Gabby Douglas didn't earn that gold medal !!!

[Retro Lyra]

I am always amused when nations are too lazy to get their own blogs and leave NS free of their crap.

This guy has to be a brat whining for attention.

I think it's the conservative robot that explores liberal websites: The Karl Rover.

I see what you did there, and I like it.

[AuSable River]

Let me clarify:

My exercise is to challenge the house of cards dogma of the Left that says that societal wealth must be redistributed based on what is 'fair'.

Hence, I have challenged these ideologues to pass judgment on 'my plan' which involves equally distribution based solely on population.

What could be more fair than to place human life as the only consideration for redistribution ??

Moreover, this formula would be immune from corruption because politicians, special interests, and lobbyists would have no input into the allocation of resources.

And predictably, these drones have been unable to either challenge my plan or support it.

Why?

Because to challenge it would expose the grand hypocrisy that is liberalism (not in the classic sense) or,

To support it would be to expose the utter utopian lunacy that is liberalism.

Hence, they run and hide or engage in inane diversionary retorts.

Checkmate liberals.

You have been exposed.

[Call to power]

how do you raise prices if the quantity of money remains the same ??

Peasants will still be willing to fitter their money away on spinning rims regardless of how many zero's you add to the price tag, its why the drastic rise in personal income has not resulted in the leisure society once envisioned in all your sci-fi comics. If anything raises prices has been shown to increase a products desirability (hence why rich people go bankrupt so easily when they're bad with money).

Also I've noticed rather amusingly that this method of distributing wealth gives me an incentive to kill people. Its like you're trying to destroy African-American society even more you racis!

[Retro Lyra]

May I ask how the points being discussed in this thread even relate to Gabby Douglas? I'm confused.

[The Gadsden Patriots]

Shush, you'll give us away! Everyone who disagrees with him must be a commie/lefist!

By definition, they are. Anyone outside of the only realistic position, freedom-loving libertarianism, has to be a leftist. Because you can't get more right than libertarian thought, after all.

[The Caldari Union]

May I ask how the points being discussed in this thread even relate to Gabby Douglas? I'm confused.

I think hes just spreading anarchist propaganda in the most authortarian way possible.

Odd concept, isn't it?

[Tekania]

Let me clarify:

My exercise is to challenge the house of cards dogma of the Left that says that societal wealth must be redistributed based on what is 'fair'.

Hence, I have challenged these ideologues to pass judgment on 'my plan' which involves equally distribution based solely on population.

What could be more fair than to place human life as the only consideration for redistribution ??

Moreover, this formula would be immune from corruption because politicians, special interests, and lobbyists would have no input into the allocation of resources.

And predictably, these drones have been unable to either challenge my plan or support it.

Why?

Because to challenge it would expose the grand hypocrisy that is liberalism (not in the classic sense) or,

To support it would be to expose the utter utopian lunacy that is liberalism.

Hence, they run and hide or engage in inane diversionary retorts.

Checkmate liberals.

You have been exposed.

I already answered your challenge, it's fair. You have not managed a checkmate.

[Williamson]

May I ask how the points being discussed in this thread even relate to Gabby Douglas? I'm confused.

it doesn't.

[Sremski okrug]

May I ask how the points being discussed in this thread even relate to Gabby Douglas? I'm confused.

Just a poor attempting at trolling and baiting.

[Ifreann]

May I ask how the points being discussed in this thread even relate to Gabby Douglas? I'm confused.

The OP is trying to invoke patriotic rage in liberals and have them defend Ms. Douglas(Mrs.? I don't know, whatever), at which point he yells "Fooled you, liberals! I was paraphrasing your Messiah, Hussein Obama!" Then we vanish in a puff of logic and he wins politics.

[Retro Lyra]

May I ask how the points being discussed in this thread even relate to Gabby Douglas? I'm confused.

I think hes just spreading anarchist propaganda in the most authortarian way possible.

Odd concept, isn't it?

I'll say.

May I ask how the points being discussed in this thread even relate to Gabby Douglas? I'm confused.

Just a poor attempting at trolling and baiting.

I wish the mods would just lock the damn thing.

[Frisivisia]

Let me clarify:

My exercise is to challenge the house of cards dogma of the Left that says that societal wealth must be redistributed based on what is 'fair'.

Hence, I have challenged these ideologues to pass judgment on 'my plan' which involves equally distribution based solely on population.

What could be more fair than to place human life as the only consideration for redistribution ??

Moreover, this formula would be immune from corruption because politicians, special interests, and lobbyists would have no input into the allocation of resources.

And predictably, these drones have been unable to either challenge my plan or support it.

Why?

Because to challenge it would expose the grand hypocrisy that is liberalism (not in the classic sense) or,

To support it would be to expose the utter utopian lunacy that is liberalism.

Hence, they run and hide or engage in inane diversionary retorts.

Checkmate liberals.

You have been exposed.

For what? Our evil plan to take over the world is already in full effect!

[Retro Lyra]

May I ask how the points being discussed in this thread even relate to Gabby Douglas? I'm confused.

The OP is trying to invoke patriotic rage in liberals and have them defend Ms. Douglas(Mrs.? I don't know, whatever), at which point he yells "Fooled you, liberals! I was paraphrasing your Messiah, Hussein Obama!" Then we vanish in a puff of logic and he wins politics.

Ifreann, you are my God.

Miss, by the way; she's a young girl so I doubt she's married.

[Gauthier]

May I ask how the points being discussed in this thread even relate to Gabby Douglas? I'm confused.

The OP is trying to invoke patriotic rage in liberals and have them defend Ms. Douglas(Mrs.? I don't know, whatever), at which point he yells "Fooled you, liberals! I was paraphrasing your Messiah, Hussein Obama!" Then we vanish in a puff of logic and he wins politics.

Puffs of logic on NSG? MY [insert religious belief of choice here]!!

[Ashmoria]

There are a lot of successful athletes and artists who agree with me because they want to give something back. They know they didn't get there on their own. Gabby Douglas, Bolt, Phelps, Babs Streisand, Clooney, Maya Angelou, et al didn't get there on her own. I'm always struck by athletes and artists who think that it must be because they are so talented. There are a lot of talented athletes and artists out there.

Gabbie, Usain, Michael, Barbara, George, Maya (net worth $28 million) and many other athletes and artists may think they are gold medalists or millionaire artists because they worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you artists and athletes -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

Somebody invested in those pools, tracks, movie theaters, book stores, and balance beams. Somebody built the roads that these athletes and artists traveled to get to their jobs, to build their computers, to protect them from fire and theft.

God bless these successful athletes and artists, but they need to payback. Do these athletes and artists really need more than $100,000 a year to live on when there are families living in the street ???

Moreover, since nobody earns what they have acquired without the sacrifice of the little guy -- I got a fair formula:

US GDP = $14 trillion divided by 330 million Americans = $42,000 a year.

Hence, what could be more fair than to give every American a paycheck of $42,000 a year. Moreover, since children are our most precious asset, someone like the Octomom, who has 14 children as of 5:00 pm EST, should get her fair share of $588,000/year.

These are self-evident truths:

1) Behind every successful person are myriad hard-working citizens and their families who don't get their fair share.

2) What could be more fair than equal distribution of wealth based on population?

3) By dividing societal wealth solely based on output/population, politicians couldn't be corrupted by money since the formula for distribution is built into the Constitution.

In sum, how many liberals, leftists, marxists, socialists, democrats, do you think would support this eminently fair and incorruptible plan?

Conservatives, libertarians, anarcho-capitalists, et al please don't respond, this exercise is not for you, it is for the 'kids'.

is it really so radical to think that gabby douglas didnt get there on her own but through her own hard work AND the work of many other people training her and backing her up?

its not like she could have done olympic level training after school and on weekends in her own back yard.

[Sedgistan]

Just a poor attempting at trolling and baiting.

I wish the mods would just lock the damn thing.

If you actually believe this is just "trolling and baiting", then your posts here could only be to "feed the troll". You might want to think before you throw around accusations such as that - particularly since they should go in the Moderation forum.

I've already replied earlier in this thread to a couple of points about the OP's tone. Note that I only picked up on a couple of bits. The actual thread itself is not trolling. If you don't like it, and aren't interested in debating it, quit posting. No-one is forcing you to post here.

[Esternial]

Let me clarify:

My exercise is to challenge the house of cards dogma of the Left that says that societal wealth must be redistributed based on what is 'fair'.

Hence, I have challenged these ideologues to pass judgment on 'my plan' which involves equally distribution based solely on population.

What could be more fair than to place human life as the only consideration for redistribution ??

Moreover, this formula would be immune from corruption because politicians, special interests, and lobbyists would have no input into the allocation of resources.

And predictably, these drones have been unable to either challenge my plan or support it.

Why?

Because to challenge it would expose the grand hypocrisy that is liberalism (not in the classic sense) or,

To support it would be to expose the utter utopian lunacy that is liberalism.

Hence, they run and hide or engage in inane diversionary retorts.

Checkmate liberals.

You have been exposed.

Again, ease down on the condescending tone.

[Khadgar]

This game needs an option to put people with don't tread on me flags automatically on our ignore lists.

I'd suggest that on the technical forum, but I'd probably get warned/banned for trolling.

[Frisivisia]

Let me clarify:

My exercise is to challenge the house of cards dogma of the Left that says that societal wealth must be redistributed based on what is 'fair'.

Hence, I have challenged these ideologues to pass judgment on 'my plan' which involves equally distribution based solely on population.

What could be more fair than to place human life as the only consideration for redistribution ??

Moreover, this formula would be immune from corruption because politicians, special interests, and lobbyists would have no input into the allocation of resources.

And predictably, these drones have been unable to either challenge my plan or support it.

Why?

Because to challenge it would expose the grand hypocrisy that is liberalism (not in the classic sense) or,

To support it would be to expose the utter utopian lunacy that is liberalism.

Hence, they run and hide or engage in inane diversionary retorts.

Checkmate liberals.

You have been exposed.

Again, ease down on the condescending tone.

Just face it, we liberals have been beaten. Through his remarkable intelligence and good looks, conservatism has won, and we must descend back to hell.

[Call to power]

No-one is forcing you to post here.

Are you new or something?

[Ashmoria]

Let me clarify:

My exercise is to challenge the house of cards dogma of the Left that says that societal wealth must be redistributed based on what is 'fair'.

Hence, I have challenged these ideologues to pass judgment on 'my plan' which involves equally distribution based solely on population.

What could be more fair than to place human life as the only consideration for redistribution ??

Moreover, this formula would be immune from corruption because politicians, special interests, and lobbyists would have no input into the allocation of resources.

And predictably, these drones have been unable to either challenge my plan or support it.

Why?

Because to challenge it would expose the grand hypocrisy that is liberalism (not in the classic sense) or,

To support it would be to expose the utter utopian lunacy that is liberalism.

Hence, they run and hide or engage in inane diversionary retorts.

Checkmate liberals.

You have been exposed.

a progressive income tax isnt exactly "redistribution of wealth" its having those who get more pay more.

[Sedgistan]

This game needs an option to put people with don't tread on me flags automatically on our ignore lists.

I'd suggest that on the technical forum, but I'd probably get warned/banned for trolling.

Oh, I can give you those warnings right here too. If you're not going to debate the topic in the OP, get out of this thread.

[The Gadsden Patriots]

Again, ease down on the condescending tone.

Why? Is your quest for radical egalitarianism so fervent that you would even force those who rise on their own merit to become equals to their inferiors on a debate forum?

Truly, leftist tyranny, your steely black hand knows no limit.

[Virana]

its not like she could have done olympic level training after school and on weekends in her own back yard.

People from third-world countries sometimes do. One Pakistani runner a few years back (she lost, but oh well) grew up practicing on her way to school. Her family was so poor that they couldn't afford shoes for her to run in, so she ran barefoot. And made the Olympics ahead of the rest of her country.

[AuSable River]

how do you raise prices if the quantity of money remains the same ??

Peasants will still be willing to fitter their money away on spinning rims regardless of how many zero's you add to the price tag, its why the drastic rise in personal income has not resulted in the leisure society once envisioned in all your sci-fi comics. If anything raises prices has been shown to increase a products desirability (hence why rich people go bankrupt so easily when they're bad with money).

Also I've noticed rather amusingly that this method of distributing wealth gives me an incentive to kill people. Its like you're trying to destroy African-American society even more you racis!

true, if you give people (and government) money that they didnt earn -- they will generally waste it to the detriment of society.

indeed, you stated the obvious that liberals dont understand, namely that if you give poor people money, they spend and inordinately large percentage of it on ,lets say, rims thereby driving up the cost of rims to the detriment of society.

similarly, if you give government money, it will spend it on education, health care, retirement, et al because thats where the votes are --- the downside is that the price of these services skyrockets.

But it is difficult to explain this irrefutable logic and empirical truth to liberals.

as you can see from the trollish and inane comments on this thread