paper you would be laughed out of the room.
@Salvysahagun Also the Embargo act and his stopping of the Slave trade was horrible for southern Planters and their business. By preventing that free trade with England the sales of cash crops like Cotton, Tobacco, and indigo tanked and almost caused a recession.
Jefferson was ashamed of his presidency that is state on several account in his biography.
I'm NOT a libertarian. Just need to make that as clear as possible Bu the ideology was not yet complete. thats why Jefferson supported Navy, and Education but many of his leanings where simular to modern day libertarianism.
@Salvysahagun "bro I'm just reading his quotes" That's just it though, his quotes, as we have both agreed, didn't reflect is presidency or his political agenda during and after his presidency.
The ideology was not yet complete? Classical Liberalism and the Anti-Federalists were associated with with positions that run contrary and in some aspects completely against Libertarianism.
@Salvysahagun "Jefferson supported Navy, and Education but many of his leanings where simular to modern day libertarianism." And many of Mussolini's leanings were similar to that of Leninist communism. In both the case of Jefferson and Libertarianism and Mussolini with Leninist communism the leaders followed an ideology that, although held some similar positions, still had many positions that stand in stark contrast to the Libertarianism and Leninist Communism.
@Salvysahagun For a man who valued the 10th amendment he sure did disregard it a whole hell of a lot in his presidency. In fact many people within his party would criticize and hate him for it. And btw the 10th amendment pretty much assured that the government of the U.S. would be centralized and encouraged federal funded projects. That's about as anti libertarian as you can get while still being in the realm of a liberal democracy.
@Salvysahagun Oh and adding insult to injury, Jefferson actually helped in the creation of West Point in order to train the Americans that would make up the back bone of the American Military for Generations to come. Far from his original position that centralization and a National military were a bad ideas.
Navys can't throw cou de tats thats why. he supported them
Jefferson valued education, in any form. If Military history could be taught well then their we would be able to protect against invaders THe Navies purpose was to protect the borders and ports until the Armie could be raised.
Please don't tell me your one of those libtards who think Jefferson was progressive?
@Salvysahagun Jefferson contradicted every single one of his claims of being an Anti-Federalist. He Helped in the formation of a National Government, Annexed the Louisiana even though nothing in the constitution said he could, and actually helped create a STRONGER federal government.
@Salvysahagun "Please don't tell me your one of those libtards who think Jefferson was progressive"
Please don't tell me that you're one of those libertarian retards who think every founding father wanted complete anarchy. Jefferson WAS a liberal in the most traditional sense of the word. Hell he helped CREATE a Liberal Democratic Republic and wanted a government not tied down by an aristocracy. IE Traditional Liberalism.
Traditional liberalism is libertarianism. Which inculdes Free People and Free Markets as originally defined.
Hayek the super god to libertarians never consisdered himself a conservative. Libertarianism in America was created to reignite the orignal liberal movement, because FDR steered more in a cross between American System of Economics and Progressivism which in America was called liberalism
@Salvysahagun "Traditional liberalism is libertarianism
"Wheras in Europe Liberal means libertarian."
Uhh, no. First off libertarianism is an offshoot of Classical Liberalism. Saying they are one in the same is like saying a Wolf and a Lab are the same. They are similar but they aren't the same. Libertarianism has WAY more to do with economic freedom while Classical Liberalism focused more on republican virtue
Buddy I have friends in Europe. When some one says they are "liberal" most europeans consider he or she to be a a follower Hayek or Mises.
Jefferson also made it very clear that he was intended on wiping the national debt clean which he almost accomplished.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." - that is not a something a federalist would think of.
@Salvysahagun Buddy, I AM European and have lived in 3 different countries there (The UK, Italy, and Germany). A Liberal is almost ALWAYS referring to someone who is a moderate with left leanings. Like "Who's he voting for?" "He's a liberal so I'll probably vote Labour."
"Jefferson also made it very clear that he was intended on wiping the national debt" Unimportant to the topic of discussion.
No its not national debt usually relflects the size of government wake up please
I'm gunna have to call you out on that. I have friends in Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. It's common knowelege the Liberal is a latin dirivative of the word "free" the original definition states policitcally free and Economically Free.
Lord Acton the leader of the liberal movement coined a famous line "Socialism is slavery"
@Salvysahagun "No its not national debt usually relflects the size of government " No it doesn't. Look at how much debt the U.S. was in under the Articles of Confederation or countries in the third world with little to no centralized government.
"Liberal is a latin dirivative of the word "free" the original definition states policitcally free and Economically Free." Yeah the ORIGINAL definition. The term has changed meaning since the 20th century.
Yes it does because he knew debt = money. the Federal Government could borrow more money than anyone and have the largest influence on expanding the money supply
Jefferson was president in the early 18th century.
like I said... the Affluent Society and FDR for ever changed the definition of Liberalism in the West. Mises and Hayek tried to revive the old liberalism but it could never happen.
@Salvysahagun "Yes it does because he knew debt = money. the Federal Government could borrow more money than anyone and have the largest influence on expanding the money supply" Do you have ANY idea how anti libertarian the idea of the Federal Government doing that is?
"Jefferson was president in the early 18th century." Duh
@Salvysahagun Liberalism in Europe has the SAME definition as it does in the US. My family and I have been in Government, I know more about European political terms than you do. Just look at a BNP add against the liberal Labour party here in the UK. I don't know who you have been talking to, but their about as up to date on European politics as a history book from the 19th century.
@Salvysahagun The Liberal Peoples party is also a very conservative nationalist party. They are to modern liberalism as Lennism is to Stateless Communism.
@Salvysahagun The party also has a liking for mixed economies. They aren't even really Libertarians. A real libertarian group is against any form of state directed economy even if the state only plays a small part.
@Salvysahagun "that is not a something a federalist would think of." The tenth amendment is a clear indication of Federalism BECAUSE it suggest anything against it.
"There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment"- US. Vs. Darby
@Salvysahagun And the ability to purchase land on a whim was NOT specified in the constitution to be in the President's right. It fell into Implied powers which anti federalists were against. Jefferson went back on his original position to buy Louisiana from the French to side step delegations in the Legislature and a supreme court decision on if the act was constitutional. It was an abuse of power by Anti federalist terms and Jefferson was called out on it by both parties for being a hypocrite.
I am aware of that. It proved that Libertarianism and small governments couldn't work.
Jefferson went down in history for turning on his idea's and flip floping idea's. Thats why he didn't want to be known for being president because his presidency was a failure to his eyes. He claimed that hist greatest accomplishments where Virginias Religous Freedom law and University of Virginia.
I've studied American history very well. your not going to beat me.
@kosomoto There is a reason why Militias aren't the primary source of policing in the first world today. It's because when they are you get a failed state like Somalia with several Waring factions of private armies with laws that contradict each other, selective enforcement, and massive corruption. Read a history book for Christ's sake.
This has been flagged as spam show
Представьте себе, что все люди на земле подарят вам по 1 рублю, им будет это не сложно, а Вы в одночасье станните Миллиардером.Здорово!Вопрос в том, как побудить их это сделать.Став участником Международной Системы Финансовой Взаимопомощи,Вы будете ежедневно получать на свои счета сотни денежных переводов.И не по 1 рублю, а по 5$ 10$ и 15$. htp : // gmgalick.goldline. pro (скапируйте ссылку в браузер и уберите пробелы)СЕРТИФИКАТ № GA16921 ПОДАРЮ ПО 10$ КАЖДОМУ, ГАРАНТИРУЮ! скайп: gmgalick
richmalika58 3 weeks ago
@ReeferTim - You are obviously an angry, uneducated, and immature person. Baby Boomers are statistically the wealthiest group of people in America. 23% of government spending is on welfare and includes aid for any mental illness. And if these people wish to spend $200 for lunch and can afford it, guess what.....that is a good thing!! That money is being taxed...TWICE! First as sales tax, than as income tax! It's money helping the economy!
12Artleye 1 month ago
Ya know what STFU means J is JERK ya Jerk Shut your over privileged pie hole
ReeferTim 1 month ago
Sometimes the arrogance of the overindulgent lunch crowd in The Financial district of San Francisco spending 200 and 300 bucks for lunch and Dinner while mentally disturbed baby boomers scrounge for food in refuse receptacles and receive nothing but SCOWLS from the ONE PERCENT who use valet parking to avoid the RIFF RAFF.
Tadich Grill Wayfare Tavern George's Michael Mina';s and Perbacco they have so many choices and are so arrogant they let mentally disturbed citizens LINGER and never help
ReeferTim 1 month ago
I'm willing to bet that he is actually part of the 1%!!! BTW You are a member of the 1% if you your net worth is basically $1 Million or higher. Quite frankly, it is not hard to be worth a million dollars! I know many farmers who bank less than 50G's a year that are millionaires because they own land. They are the 1%. People need to stop concerning themselves with hating the rich and do something with their lives to try and achieve it.
12Artleye 1 month ago
@12Artleye Oh gee such a terrible predicament having money
poor baby
may I call ya all a WHAMBUlance
PONY UP aand STFUJ
ReeferTim 1 month ago
Sometime he makes good points, like now, but for the most part, T YT is just another globalist at heart. Fuck globalists!
MeCallCrazy 2 months ago
Here in Canada, someone getting minimum wage in 1970 had more buying power then someone who makes 20 dollars an hour today. Food was SO MUCH cheaper, same with housing. The only things that were costly back then were appliances, but at least they would last you 30-40 years unlike what you buy today for cheap.
EquitesVeritatis 3 months ago
All this hourly wage talk is B.S. It isn't how much you earn, its how much you keep! Get off your ass and go learn how money works! IF you invest properly (not some gay 1% GIC-RRSP) there is no freaking reason you can't retire. This is down right ridiculous. People are complaining about ALL the wrong things. EDUCATE YOURSELF ON MONEY, and STOP waiting for hand-outs!!!
USA = Bunch of whiney pukes who blame everyone but themselves like a spoiled 10 year old!!
zuralias10 4 months ago
@zuralias10 your comment shows how stupid you are, you are one of the 1% who think that everything is happy and great and ALOT of people protesting have jobs and save money so maybe you should open your eyes. ow and I am a 14 year old girl and even I realize that.
stephensiscool 3 months ago
@zuralias10 "All this hourly wage talk is B.S. It isn't how much you earn, its how much you keep! Get off your ass and go learn how money works!"
That does not negate the fact that wages have skyrocketed for the 1% while others have not. You don't see this?
hawklord2001 3 months ago
""not enough to say "Vote Ron Paul"
PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION ! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE ! PLEASE !
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE ! Copy and paste this everywhere"
Allseeingeye2013 4 months ago
Fuck yeah, young turks.
heyandy889 4 months ago
feuding among Lower-middle class, Middle class & the Upper-middle class(99%) the Upper-middle feel they're close to being rich, play crony to the rich and stop tax & banking regulations pro lower-classes, but YOU'RE NOT RICH UNTIL YOU'RE RICH, remaining in the same tax bracket not getting the benefits of the rich & shouldering the burden that all non wealthy do, they're hindering ALL OF OUR (99%) economic progression; if this continue, U.S. will have 3rd world economic structure Rich & Poor
TheOdhisattva 4 months ago
The "evil" 1% that are still paying most of the taxes in the US. The way he words it makes it sound like the rich are being taxed SMALLER percentage of their income than poor people are. Not true. It's a smaller percentage of their incomes compared to their PAST INCOMES, not a smaller percentage of incomes compared OTHER peoples incomes.
This means that the disparity of PERCENTAGES between rich and poor is MORE equal today than it was before!
cmtmoore 4 months ago
@cmtmoore yea but the disparity in tax rates shouldnt be equal. As the lower income you are the less able you are to pay taxes.
in terms of wages median income is stagnant while top 1% income levels soar, which is the point of the chart.
but of course hedge fund managers, some of the richest of the rich, still pay a lower tax rate than many middle class families.
LiekABaus 4 months ago
@cmtmoore
Total lie.
They do pay less % as well, but the reason they still contribute allot of money in $, not %, is BECAUSE they got so much more wealth amassed to themselves.
If I have 1000$ and pay 10% its 100$ tax.
If you have 10$ and pay 10% its 1$ tax.
In $ I would be paying more, but I could also argue that the reason I pay so much more in plain $ is because I spent millions lobbing the system to keep your wage down... and its stuff like that the graph shows.
A transfer of wealth.
Lobos222 4 months ago
We're the 99% Viva la Revolution!
toddfuckingaudas 4 months ago
Uygur is such a good broadcaster. Keep on Turkin!!!
resaf 4 months ago 2
More government regulation will help NOTHING!
LudusVan 4 months ago
@LudusVan why not, job creators haven't been doing they're job the last 20 - 30 years, time to change tactics?
tamu77095 4 months ago
@tamu77095 It's no one's job to create jobs, jobs are created in proportion to the demand the market has for jobs. Anyway, we let the government have free reign and what happens? They ignore corporations not paying taxes and give massive bailouts to those they deem "too big to fail". That is not how capitalism works, my friend.
LudusVan 4 months ago
@LudusVan if it's no one's job to create jobs and if jobs are only created due to changes in the market then republicans (republican base)shouldn't use this faulty reasoning as their base. Now, where did I say give government more power? I'm a supporter of small government, but I'm a supporter of higher taxes (at the state level, not federally). Unfortunately america's government is too powerful already and it will only end one way now: badly
tamu77095 4 months ago
@tamu77095 Well that, Mr. tamu77095, is something we are in agreement over.
LudusVan 4 months ago
@LudusVan :) ms.
tamu77095 4 months ago
@tamu77095 My sincerest apologies, Ms, tamu77095.
LudusVan 4 months ago
Cenk ur back
Blacktolite 4 months ago
Fight on America. We Canadians have your back. The city where I live and dozens of others are organizing our own protests to show our support, and to tell PM Harper that we don't appreciate him shoving his head up the ass of the American government. I've been depressed about the state of our two nations for a long time, but the Occupy Wall Street movement makes me damn proud to have people like you in my neighboring country.
QueenOliver 4 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks 17
I'm glad I'm part of the 1% being rich is awesome!
MrLotion69 4 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrLotion69 Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
kosomoto 4 months ago
Is it just me, or is there an audio/video discrepancy in the past few videos...
iloveyertle 4 months ago
Its a rather frightening concept when you realize our economic woes is caused by a single percent.
WolfsStorm 4 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks
@WolfsStorm It wouldn't be so bad if we didn't bail out the banks and let capitalism run.
kosomoto 4 months ago
We are the 99.99%! It's really only one out of 10K people that are screwing up this country, people like the Koch Bros.
tstruss912 4 months ago 46
@tstruss912 The people ruining this country are the people who want everything for free! Pay for your own damn stuff, there's easy ways to make money if you're not a dumbass!
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto Social spending is 200 billion per year....vs 800 billion on defense and hundreds of billions wasted on privatized healthcare. Get it? Cut defense in half over 10 years and offer college money to the troops for retraining in their new chosen field and get universal healthcare and we can save over 600 billion per year, not to mention the PRODUCTIVE INCREASE that would spark. Our measly social spending is not the problem, but it is an easy target since it's defended by the weak.
tstruss912 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tstruss912 Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
kosomoto 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tstruss912 Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
kosomoto 4 months ago
@tstruss912 That 0.01% also includes Warren Buffett
redcups21 3 days ago
I'm sorry, I don't understand. If a company doesn't pay enough for you to accept the responsibilities, then find another job. I know my wages have been going up since I started working in 1997. Maybe their issue is with inflation. I wonder what causes inflation. Could it be the Federal reserve???
satarnag 4 months ago
Let's delete the elite.
noxXxnocti 4 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" - Mahatma Ghandi
ShallowBeThyGames 4 months ago
We are the 99%!!
abfmariachi 4 months ago 49
@abfmariachi Yes, I am the 99%, and I believe in ending welfare and lowering taxes!
kosomoto 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@abfmariachi Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
kosomoto 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@abfmariachi Hey, idiot. Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus. -debtclock
kosomoto 4 months ago
The graphs are manipulated
Wiseguyzmoney 4 months ago
Easily rebuked
/watch?v=vDhcqua3_W8
Don't Forget about income mobility
1972 Bretton Woods Collapsed and the middle classes savings where well wiped out. that was the problem not the Reagan revolution.
Economic education would be helpfull cenk.
The rich pay, FICA (3%-0%), Corperate income tax (12%-35%) and personal income tax (20% to 35%)
Middle class pay FICA,(8%) and personal income tax (25%) You do the math.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
"Average Hourly Earnings" $20??? Are you serious? Most people earn about 10 dollars/h if they're lucky.
xxxxxxkarlaxxxxxx 4 months ago
@xxxxxxkarlaxxxxxx You'd have to be retarded if you're older than 20 making 10 dollars an hour. Literally. You'd need to have autism.
kosomoto 4 months ago
I think that media hack Erin Burnett should see these graphs. Maybe then she'd understand what OWS is about.
DorEnErnil 4 months ago
i'm confused.. in an similar topic, you said 0.1% o3o
chikkachinijohannady 4 months ago
1. Cenk is such an idiot. wow you think the rich are the problem? honestly if you think the rich owe you thier money than you have issues because it's not them its the government that is destroying the poor who tax's you??? who tax's you at gun point??? who exactly spends trillions of your dollars on wars???/ wow how can people be so stupid when knowledge is all around us.
Tethloach1 4 months ago
@Tethloach1 Are U THAT stupid? Who do you think neglects to tax the rich like they do everyone else? The point is that the tax system and the wage system are biased against the 99%, of which I'd bet you are one. Nobody is saying the rich should no longer be stinkin' rich, if they work hard, or inherit, whatever, they deserve to still be rich, but we still have a country to run, which I'm sure you'll benefit from, i.e., medicare, social security, disaster....
Shelby596 4 months ago
@Shelby596 I know but vote Ron paul if he is a man of his word their wont be an income tax. You will get to keep more of your money rich people and middle class people can hire more workers. it' seems more competition and less monopoly. class war fair wont solve anything. the 99% tax money gets used to bail out the rich. welfare for the rich, why create welfare why not just invest in people who are looking to create jobs instead their is welfare for the rich and the poor
Tethloach1 4 months ago
@Tethloach1 lol no sorry. U maybe will able to keep u tax but all the municip. meters, water and electric companies will be privatised and your bills will go up so fast u income tax not gonna suffice. BTW, rich ppl would like to hire u and I and someone else they just dont want to pay us a living wage. they prefer slave labor. see a lot of them went else where bc its easy to explot workers in others countries. they just lock them in factories for 14 hours for 10cent an hour. its a good deal
dharmaatdawn 4 months ago
@dharmaatdawn Im glad you raised that point, thier would be no monopoly, I would not have to work for any corporations when i can start my business, companies would compete for customers. the only reason those people work for slave labour is because they don't have as much skill and education as all of us. no taxes also means employers can hire more people to get the work done faster. competition thier wont be slave wages. monopoly = slave wages. Americans were much richer back in the 1950s.
Tethloach1 4 months ago
"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
.
Someone should remind the rich that every plutocratic ruling class imposed on every society throughout history have been overthrown and mass-mutilated.
Jex134 4 months ago
@Jex134 it's the government not the rich. If you want to fight the rich especially in politics it wont end well. If you use the politicians to pick on the rich its class bullying, they will bully you right back, not only that they will rap thier fingers around everything to the point were you have no power, pay taxes and you paying for ilegal wars, monopoly, and more violence. socialism is fine but it's not good to pick on the upper class because they picked on you!
Tethloach1 4 months ago
Hey Cenk , why don't you tell the kids what happened in 72 that made the average hourly earnings go down?
When the money has no base in reality it's worth goes down.
mycomama 4 months ago
@mycomama No, its imaginary worth goes down due to inflation of currency in circulation. Inflation causes devaluation---the fact that it has no real monetary value is another topic entirely, and not as tied into inflation as you seem to think.
Jex134 4 months ago
The past 11 years?
bornthug213 4 months ago
Graphs like these are eye-opening.
TOTCD 4 months ago
I tended to believe in the people of the States to react to this blatant disparity and at least try to vote the people who are capable of tax raise. When in 2004 Bush got re-elected as the president of the States, I simply gave up. No one can save the country if the people are so dumb and fail to resist the rich abusing them.
Just by giving a poor guy a nickel you make him ignore the rich getting astronomical gains and the fact that taxpayers like the poor guy ultimately pay for it all.
fingrid 4 months ago
As a person paying 37cents/$1.00 in income tax & entitlement deductions on every dollar earned, then 8.875 cents/$1.00 in sales tax on every dollar spent*, then 15 cents/$1.00 for every dollar invested/saved*, then god (& politicians) alone knows how many cents/$1.00 in fees & hidden taxes (& me not being in any way rich & therefore paying less than they pay), I am sick to death of the 'entitled class' telling me anyone should pay more taxes.
*money already taxed when I earned it...
UtubeMyAccountName 4 months ago 3
@UtubeMyAccountName I pay the same, and fuck off, seriously. You have no clue what life is like for those less fortunate than us.
aaronpolitical 4 months ago
@aaronpolitical I grew up in a single parent household, with a mother who had to supplement our income by taking on a second job from time to time. I got my first paying job at 14 to help out and I haven't been out of work since. I'm now 42.
I got a job at a commercial moving company in my middle twenties, and have busted my ass, sometimes working multiple jobs and going to school as well, to get to the position I have now (operational manager) with that same company.
You know nothing about me.
UtubeMyAccountName 4 months ago
@UtubeMyAccountName I need to know nothing about you, only that you clearly have no concern for those of your roots, or any concept of the rarity of your rising out of those circumstances. We can't all be Steve Jobs, or you for that matter. Shame on you for losing the compassion upon which your mother relied.
aaronpolitical 4 months ago
@aaronpolitical Compassion? My mother relied on no compassion. She raised a son & two daughters by working. No one gave my mother anything, nor did she ask anyone to. She earned her own way, and so do her children.
What do you know about the people I grew up with? What are you talking about rare? Why do you think these fantasies you are constructing, are real outside of your head? Most of the people I grew up with are doing okay. No they're not any of them a Steve Jobs, but so what?
UtubeMyAccountName 4 months ago
@UtubeMyAccountName Bullshit.
I know those people. I grew up with them, I have lived near them, and I see them every day. Get the fuck out of here, you clearly care nothing for reality.
aaronpolitical 4 months ago
@aaronpolitical What are you talking about?
You know what people? You grew up with which people? You see what people everyday? What reality do I not care about?
What are you talking about?
UtubeMyAccountName 4 months ago
@UtubeMyAccountName If it were so easy for folks like you, and apparently the other people you grew up with, to be "doing okay", then we wouldn't have the poverty rates we have right now. If you can't answer the questions you just asked me, you are an idiot.
Maybe I don't even need to give you the benefit of that qualifying statement, libertarian. Keep dreaming about getting rich, it'll never happen for you. LMAO
aaronpolitical 4 months ago
@aaronpolitical Who said anything was easy? Who said I was a libertarian? How can I (or anyone) answer questions regarding assertions you made?
Who said I dream about getting rich? You 'talk' a great deal without ever actually saying anything. it is impressive.
UtubeMyAccountName 4 months ago
@UtubeMyAccountName I have read your other comments. It is impressive how much one can figure out about another if one has a brain.
aaronpolitical 4 months ago
@aaronpolitical You did it again, words, words, words; nothing, nothing, nothing. I already said I was impressed, no need to gild the lily.
If meaningless babble was gold ...
UtubeMyAccountName 4 months ago
@aaronpolitical Defense/war spending is 699 billion. Social security is 720 billion. 820 billion for medicare/medicaid. Income security 411 billion. Federal Pensions 210 billion. Interest on debt is 215 billion. We can INSTANTLY cut 2 trillion dollars by cutting everything but defense and interest. Problem solved. We're INSTANTLY in a surplus.
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto we can also cut 700 billion dollars by getting out of a freakin war. A war in a country we have essentially conquered costs almost as much as providing assistance to 60 million recipients of SS in the U.S. You want a revolution? Cut SS and you got one. Look at what France did when they raised the age to receive SS.
slev09 4 months ago
@slev09 I agree, we should NOT have any war spending. Defense spending is understandable, but ONLY defense, as in protecting our homeland. And people currently on SS or about to get SS will remain on it, but young people should break the cycle. Having one generation pay for another is a stupid idea with population fluctuations, but it's even MORE stupid to have others pay for each other whatsoever! Independence creates LIBERTY and FREEDOM.
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto Defense spending IS directly war spending. That refers to spending by the DoD who has under their jurisdiction...the US Army!
I am fine with rehauling the SS system because it does function poorly, but cutting it creates new problems
Its more stupid to have others pay for each other? Than who pays the firemen or teachers? We have to have some socialism in this country, or else we don't have a functioning democracy
slev09 4 months ago
@slev09 I should have specified. FORCED spending is what should not occur. States can set their own terms for law enforcement. There should not be federal mandates, except when the entire country is at risk from a threat. As for teachers, they should be privatized. Education is a service and makes up GDP, so it should cost money directly from the person using that service. Defense is not war spending. Building a system to shoot down missiles is defense.
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto I would love to hear this plan to privatize education. Please elaborate how you can privatize education and at the same time make it affordable for everyone. We live in a hierarchal society where you have to reach education standards to have any sort of well-paying job. How do you propose you could privatize education without discriminating against the poor? how do you deal with GEDs?
Do I have to say it again? "Defense spending" is spending by the DoD which controls the army.
slev09 4 months ago
who the fudge are these seven people that keep disliking this channel????
wachi201 4 months ago
@wachi201 It's not seven people it is one person with 7 accounts.
MrGnarus 4 months ago
@MrGnarus .....of course....that person is a doosh
wachi201 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Financial Enemy of Greece, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Portugal, & America - Jew
1. Goldman Sachs CEO, Lyold Blankfein - Jew
2. IMF Deputy CEO, John Lisky - Jew
3. Ex IMF CEO, Dominic Strauss - Jew
4. World Bank CEO, Robert Zoellick - Jew
5.Ex World Bank CEO, James Woolfesen - Jew
6.Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke - Jew
7.Ex Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan -Jew
8.Obama Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner -Jew
9.George Bush Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson -Jew
Stevie68000 4 months ago
yeah... well... when Bourgeoisie is becoming extremly wealthy and the rest of the country is getting crumbs, that leads to a communistic movement. as we can see going around more and more lately. that's why they don't want us to know history. 'cause it repeats it self.
aandreya 4 months ago
Bravo Cenk !!!!!
appatel 4 months ago
Psssssss fuck rich people
pisitama 4 months ago
Rail against CORPORATISTS not (R). We all know most (D) are really corporatists along with most (R)'s.
lopsided1 4 months ago
The economy as a whole is about to take a major crash again. Has anyone seen what's happening in china?
suchahipster 4 months ago
Correlation does not prove causation, Cenk.
PolitcalIslam 4 months ago
Ronald Reagan happened.
Redfingers 4 months ago 12
Abolish the government, open the free markets!! I mean, yes, lots of people gonna die. But, its just natural, social darvinism. But ppl gonna be FREE, FREE, freedom and liberty!!! I have the same right as B. Gates and Koch. if one of them decides to buy my whole town and my electric bill will be very high. I will take them to court, im sure constitution has sm to say about that. Let see whose gonna be freeer and have more liberty. Gates or me ?
dharmaatdawn 4 months ago
@dharmaatdawn how are you gonna take someone to court if you have difficulty affording a lawyer or if the judicial branch is "abolished"???
Piriathy 4 months ago
Okay, so if all the rich leave when you want to take their money, what then? Who pays for all your "free" stuff you idiots? Maybe we should STOP paying for poor people so we have enough resources for everyone to live well.
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto No, you're the idiot, taxes aren't "taking" rich peoples money. Rich people need to stop BITCHING and morons like you need to stop defending them.
Piriathy 4 months ago
@Piriathy Taxes DO take the rich people's money. How the hell can you argue taxes don't take money? If I earn 10 dollars, and taxes are 3 dollars, 3 dollars were taken from my income.
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto what i MEANT was that people act like taxes are stealing or confiscation, unjust, when infact it is not. rather than simply paying their taxes like everyone else some people (often wealthy people, which makes little sense) bitch and moan about it and try to buy politicians to get their taxes lowered, like investment bankers having to pay fifteen percent on some other their earnings.
Piriathy 4 months ago
@Piriathy Taxes ARE theft when it comes to people and politicians calling for higher tax rates on certain people. It's robbing them BECAUSE of what they have, which is the same logic a thief uses when he steals.
People who call for higher taxes don't deserve to have jobs computers, TV's or any other fruits of capitalism, because they are the enemies of the system which produces those things. Their efforts seek to destroy the risk-reward system that creates jobs and makes capitalism work .
gilbet 4 months ago
@gilbet You didn't think that through did you? If the "undeserving" as you've labeled dissenters were not permited to PARTAKE IN CAPITALISM then our economy would stall even more so. You can't have a capitalist system without consumers.
Why is it theft to give back to your country? Have you no national pride or sense of obligation whatsoever? If the bush tax cuts were repealed, it would immediately begin to help us work our way out of our incredible debt started by bush & worsened by him & obama
Piriathy 4 months ago
@Piriathy Yes, that brings up a dilemma about the fraction of consumers who are socialists. A few socialist consumers would not harm businesses because their purchases would add to the sales. But if socialists gained political power, they would begin to destroy businesses with their policies. Every step a socialist wants to take is in the opposite direction of what is good for businesses, jobs, and even tax revenues- Countries with business-friendly environments always have higher revenues.
gilbet 4 months ago
@kosomoto Where exactly do you think they are going to go? The US has some of the lowest taxes in the first world when it comes to Corporate taxes. It would cost more money to move and set up shop somewhere else then to just pay the taxes. And There isn't "Free stuff" EVERYONE pays taxes. And you're acting like the poor can't contribute to society. Tons of lower income households simply lack funds to go to college to make something of themselves. You're a corporate apologist shill.
Jamez773 4 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks
@Jamez773 I love the fox news shit, with the "The productive class" and when i heard that i thought of the lower class, but no, they referred to that as "the moocher class." And that Ann Coulter bitch going on about how welfare and tax breaks on the poor will create socially inept animals.
727ping 4 months ago
@727ping Ann Coulter is a socially inept cunt.
random69ism 4 months ago 34
@random69ism No she simply likes money more than her soul.
Jex134 4 months ago
@Jamez773 Seriously,don't bother. You should have stopped typing your response after he said "so if the rich leave when you want to take their money" because it's just so ludicrous that he should have stopped after typing it.
He's a fucking moron that listens to the same strawman arguments propped up by the republican establishment.
xxFortunadoxx 4 months ago
@Jamez773 They can go anywhere. I don't mean setting up shop. They can fire everybody and make off with a few billion dollars and retire. Then Americans will see those people pay for all their services we get from taxes. We will beg the rich to come back. Poor people are a NET LOSS on society. They cost more in transfer payments than they pay into the system. Stop paying for them. Poor people don't need welfare, they need intelligence!
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto "They can fire everybody and make off with a few billion dollars and retire" Oh yes, because firing your entire workforce is good for your company's reputation. Business practices like that are a good way to lose trading partners and destroy any government deals. They won't beg the rich to come back. All they have done is waste tax dollars and exploit the working class.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@kosomoto And let me get this straight, you don't want ANY government aid for the poor but you expect them to get an education. Do you know how stupid that sounds? Need based Grants like Pell Grants, free school lunch programs for the poor, and other Government institutions and polices are designed to HELP poor people get an education.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773 NO GOVERNMENT AID for anybody. If you cannot afford to pay for yours kids education, YOU DON'T FUCKING HAVE KIDS!
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto I don't think you understand that sudden economic conditions often prevent formerly well off households from giving their kids an education. Take for example a family where a parent gets laid off. Suddenly that family lacks the funds for tuition. THATS why Pell Grants exist.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773 If you don't have the money for college set aside, then don't have kids!
kosomoto 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kosomoto "If you don't have the money for college set aside, then don't have kids!" (facepalm)
Do you not understand that even WITH that money set aside that the majority of students from both middle and upper income households STILL need loans to pay for everything? Do you not understand that the recession has crippled families who already HAD that money to send their kids to college AFTER they had kids?
Jamez773 4 months ago
@kosomoto "NO GOVERNMENT AID for anybody." Okay, I hope you like having no police force, fire department and water treatment. Tell your parents and Grandparents to say bye bye to their Social security. Feel free to tell Veterans that they won't get any benefits or that they can't take advantage of the GI bill. Oh and don't forget to tell 90% of college students that they don't get their College Loans. Are you playing a joke or are you really this psychotic and dumb?
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773 Police and fire departments can easily be created at the local level, people pay private companies for water, grandparents should have saved, and parents should pay for children's college and if they can't afford it they shouldn't have children, TRY HARDER>
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto " Police and fire departments can EASILY be created at the local level" HA you have OBVIOUSLY no clue how much money is needed to fund those types of organizations. Have you bothered to EVER go to a town hall meeting in your life. yeah, see what you can do with that small of a budget.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773 Police DON'T require much money. Ever heard of a militia? People volunteer in their free time to enforce the law, using their own weapons. Police with a bureaucracy attached DO require money, because our government loves to waste our money.
kosomoto 4 months ago
@kosomoto "Police DON'T require much money. Ever heard of a militia?" You tried that once after the revolutionary war. And guess what...? IT FAILED. You had private armies fighting with the army. It was feudalism light and it was the cause of some of the worst revolts and riots in American history. Your ignorance has stopped being funny and started being painfully stupid.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
- Thomas Jefferson
The same way the Greeks could grab thier family sword and armor to fight for their nation was the same way an American could grab his firearms and report to Boot Camp.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
You do realize that Jefferson actually called for funds to back the creation of a stronger Navy, used Federal troops to stabilize the Louisiana Purchase, and even helped in the transition AWAY from militias and towards a National military right?
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "The same way the Greeks could grab thier family sword and armor to fight for their nation"
Learn your history, Greece was a collection of separate states most of which were highly militarized. Even Athens had an actual military and only used a draft like system in desperate measures. Or did you miss the part where Macedonia used professional Greek troops to conquer everything up to India?
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
No Alexanderos led the army with Macedonians into Persia.
Greeks, Persians, Myceneans all had family weapons and Armor. Have you read the Illiad? Achilles used the same armor in ALL of his wars. The Romans where the first to have uniform militaries.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "No Alexanderos led the army with Macedonians into Persia."
Alexander conquered Greece and brought their pre existing armies into his own. They had Family Weapons and armor BECAUSE the we a trained fighting force NOT a militia. "Have you read the Illiad?" Yes nice work of FICTION.
"The Romans where the first to have uniform militaries."
Yeah...Try China and India a few hundred years before even the Roman Kingdom formed.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
Chinese and india would run drafts in time of great peril seldom did they require mandotry entry. Again Just enough to keep the invaders at bay.
Rome was one of the first major powers to require military service.
When did I ever say the word militia?
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "Chinese and india would run drafts in time of great peril seldom did they require mandotry entry. Again Just enough to keep the invaders at bay."
Uhh, no. Chinese and Indian state based civilization actually was FORMED because of professional armies. They were both highly militaristic nations with centralized empires and highly trained professional fighting forces loyal to their respected kings.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "When did I ever say the word militia?" The Creation of a military by civilians is a militia and after the Presidency of George Washington they idea that America could be a stable nation with only a militia was thrown out the window after several armed groups revolted against the government.
Your implication that their should be no national army through your previous comments shows that you prefer a militia based system.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
George Washington attempted to pass a law that every American household buy a fire arm and amunition.
Thomas Jefferson wrote the bill of rights. then stated the 10th amendment was the most important of them all and is what makes the constitution work.
Jefferson also creatd the "Democratic-Republicans" to counter Hamiltons and Madisons Federalist movement, hence Anti-Federalist.
Jefferson was a libertarian. Don't get me wrong. I am in no way liberatarian. I just know history
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "Jefferson was a libertarian"
His actions as President show that wasn't the case. He went disregarded congress when purchasing Louisiana from the French, Controlled trade through the Embargo Act, and passed the law preventing Slave trade in 1807. Sorry but if you think controlling the market and side stepping congress to make a land deal is in line with Libertarian ideals than you don't know history.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
Embargo Act was focused on Europe because of the tensions rising with Napoleon. Jefferson had to go back on his small government ideals because he wanted to get France out of America but at the same not loose trade relations. The Louisana was hitting two birds with one stone. Most of the Lousiana was paid for Bonds.
Basically thou Louisana only proved the Hamilton was right and in order to expand we had to spend money.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun The Embargo act made it impossible for merchants to legally trade with England and would cause american Business to suffer. Deciding who you can and can't trade with is about as anti libertarian as it gets.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
Libertarians advocate Free Trade.... Thanks for proving my point.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun You missed the point. Libertarianism entails that the Government SHOULDN'T regulate commerce. So preventing trade with someone is against libertarianism. You're right, I'm not going to beat you because you already beat yourself about 3 responses ago. You have no idea what the terms your using mean. You're making first year mistakes and going off of assumptions you make off of Europe. If you put this in a research paper you would be laughed out of the room.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
I've been to sweden, I've been to a liberal Meet up Group in Oslo.
Austrians all over the place.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Jamez773 miss read the definition of the Embargo act. my bad.
"The exercise of a free trade with all parts of the world [is] possessed by [a people] as of natural right" -Thomas Jefferson.
I was also aware he was trying to drive out British influence in American commerce. But he was a hypocrite.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun Also the Embargo act and his stopping of the Slave trade was horrible for southern Planters and their business. By preventing that free trade with England the sales of cash crops like Cotton, Tobacco, and indigo tanked and almost caused a recession.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
bro I'm just reading his quotes.
Jefferson was ashamed of his presidency that is state on several account in his biography.
I'm NOT a libertarian. Just need to make that as clear as possible Bu the ideology was not yet complete. thats why Jefferson supported Navy, and Education but many of his leanings where simular to modern day libertarianism.
Just swipe up his autobio.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Salvysahagun "bro I'm just reading his quotes" That's just it though, his quotes, as we have both agreed, didn't reflect is presidency or his political agenda during and after his presidency.
The ideology was not yet complete? Classical Liberalism and the Anti-Federalists were associated with with positions that run contrary and in some aspects completely against Libertarianism.
Jamez773 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Salvysahagun "Jefferson supported Navy, and Education but many of his leanings where simular to modern day libertarianism." And many of Mussolini's leanings were similar to that of Leninist communism. In both the case of Jefferson and Libertarianism and Mussolini with Leninist communism the leaders followed an ideology that, although held some similar positions, still had many positions that stand in stark contrast to the Libertarianism and Leninist Communism.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
Sorry fo tthe last comments clearing I went on Cruise ship around the Denmark, Sweden, Norway 6 years ago.
I am aware Olso is not in sweden
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun For a man who valued the 10th amendment he sure did disregard it a whole hell of a lot in his presidency. In fact many people within his party would criticize and hate him for it. And btw the 10th amendment pretty much assured that the government of the U.S. would be centralized and encouraged federal funded projects. That's about as anti libertarian as you can get while still being in the realm of a liberal democracy.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun Oh and adding insult to injury, Jefferson actually helped in the creation of West Point in order to train the Americans that would make up the back bone of the American Military for Generations to come. Far from his original position that centralization and a National military were a bad ideas.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
To provide and mantain a navy
To raise and support an army
Navys can't throw cou de tats thats why. he supported them
Jefferson valued education, in any form. If Military history could be taught well then their we would be able to protect against invaders THe Navies purpose was to protect the borders and ports until the Armie could be raised.
Please don't tell me your one of those libtards who think Jefferson was progressive?
I've stated a commonally refere
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun Jefferson contradicted every single one of his claims of being an Anti-Federalist. He Helped in the formation of a National Government, Annexed the Louisiana even though nothing in the constitution said he could, and actually helped create a STRONGER federal government.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "Please don't tell me your one of those libtards who think Jefferson was progressive"
Please don't tell me that you're one of those libertarian retards who think every founding father wanted complete anarchy. Jefferson WAS a liberal in the most traditional sense of the word. Hell he helped CREATE a Liberal Democratic Republic and wanted a government not tied down by an aristocracy. IE Traditional Liberalism.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
Traditional liberalism is libertarianism. Which inculdes Free People and Free Markets as originally defined.
Hayek the super god to libertarians never consisdered himself a conservative. Libertarianism in America was created to reignite the orignal liberal movement, because FDR steered more in a cross between American System of Economics and Progressivism which in America was called liberalism
Wheras in Europe Liberal means libertarian.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "Traditional liberalism is libertarianism
"Wheras in Europe Liberal means libertarian."
Uhh, no. First off libertarianism is an offshoot of Classical Liberalism. Saying they are one in the same is like saying a Wolf and a Lab are the same. They are similar but they aren't the same. Libertarianism has WAY more to do with economic freedom while Classical Liberalism focused more on republican virtue
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
Buddy I have friends in Europe. When some one says they are "liberal" most europeans consider he or she to be a a follower Hayek or Mises.
Jefferson also made it very clear that he was intended on wiping the national debt clean which he almost accomplished.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." - that is not a something a federalist would think of.
History!
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun Buddy, I AM European and have lived in 3 different countries there (The UK, Italy, and Germany). A Liberal is almost ALWAYS referring to someone who is a moderate with left leanings. Like "Who's he voting for?" "He's a liberal so I'll probably vote Labour."
"Jefferson also made it very clear that he was intended on wiping the national debt" Unimportant to the topic of discussion.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
No its not national debt usually relflects the size of government wake up please
I'm gunna have to call you out on that. I have friends in Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. It's common knowelege the Liberal is a latin dirivative of the word "free" the original definition states policitcally free and Economically Free.
Lord Acton the leader of the liberal movement coined a famous line "Socialism is slavery"
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "No its not national debt usually relflects the size of government " No it doesn't. Look at how much debt the U.S. was in under the Articles of Confederation or countries in the third world with little to no centralized government.
"Liberal is a latin dirivative of the word "free" the original definition states policitcally free and Economically Free." Yeah the ORIGINAL definition. The term has changed meaning since the 20th century.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
Yes it does because he knew debt = money. the Federal Government could borrow more money than anyone and have the largest influence on expanding the money supply
Jefferson was president in the early 18th century.
like I said... the Affluent Society and FDR for ever changed the definition of Liberalism in the West. Mises and Hayek tried to revive the old liberalism but it could never happen.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Salvysahagun "Yes it does because he knew debt = money. the Federal Government could borrow more money than anyone and have the largest influence on expanding the money supply" Do you have ANY idea how anti libertarian the idea of the Federal Government doing that is?
"Jefferson was president in the early 18th century." Duh
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun Liberalism in Europe has the SAME definition as it does in the US. My family and I have been in Government, I know more about European political terms than you do. Just look at a BNP add against the liberal Labour party here in the UK. I don't know who you have been talking to, but their about as up to date on European politics as a history book from the 19th century.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
Liberal People's Party (Sweden) Center-Right
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun The Liberal Peoples party is also a very conservative nationalist party. They are to modern liberalism as Lennism is to Stateless Communism.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun The party also has a liking for mixed economies. They aren't even really Libertarians. A real libertarian group is against any form of state directed economy even if the state only plays a small part.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun "that is not a something a federalist would think of." The tenth amendment is a clear indication of Federalism BECAUSE it suggest anything against it.
"There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment"- US. Vs. Darby
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
Congress has the power to regulate commerce.
again thanks for proving my point and please don't take quotes of of context
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@Salvysahagun And the ability to purchase land on a whim was NOT specified in the constitution to be in the President's right. It fell into Implied powers which anti federalists were against. Jefferson went back on his original position to buy Louisiana from the French to side step delegations in the Legislature and a supreme court decision on if the act was constitutional. It was an abuse of power by Anti federalist terms and Jefferson was called out on it by both parties for being a hypocrite.
Jamez773 4 months ago
@Jamez773
I am aware of that. It proved that Libertarianism and small governments couldn't work.
Jefferson went down in history for turning on his idea's and flip floping idea's. Thats why he didn't want to be known for being president because his presidency was a failure to his eyes. He claimed that hist greatest accomplishments where Virginias Religous Freedom law and University of Virginia.
I've studied American history very well. your not going to beat me.
Salvysahagun 4 months ago
@kosomoto There is a reason why Militias aren't the primary source of policing in the first world today. It's because when they are you get a failed state like Somalia with several Waring factions of private armies with laws that contradict each other, selective enforcement, and massive corruption. Read a history book for Christ's sake.
Jamez773 4 months ago