This man is who you need if you want a better country, my fellow American /lebutts/
Take a dosage of truth.
Things he'll do for LGBT issues:
>Sign into law the Equality Act, the Every Child Deserves a Family Act, and any other bill that prohibits discrimination against LGBT people.
>Work with HHS to ensure LGBT Americans have access to comprehensive health insurance which provides appropriate coverage and do not have to fear discrimination or mistreatment from providers.
>Continue the great work of the State Department’s Special Envoy for LGBT Rights and ensure the United States helps protect the rights of LGBT people around the world.
>Advance policies to ensure students can attend school without fear of bullying, and work to reduce suicides.
>Require police departments to adopt policies to ensure fairer interactions with transgender people, especially transgender women of color who are often targeted by police unfairly, and institute training programs to promote compliance with fair policies.
>Bar discrimination against LGBT people by creditors and banks so that people will not be unfairly denied mortgages, credit cards, or student loans.
>Veto any legislation that purports to “protect” religious liberty at the expense of others’ rights.
Hillary is the only one who explicitly panders to the lgbt vote, but it's clear Sanders is the one with the best pro-lgbt record and the most comprehensive policies.
Hillary is also a Wall Street democrat and a liar, and possibly an android. Sanders is the only one who isn't part of the Great American Pyramid Scheme.
honestly, progress for lgbt stuff is inevitable, i don't really care who's elected cause we'll get what we want soon enough/in our lifetimes. gay marriage was the big thing and now that that's out of the way, the rest is bound to come. also, the popular vote effects nothing, i don't see why it matters who we vote for.
Honestly the fact that /pol/ is on this trump-meme reassures me that he'll fail, just because of how wrong /pol/ always is.
Where were you when Bernie got anally destroyed?
Bernie is great but he hasn't got a chance, and he can't work the political system; he's just get stymied and blocked at every turn just like Obama.
Hillary is sufficiently conniving and dastardly enough to get dirt on politicians to make them do what she wants.
That said, I'm voting for Trump; I haven't got much stake in this world anymore and I think it'd be great if Trump was president.
He's a buffoon, an egotist, easily offended, and an all around pig; but he also knows how to get what he wants from people, how to broker a deal, how to understand the other side.
And NOBODY hates rich people more than other rich people, I think Trump would usher in a new age of diplomacy.
>And NOBODY hates rich people more than other rich people, I think Trump would usher in a new age of diplomacy.
Did you think about anything you just posted before you typed it, or are you just funposting senpaitachi?
This is exactly why I hate Trump voters, not because he's a republican but the voters decision sums up to "It"ll make others uncomfortable". I hate how American politics have a sway on my country's economy, seriously fuck you.
>I don't like taxes
>supports new taxes to build wall
>supports new taxes to build wall
AS PRESIDENT, SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS WILL REDUCE INCOME AND WEALTH INEQUALITY BY:
Demanding that the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share in taxes. As president, Sen. Sanders will stop corporations from shifting their profits and jobs overseas to avoid paying U.S. income taxes. He will create a progressive estate tax on the top 0.3 percent of Americans who inherit more than $3.5 million. He will also enact a tax on Wall Street speculators who caused millions of Americans to lose their jobs, homes, and life savings.
Increasing the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $15 an hour by 2020. In the year 2015, no one who works 40 hours a week should be living in poverty.
Putting at least 13 million Americans to work by investing $1 trillion over five years towards rebuilding our crumbling roads, bridges, railways, airports, public transit systems, ports, dams, wastewater plants, and other infrastructure needs.
Reversing trade policies like NAFTA, CAFTA, and PNTR with China that have driven down wages and caused the loss of millions of jobs. If corporate America wants us to buy their products they need to manufacture those products in this country, not in China or other low-wage countries.
Who are you quoting? Trump has pushed for a tax cut on everyone except the rich and the wall will pay for itself within the first 2 months of being built because we spend 100 billion a year on illegal immigration.
Longer than I thought (2/3)
Creating 1 million jobs for disadvantaged young Americans by investing $5.5 billion in a youth jobs program. Today, the youth unemployment rate is off the charts. We have got to end this tragedy by making sure teenagers and young adults have the jobs they need to move up the economic ladder.
Fighting for pay equity by signing the Paycheck Fairness Act into law. It is an outrage that women earn just 78 cents for every dollar a man earns.
Making tuition free at public colleges and universities throughout America. Everyone in this country who studies hard should be able to go to college regardless of income.
Expanding Social Security by lifting the cap on taxable income above $250,000. At a time when the senior poverty rate is going up, we have got to make sure that every American can retire with dignity and respect.
Guaranteeing healthcare as a right of citizenship by enacting a Medicare for all single-payer healthcare system. It’s time for the U.S. to join every major industrialized country on earth and provide universal healthcare to all.
Requiring employers to provide at least 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave; two weeks of paid vacation; and 7 days of paid sick days. Real family values are about making sure that parents have the time they need to bond with their babies and take care of their children and relatives when they get ill.
Enacting a universal childcare and prekindergarten program. Every psychologist understands that the most formative years for a human being is from the ages 0-3. We have got to make sure every family in America has the opportunity to send their kids to a high quality childcare and pre-K program.
Making it easier for workers to join unions by fighting for the Employee Free Choice Act. One of the most significant reasons for the 40-year decline in the middle class is that the rights of workers to collectively bargain for better wages and benefits have been severely undermined.
Breaking up huge financial institutions so that they are no longer too big to fail. Seven years ago, the taxpayers of this country bailed out Wall Street because they were too big to fail. Yet, 3 out of the 4 largest financial institutions are 80 percent bigger today than before we bailed them out. Sen. Sanders has introduced legislation to break these banks up. As president, he will fight to sign this legislation into law.
This is how he'll pay. NOT FREE.
>FULLY PAID FOR BY IMPOSING A TAX ON WALL STREET SPECULATORS.
The cost of this $75 billion a year plan is fully paid for by imposing a tax of a fraction of a percent on Wall Street speculators who nearly destroyed the economy seven years ago. More than 1,000 economists have endorsed a tax on Wall Street speculation and today some 40 countries throughout the world have imposed a similar tax including Britain, Germany, France, Switzerland, and China. If the taxpayers of this country could bailout Wall Street in 2008, we can make public colleges and universities tuition free and debt free throughout the country.
Are you implying that the "elite" and rich would just pay their taxes and not find legal loopholes to tax evade and that illegal immigration would suddenly end with sanctions and stricter boarder controls? How delusional.
>PUTTING 13 MILLION AMERICANS TO WORK:
Senator Sanders’ Rebuild America Act would more than double the current level of funding for the highway and transit accounts of the Highway Trust Fund, and would create a National Infrastructure Bank to leverage private capital to finance more than $125 billion in new projects.
He'd win easily if idiots hadn't gotten hung up on the meme man Bernie Sanders.
He's basically the same as Sanders except younger with more clearly defined goals and a proven ability to actually accomplish his goals.
I guess he's not as memeworthy though. Feel le bern : ^)
>caring about fleeting social issues in politics
this is a joke, right?
>Employee Free Choice Act. One of the most significant reasons for the 40-year decline in the middle class is that the rights of workers to collectively bargain for better wages and benefits have been severely undermined.
Every time I see something related to these laws I get a good kick out of it. Unions in the US are a joke, and they are for the most part nothing but money sponges for workers, especially since much of their constituency is out of a job or works in a field in decline.
That's part of the "get rid of legal loopholes" part of trump's plan that's like Bernie's. You just have to put trust in whichever candidate will follow through and we've seen time and time again how ruthless trump is and how much Bernie rolls over.
>works in a field in decline.
I hope you realize more than half of the country doesn't work in a specialized field like a yuppy like you.
Walk outside, and it's not a bunch of rich Computer Science majors. It's dishwashers, clerks, and laborers.
But Bernie has been dubbed a pragmatic and successful legislature who can work bipartisanly and break gridlock.
Plus there is some merit to having just some public head of state figure that is known the nation over who can just talk and raise public conscious and debate, and get these issues discussed or just acknowledged. And that could lead to voters voting for people who may side differently on some issues then the present congress
>yuno rebuttal to my neat youtube link of a guy making funny voices and spouting libertarian memes
Idk dude. You got me. Give me your number so I can go suck your libertarian dick.
" I haven't got much stake in this world anymore... He's a buffoon, an egotist, easily offended, and an all around pig; but he also knows how to get what he wants from people, how to broker a deal, how to understand the other side... And NOBODY hates rich people more than other rich people,"
I didn't say you did it for "luls" just the fact that you think Trump's tv personality would be the same as his presidency. We"ll just have to wait and see.
>Plus there is some merit to having just some public head of state figure that is known the nation over who can just talk and raise public conscious and debate, and get these issues discussed or just acknowledged.
That's basically Obama
>bunch of rich Computer Science majors
Most, actually, just about all CS majors will never be rich. Ever.
It is fine that you want to remain in this delusion of majority opinion/status.
>It's dishwashers, clerks, and laborers.
The first is a fleeting, transitory position, whereas the latter are generalizations.
>yfw /stormfront/ thinks they're going to be right this time
we're always right
but this time we're going to win
>The first is a fleeting, transitory position, whereas the latter are generalizations.
>yfw /pol/ is always right
>when Bernie voters and Trump voters bump my thread, giving Bernie more publicity
Give me all your you(s).
Ok, wouldn't want you to waste your time thinking about anti jewish conspiracies or doing silly things like putting together racist MS paint projects.
>>And NOBODY hates rich people more than other rich people, I think Trump would usher in a new age of diplomacy.
>Did you think about anything you just posted before you typed it, or are you just funposting senpaitachi?
I've known to many rich people. Yeah, they are all jealous of each others successes and wealth. Hate may be to strong of a word. The whole system is connections, and deals. There is a type of trust, but it is that the other wouldn't screw himself to screw you.
I hate this stupid meme
The government gives you free stuff all the time. In the form of roads and infrastructure, libraries, schools and education, police and the law enforcement etc.
Corporations get free stuff in the form of subsidies, tax breaks and bailouts.
I love how we can afford all those free things, and pay for our gigantic military, but the things Bernie proposes are too much. The tax payers can afford to bail out the banks in 08 but not free college.
We can afford to spend more then the next 14 nations combined and maintain thousands of nuclear warheads when a few dozen would probably suffice. Yet healthcare for all citizens? Preposterous!
I love how people think everything has to stay the same. You want to do something you need to raise taxes. While I agree that we live in the wealthiest nation in history with the wealthiest people and taxes them in a way that better endures they pay their fair share is probably one of the better ways to pay for some things. People seem oblivious to the fact you can rearrange a budget and reallocate money to other things. The militaries spending isn't static, we could audit the DoD find where the over or misspend and put that money to use elsewhere.
We are already spending trillions upon trillions of dollars, and people like to argue that these things will just add on to that but that isn't necessarily the case.
It's all about priorities and how you balance things.
Some people think universal healthcare and a well educated populace and workforce is a better use of tax dollars.
And weather you agree with free college or not you have to admit the debt crisis that is leaving the next generation crippled with student loans is a problem that needs to be addressed in some form.
That's my 2 pennys anyway, I'm just rambling at this point
Most stuff like roads and whatnot are supposed to be financed by things like local property taxes
>bailing out the banks
Arguably the wrong choice, but letting them fail would probably have had catastrophic consequences. Potentially like civil war-esque martial law Ferguson style shit everywhere all the time for a good while.
>the military spending is high
It is and it needs to be. One of the last low-density high natural resource nations of the world that has pissed literally everyone off. The second the USA lets up on its military it will be broken up.
>audit the military industrial complex
I guess this one depends on whether or not you like your brains inside your skull or out on the pavement
In any case sure, great things could be done by re-arranging the budget. I made a video about this actually. What I proposed in my video is effectively Kickstarter for taxes. Everyone pays their set amount of taxes at the end of the year, but everyone gets to pick which area their taxes go toward.
Bernie's plan isn't inventive. Bernie's plan is just take more spend more. It won't work.
I'd personally rather have him than Hillary but I'll also take Hillary over any on the right.
I think Trump and Kasich would be the least worst for gay rights but I think Trump would destroy us foreign policy wise, because he has such thin skin, and I don't see Mexico ever paying for a wall, and I guarantee you he can't put up a ban on entry of all Muslims temporarily, the Supreme Court would overturn that in a heartbeat.
And Kasich just isn't going to get the nomination although I don't think he would be a bad President like many of his colleagues. So I'm fine with Bernie or Hillary.
Trump cant stop illegal immigration.
not only that, but more illegals are going back to mexico then they are coming here..
we spend more money fighing a problem that is minute than we do actually winning.
It's essentially flushing money down the drain while screaming and kicking in every direction, while illegals slowly walk away back to mexico because they're afraid.
the "illegals" that trump is talking about isnt illegals at all, but legal residents who just happen to be from mexico.
My friend in the airforce is told to waste parts and unpackage new parts and throw them away so they can keep a high budget up to get more funding.
plane already waxed? Wax it again and again and again, get paid for doing useless work.
>he can't put up a ban on entry of all Muslims temporarily,
You think the GOP Congress won't pass a law banning all Muslims? They are hardcore fascist Nazis who oppose rights for anyone who isn't white straight males!
I believe it. I'm just saying if you want to be the one who is going to take away that slush fund, you're taking it away from people who are literally trained and equipped to kill human beings - and who probably have extensive contacts in your personal staff including your bodyguards.
I'm not sure I've ever met anyone with that big of balls who lived to tell about it.
>I know you're just shitposting but what saddens me is that some americans really think this way.
I can't tell if trumpfags are really this stupid or just trolling. However Amerifats are pretty overtly retarded for the most part.
>It is an outrage that women earn just 78 cents for every dollar a man earns.
This is not a thing, and this number is derived from a very poor study. You can't compare the incomes of people in two separate brackets and expect to produce anything remotely close to an accurate statistic.
Fuck off with this shit.
>societies have never regressed
There's not a liniear progression of humanity there's been huge steps backwards socially, the U.S 1980s, Germany 1930s, french revolution, Minoan and Greek civilizations... It goes on, why would you think the minority would be protected without any effort?
>everyone gets to pick which area their taxes go
Are you actually retarded? Hurr durr in 2017 nobody put money towards libraries so I guess we're shutting them all down.
And Bernie wants to break up the banks so they don't have to be bailed out. If they're too big to fail they're too big to exist.
>give lots of rights to lgbt
>allow immigration to run rampant
>destroy the country economy with gibs me dat programs and laws
>lgbtqwerty get stoned by muslims anyway since they don't care about the law
Beautiful, Bernie might destroy all the gays and trannies without even trying.
desu >>5566162 is kinda right as far as LGBT issues go, the general public (including non-religious conservatives) is rapidly becoming more tolerant of LGBT individuals and there's no real reason to think that trend will reverse... LGBT rights are basically inevitable
but there are plenty of politicians who'd be bad for LGBT people in the short term and could at least slow progress down for a few years, and besides that, there's dozens of other important issues at stake... so yeah, it does matter who you vote for
>And Bernie wants to break up the banks so they don't have to be bailed out. If they're too big to fail they're too big to exist.
Yeah and Hillary said nobody should be "too big to jail" :D We believe either one why?
>Arguably the wrong choice, but letting them fail would probably have had catastrophic consequences. Potentially like civil war-esque martial law Ferguson style shit everywhere all the time for a good while.
Getting ourselves into a situation where banks are "too big to fail" was a mistake to begin with. And failing to adequately punish those responsible just encourages them to do it again.
>give lots of rights to lgbt
And why is that a bad thing?
>lgbtqwerty get stoned by muslims anyway since they don't care about the law
That's what law ENFORCEMENT is for. They don't care about the law, but they DO care about spending life in prison or being deported.
>That's what law ENFORCEMENT is for. They don't care about the law, but they DO care about spending life in prison or being deported.
How many of the Cologne rape gangs have been tracked down, arrested, imprisoned, or deported? So far European police have had very little success in prosecuting attacks against women, what makes you think they would be at all successful at prosecuting attacks against homosexuals?
In Europe Muslims live in ghettos that are "no-go zones" for police because if they police enter them they will immediately get swarmed by local Muslims and no one will help them conduct an investigation. That's why when they went after that terrorist in the Paris suburb they had to just go in shooting and they still lost a police dog to a suicide bomber.
>it's an "abusing the quote function" post
>In Europe Muslims live in ghettos that are "no-go zones" for police because if they police enter them they will immediately get swarmed by local Muslims and no one will help them conduct an investigation. That's why when they went after that terrorist in the Paris suburb they had to just go in shooting and they still lost a police dog to a suicide bomber.
Honestly, if these communities are consistently refusing to allow the police to conduct an investigation, they are in direct violation of national laws and the government should respond appropriately - mass arrests (but still with a fair trial as usual) with the help of the military if that's the only way to do it. Because I'm pretty sure that kind of behavior is against the law.
No. I will never vote for a socialist candidate. How many nations have to be wrecked before you retards realize it simply doesn't work?
>but muh poor people and my bleeding heart
>I have to deny reality
>being this angry
Thanks for bumping my thread, by the way.
>inb4 "i-t-t's just the money"
White applachia doesn't have crime rates or intelligence levels that low and it's much poorer than the cities
>inb4 ebin race doesn't exist
If it doesn't exist give me a working explanation as to why there isn't a single African country as intelligent as the rest of the world. Give me an explanation as to why all of Africa has inferior cultures and all predominately white countries share similar IQ levels and culture even when they didn't have any contact with each other.
>inb4 b-b-but muh geography
Admitting this is admitting I am right as the only reasons races exist is because of people existing in different geographies and climates thus forming different races attuned to different parts of the world. Stop denying reality.
You don't understand the government won't deal with it because this is socialism, this is political correctness, this is Cultural Marxism. Voting for this man will lead to the same things. Their media covers up refugee attacks I'm not even shitting you. They have developed such a cuck attitude. Voting for Bernie is voting against gay rights you get the nice smooth talk (I love gays), but then he will flood the country with Muslims. The reality is as a conditioned Cultural Marxist he views gays as more privileged than Muslims so he won't do anything to stop it at all.
>White applachia doesn't have crime rates or intelligence levels that low and it's much poorer than the cities
It's also not urban. High population density + poverty tends to result in a high crime rate.
>If it doesn't exist give me a working explanation as to why there isn't a single African country as intelligent as the rest of the world.
Give me a source that says all of Africa is "less intelligent" based on an objective measure of "intelligence" not dependent on education or culture. No one's denying that Africa is predominantly a third world shithole with very poor education.
> all predominately white countries share similar IQ levels and culture even when they didn't have any contact with each other.
Citation needed. Especially since predominantly white countries have been in contact with each other at least several centuries before there was even such a concept as IQ. If you can find those 10th century IQ statistics, be my guest.
Do you know what is going on in Democratic Socialist nations. Please if you think Europe is going to survive you're an idiot. Ask Poland about socialism. Ask Poland about Muslims. www.breitbart.com/london/2015/10/26/white-guy-killed-sweden-terrorism-eritrean-migrant-wasnt/
The shining pride of Democratic socialism, Sweden and Germany, are both having their government cover up mass attacks. Seems to be working just fine am I right? Europe won't survive. Even if it did it's a false equivalence. America has 30x the population of Sweden which means it's approximately 30x worse than it will be. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape
Notice the 3x increase in crime and 15x increase in rape since Sweden became socialist.
>Honestly, if these communities are consistently refusing to allow the police to conduct an investigation, they are in direct violation of national laws and the government should respond appropriately - mass arrests (but still with a fair trial as usual) with the help of the military if that's the only way to do it. Because I'm pretty sure that kind of behavior is against the law.
They don't have the resources to arrest entire suburbs and even if they did they wouldn't because it would be "racist" to mass arrest Muslims. We're talking about millions of people living in European countries who believe that any European man-made law is illegitimate and that only their Sharia God-made laws are enforceable.
Now I'm not opposed to arresting entire suburbs of Muslims and putting them in camps but that sort of thing just isn't going to fly in Europe at the moment. Maybe in another 5 years when things are really chaotic and terrorists have done to Europe's monuments what ISIS has done to Syria's.
Socialism is not the same thing as political correctness. And cultural marxism is a meme phrase that even /pol/ who uses it all the time can't define: "Well, it's like you know, kind of like Marxism, but it's, uh, you see, rather, uh, cultural. And its part of a Jewish feminist conspiracy to destroy western civilization. So yeah."
>>Ask Poland about socialism. Ask Poland about Muslims.
>implying you've asked polish people outside of /pol/, or 4chan in general
>in favor of bringing more refugees
Yeah nah, sanders can go to hell.
>It's also not urban. High population density + poverty tends to result in a high crime rate.
No it doesn't show that at all. It it were the case there would be a connection between poverty and crime there isn't. Thus it can only be assumed to be high population density. Guess what, whites still live in cities and densely populated areas. Are you also going to claim that intelligence is affected by population density? I think most scientists would laugh you away.
>Give me a source that says all of Africa is "less intelligent" based on an objective measure of "intelligence" not dependent on education or culture. No one's denying that Africa is predominantly a third world shithole with very poor education.
Give me a source that proves this has a bearing on "muh upbringing". Most geneticists have insisted that the large majority of IQ is in fact genetic. What you're seeing is that they have shit culture, shit education, shit nutrition, etc because they are less intelligent cold and brutal truth. There is no other explanation as to why their countries turned out so shit unless you want to play the geography game which proves I'm right.
>Citation needed. Especially since predominantly white countries have been in contact with each other at least several centuries before there was even such a concept as IQ. If you can find those 10th century IQ statistics, be my guest.
You're joking right? There are so many subgroups of whites celts, anglos, anglo-saxons, etc. You don't need a citation it's called common sense.
Yes it is. Every democratic socialist nation is linked to abhorring political correctness. It is undeniable the two are directly related to each other. Like I said Sweden is extremely politically correct and they are literally the shining beacon of a democratic socialist society. This trend correlates directly to the onset of Democratic Socialism.
You haven't been to Poland obviously. If what happened in Cologne happen there they would literally go on witch hunts beating up Muslims. They view them as inferior as they rightfully should.
>feel le bern!
>can't even beat Shillary
who /polgbt/ here?
>America has 30x the population of Sweden which means it's approximately 30x worse than it will be.
Uh, no. That's not how it works at all. I mean yes, you could argue that a country with 30x the population will suffer 30x the increased crime for a similar proportion of Muslims, but the RATE is still the same. Not only that, America will need to import 30x as many Muslims to achieve the same proportion as Sweden. If anything, the larger population means America is less susceptible to the effects of immigration.
>They don't have the resources to arrest entire suburbs
That's why I said they might have to get the military involved. If the entire suburb is essentially refusing to cooperate with the police, they are for all intents and purposes engaging in an uprising against the government.
>it would be "racist" to mass arrest Muslims
Only if they're being mass arrested simply BECAUSE they're Muslims. If the entire suburb is engaging in illegal activity, it's not racist.
>We're talking about millions of people living in European countries who believe that any European man-made law is illegitimate and that only their Sharia God-made laws are enforceable.
If that's really the case, they shouldn't have been allowed in in the first place. They're refugees, they're desperate for a safe place to live, they should be at least be willing to tolerate living under our laws. If they can't agree to that, they can go back home.
>Uh, no. That's not how it works at all. I mean yes, you could argue that a country with 30x the population will suffer 30x the increased crime for a similar proportion of Muslims, but the RATE is still the same. Not only that, America will need to import 30x as many Muslims to achieve the same proportion as Sweden. If anything, the larger population means America is less susceptible to the effects of immigration.
I was referring to socialism. It is common placement knowledge that the bigger the country the harder it will fall to Socialism.
Actually, this thread is very much on topic.
Thanks for bumping the thread. Giving Bernie attention , especially negative attention from the GOP supporters, brings him one foot closer to presidency
>No it doesn't show that at all. It it were the case there would be a connection between poverty and crime there isn't. Thus it can only be assumed to be high population density. Guess what, whites still live in cities and densely populated areas. Are you also going to claim that intelligence is affected by population density? I think most scientists would laugh you away.
It's poverty + population density that encourages high level of crime.
>You're joking right? There are so many subgroups of whites celts, anglos, anglo-saxons, etc. You don't need a citation it's called common sense.
Yes, but all of these groups have been in contact and influencing each other for like thousands of years. There is no intelligence test data from a time before they were in contact - intelligence testing didn't even EXIST back then!
>It's poverty + population density that encourages high level of crime.
If this is true than both of them should increase crime on their own. Appalachia had less crime. There is no net increase in crime with poverty. There is with population density. Population density doesn't disproportionately affect a population therefore blacks commit more crime.
>If this is true than both of them should increase crime on their own
That is correct. Do you have any statistics refuting that?
>Appalachia had less crime.
How does its crime rate compare to wealthy, white, rural regions?
>Yes, but all of these groups have been in contact and influencing each other for like thousands of years. There is no intelligence test data from a time before they were in contact - intelligence testing didn't even EXIST back then!
Except that's not the case at all it's the exact same as any other race with contact. I somehow don't think white located in Asia or the Middle east contacted with the European ones?
>liberterians wouldn't be anti-immigration
Ohh, am I laffin. Anti-immigration is literally one of the core proponents of liberterianism and anarcho-capitalism in general. The only reason why we needed wage and hour protection laws were because immigrants flooded the U.S. ruining the consensual relationship already set up between employer and employees.
>I'll work for 5 cents hurr durr
>Americans: hey we have already have a system set up where we don't accept wages like that you're going to ruin it for the res-
>hurr durr I don't care
>Ohh, am I laffin. Anti-immigration is literally one of the core proponents of liberterianism and anarcho-capitalism in general. The only reason why we needed wage and hour protection laws were because immigrants flooded the U.S. ruining the consensual relationship already set up between employer and employees.
Libertarian is anti-government. Who would keep the immigrants out?
Since the time when they were already wealthy and had a rich culture. Superb. Africans have also had contact with Europeans and the nations of theirs that weren't shit. Yet? Still shit culture.
Okay, I'll try to make this easy for you:
Find a European country and African country with similar wealth, education, and level of economic development, and show that the African country has a lower IQ.
If you can do that, then I'll concede that blacks are stupid.
>If that's really the case, they shouldn't have been allowed in in the first place.
That's what the right-wing has been saying from the FUCKING start. Try saying that in Europe and you're a Nazi.
>It's poverty + population density that encourages high level of crime.
Do you have any data that shows any link between poverty and crime? When comparing the same city year by year the poverty rate actually NEGATIVELY correlates with the crime rate. A better theory is that a people with poor impulse control / low-IQ is both more likely to commit crime and more likely to be in poverty.
Natural borders? People who realize the danger of immigrants and their businesses? Why are we talking about the theoretical anyway. True liberterianism will never be practiced anyways. Like any other group liberterians have certain things they want. Anti-corruption is probably at the top of the list because they realize the government is directly opposed to them and they can't have their ideas implemented in a society where government is corrupt.
The arguments over he can't come back grom this. It's clear that view park-windsor hills is not at all densely populated. In fact, the former probably he is. Now his only possible stance he can take is 'muh institutionalized racism"
You're putting the cart before the horse. Low-IQ causes less wealth, education, and economic development. People with lower-IQ do less well in education. This shouldn't be a difficult concept.
>Try saying that in Europe and you're a Nazi.
No, you're a Nazi if you call them subhuman or something. Saying those who can't follow our rules shouldn't be allowed in does not make you a Nazi.
>When comparing the same city year by year the poverty rate actually NEGATIVELY correlates with the crime rate. A better theory is that a people with poor impulse control / low-IQ is both more likely to commit crime and more likely to be in poverty.
You're contradicting yourself here.
Your assumption is that those things cause low IQ and aren't a product of them. Which you have yet to prove. Also see >>5569330
Of course the government and scienticists don't conduct study like these because of political correctness. I'm willing to bet the left has a higher IQ if we assume that less IQ = less impulse control.
Like what, geography? That won't really stop immigration if there's enough motivation for people to come to your country. Sure, if you're like Egypt or something the desert will restrict immigration but most countries aren't in that kind of situation.
Okay, thanks for playing!
Not same guy but the very fact they don't have that is evidence they are stupid.
I mean shit, I'm from Ireland, we were slaves(more Irish slaves than black slaves at the peak of slavery), got fucked by the famine, civil war less than 100 years ago and look at us today, in top 5 HDI in pretty much every area
Blaming whitey for shit generations ago is pathetic
>Like what, geography? That won't really stop immigration if there's enough motivation for people to come to your country. Sure, if you're like Egypt or something the desert will restrict immigration but most countries aren't in that kind of situation.
Explain to me how vast amounts of Muslims are going to cross the Atlantic country when there countries are such shit holes. Any country that can do it wouldn't be a burden.
>Not same guy but the very fact they don't have that is evidence they are stupid.
Not evidence in the scientific sense. That's like saying a plane crash is evidence of an engine failure. It's a POSSIBLE explanation, but that's realy all it is.
>Explain to me how vast amounts of Muslims are going to cross the Atlantic country when there countries are such shit holes. Any country that can do it wouldn't be a burden.
Then what's to stop Muslims from immigrating into Europe, or Mexicans from immigrating into the US?
There you go my friend. Despite race realism being an academically defensible position with heavy weights agreeing with the theory and Rushton still yet to be debunked. Of course, they were called racists and shackled for their entire lives by the idiotic scientists who love political correctness. Scientific racism? More like scientific political correctness. If Rushton is any indication I wouldn't want to risk my livelihood and career to go through what he did. Neither do most scientists.
God I hate that people like you think you know statistics. You know that there's more stats than income, right?
There's all kinds of shit, like small town mentalities/communities that police themselves (often quite horrifically) and don't report crimes, rich areas that have criminals come in from poorer areas to rob shit/mug people, some areas report every crime others don't, and that's even without cherrypicking, which even if it's accurate, that image clearly is.
There's two entire branches of science to actually correctly understand what statistics mean in specific situations - sociology, and statistics. People with years of training in those fields say your point of view is bullshit promulgated by idiots to give assholes ammunition for shitty arguments. Universally. You have no training in either - so shut the fuck up, and get the fuck out.
The people? What else? You act like people can't play border defense and that we need a military. People can build walls if they wish or patrol borders. If people didn't assimilate to the system they would be forced out.
Did he have any scientific evidence to support his claim of lower black intelligence? If not, his statement was not academically defensible, regardless of his actual scientific accomplishments.
Yes, and? Libertarians still want to have open borders and get rid of the minimum wage. It's not like I have to choose between democratic socialism or libertarianism and there are no other options.
>You're contradicting yourself here.
Look closer, there is no contradiction. A city with more or less the same people has roughly the same IQ year after year. In years when that city of people have a higher poverty rate they have a lower crime rate. In years when that city of people has a lower poverty rate they have a high crime rate. Poverty rate fluctuates year after year based on economic changes, IQ goes up a tiny bit year after year from the Flynn effect but doesn't make huge shifts without massive immigration.
When you compare city vs city the cities with the lower average IQ have higher crime rates and higher poverty.
Sure, poverty can breed crime, when it's out of survival
But niggers brawling in Denny's at 3am or sucker punching someone and stealing their Jordons has nothing to do with survival, it's their culture.
>Except libertarians don't want open borders
lel you fucking liar. please explain to me how a libertarian society would react to millions of migrants willing to work for $1/day trying to enter a first world country.
You call it "logical" to assume biological intelligence is the sole determinant of a nation's level of development. Again, that's like saying an airplane's airworthiness is ONLY affected by its engines.
Sure, people can form a border defense, but it would need to basically be a military to work effectively, individuals guarding the border wouldn't work (especially given that not even every mile of the US border is inhabited).
And what if the people don't consider keeping immigrants out such a priority? Indeed, if even ONE person living on the border decides not to stop immigrants from coming in, there's just about nothing to stop them.
The argument you made in the first place is sociological. Crime rates ARE part of sociology, you know.
And, if it was a libertarian country, the airline companies would still be free to fly Muslims in.
You mean those stupid fucks who use "qualitative methods" instead of "quantitative methods" so they can write whatever opinions they have down as facts and don't have to worry about their "science" not being replicated? Sociology is nothing more than Marxist indoctrination with state funding.
I've already explained multiple times. Look people can defend their borders. If they don't want to heed the laws then they will end up dead. This all theoretical of course. A libertarian society won't exist at least not any time soon. My basis for saying libertarians are against open borders is their views and what they're supporting and want.
So you're building a strawman and asking us to defend it. You're fucking retarded, libertarians want the government to be involved in as little as possible, only intervening when strictly necessary to keep the public peace.
Keeping the borders closed is included on the last part so your argument is null.
Yes actually, quite a lot of studies referenced. All of $5 on Amazon if you're curious.
>calling people "SJWs" because you have no counter-argument
Well, where is this scientific evidence?
Most libertarians I've encountered are FAR more towards the anarchist end, the only difference between them seeming to be than "anarchist" has left-wing connotations.
The business owners would love it. And as we've seen in our own history, without government regulations, it's big business that makes the rules. That's simple capitalism. Our own workers wouldn't be able to compete, we'd need to work for lower wages or provide proportionally better quality of labor. And if the workers tried to drive the immigrants out through violent force? Well the business owners would save enough money by hiring immigrants to hire private security forces to protect their new workers. Money is power, and in a libertarian society it is the only source of power.
Well since you're throwing out accusations of logical fallacies let me come right back with a good ole no true scotsman. You say that "real" libertarians want to protect the borders, yet I've seen many libertarians who say all they want from the government is the fire department.
No true libertarian, hmmm?
Rushton has conducted loads of studies on the issue. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=rushton+race+and+intelligence&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi0-ZHf8bPKAhWLPT4KHX_EBO4QgQMIGjAA
Here's a few. The man basically did it for his entire life. There are parts of his theory which are challenged, but it is still a defensible position.
Actually that is a divisive point in the libertarian community. A lot of (often the left-libertarians) will argue that to be philosophically consistent enforcing borders isn't a valid use of force. Molyneux has been screaming about maybe that would be a valid point but as long as the welfare state exists crossing the border is an initiation of force so it's a legitimate use of force to respond with force.
Anything taken to its ideological conclusion without pragmatism is doomed to be a disaster and libertarianism is no exception.
>Most libertarians I've encountered are FAR more towards the anarchist
Then they aren't libertarians you dipshit, the political label you put on someone must come from their views NOT according to what they call themselves.
You wouldn't believe that someone is a doctor just because he sees himself as a doctor you'd want to know his actual profession. You shouldn't believe someone is an actual libertarian just because he calls himself one, you should see his political stances first.
Why would you be wasting money on libraries in 2017? Why wouldn't you follow the trends of the free market and the will of the people instead of wastefully buoying unnecessary programs?
If a country wants to spend all its money on its military and nothing on orphanages, and have street urchins rotting on the side of the road, neat. I mean sure that sounds like a deplorable condition for a state but if that's what they want who are you to tell them otherwise?
>Is all that child rape, cannibalism, and violence in Africa fabricated as well?
Yea I bet you think that Africans are just in a violent state of killing and eating each other constantly, so yes, the image in your mind of Africa is incorrect.
Any violence in africa is obviously a result of lack of natural resources and incomprehensible poverty. If whites or asians were as poor as people in the Congo, they'd be no different.
>muh anti-black conspiracy
Oh yes of course all those crime-victimization surveys were just faked to make black people look bad because... reasons. Chicago is called "Chirak" because you don't want to be walking around the white areas at night, no sir.
You may have just won the award for "most stupid thing said on 4chan today".
>tfw criminology gets a bad rap as a social science
I wasn't aware that Chicago was called "Chirak". I thought it was called "Chicago". Also, don't you find it the least bit ironic that you're attempting to compare an area with a high percentage of blacks to a high percentage of middle easterners? I'm sure to a redneck like you they they're basically the same.
>lack of natural resources
>South Africa and Zimbabwe exported massive amounts of food until the blacks took over, drive off/murdered the white people and ran things into the ground
I don't need to go, though if I had the money I would. You're believing propaganda about Africa that would have been accepted in the 1800s, not today. I bet you think that Africans have extra tendons in their legs and have differently shaped brains as well.
It's actually Chicago's black community that termed the city "Chirak" because there was a war in Iraq at the time and they wanted to raise awareness of the massive amounts of black on black murders in their communities.
Pretending that high murder rate is not a problem in black communities does those communities no favours any more than a doctor that knows you have cancer decides to not tell you because he thinks it might worry you. If you actually had sympathy for those communities you'd listen to them when they say they have a problem instead of pretending the problem is just something racist white people made up.
In superstitious white countries they kick you out for being a faggot and tell you not to talk to them.
In superstitious african countries when you're born albino they chop you up and eat you like you're ingredients in some chinese soup.
That has nothing to do with poverty. Genetically, some "races" or broad geographical areas produced really stupid people. Even with the bell curve and stuff in effect there are smart black people ( obviously ) but it doesn't change the fact that the progression of white and asian societies has been fairly constant. If you look at blacks in North America with high resource access ( comparatively ) they still have overall worse results. If you look at africans brought to america they do better, because those systems ideally cherry pick the smartest and most capable africans.
But facts are racist so vote for Sanders. His tax plan will work. People who professionally hide money won't escape him, he's a career politician!
Don't worry, pnly a few LGBT will be murdered and raped. Eventually they'll assimilate and they'll be peaceful. Until then please stop be islamaphobic just ignore what they're doing
Well since murder is normalized it's a real shame that a racist like you wasn't murdered when you visited.
Btw, can you tell me what towns and cities you visited? Where were they? When did you visit?
>pnly a few LGBT will be murdered and raped. Eventually they'll assimilate and they'll be peaceful.
By that you mean the LGBT population will assimilate into Islam? Just checking to make sure I don't have to report you for saying something racist.
South Africa ;^) the only safe place for whites in the entire continent. Also, wishing he died because he was a "racist" (more like race realist) only proves the point of how cucked you are. That you wish people that say mean words on the internet are killed. Of course, only proving his point about the savagery in Africa.
>Definition of scotsman
>a male native or inhabitant of Scotland, or a man of Scottish descent.
>Definition of Libertarian
>a person who believes that people should be allowed to do and say what they want without any interference from the government
As soon as you break the definition then you're applying the wrong label.
>ISIS is fighting in Syria and Iraq
>hey guys we have to let in all these millions of people from Morocco, Ghana, Somalia, Eritrea, Kenya, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Bosnia!
LGBT will assimilate in the sense of accepting Muslims who don't think they should be killed or deprived of their rights. Muslims will assimilate in the sense of accepting LGBT people who don't spout hate speech at them simply for being Muslim. That's how assimilation works.
>The few arab wealthy nations are very secular. Not fundamentalist.
So tolerant and progressive.
>Muslims will assimilate in the sense of accepting LGBT people who don't spout hate speech at them simply for being Muslim.
Do you have any proof of that? Likesome statistics showing muslim beliefs on first world countries?
>Also add in a good 20+ Paris style attacks over the next 20 years at least
That seems optimistic. By the time Muslims reach 1/3 the population it's basically going to be Balkan Wars 2: Islamic Boogaloo.
>>a person who believes that people should be allowed to do and say what they want without any interference from the government
Okay, define "government". How would individuals preventing immigrants from crossing the borders not be, for all intents and purposes, governments of small, 2-acre sized countries?
>LGBT will assimilate in the sense of accepting Muslims who don't think they should be killed or deprived of their rights.
So like 1% of them? Because the rest are extremely homophobic.
Yooo they ain't talking about private buildings you useless sack of pus, they're talking about a) places of business and b) public places. Everyone should be able to access those. Doy.
>Muslims will assimilate in the sense of accepting LGBT people who don't spout hate speech at them simply for being Muslim.
my fucking sides! you should do comedy!
Protip: Muslims don't hate gays because gay people are concerned about not letting them in because they might throw us off buildings. Muslims hate gay people because the Quran tells them exactly what they're supposed to do to gay people and deviating from the Quran is a sin against Allah. It would be like saying, "Muslims will assimilate and all start eating bacon". Sure a tiny few might but the vast majority will not simply switch over simply because they're living on a different piece of dirt.
Part of the process of assimilation will be homophobia becoming less common. Note that homophobia in the West has fallen over the past decades, without any change in the ethnic composition.
Most major religions say homosexuality should be punished by death. They don't kill gays because a book tells them to, they do it because that interpretation/emphasis is accepted and even encouraged within their culture.
Muslims Brutally Attack Gay Man in Washington
Captured on security camera: The moment a Muslim extremist allegedly shoots a man seven times outside a Sydney gay sex club
Police attack Muslim world's largest gay pride parade
>The video shows two men being thrown to their deaths from a roof in Homs, before being stoned by a bloodthirsty and baying mob – which included children.
Muslim gang attacks gay catwalk model
Well there was 2 trannies almost stoned to death just a few days ago by refugees
Finding 5 stories proves nothing , if you really think your average middle eastern/north African male is homophobic or misogynistic you are a legitimate retard though
Are you the OP btw?
You give off the vibe of someone who is visiting 4chan for the first time
Do you participate in /r/berniesanders and just thought you could come over here and win us silly one-issue voter faggots over with some bullet points and are now shocked and surprised we aren't all 2 dimensional LGBTBBQISITKS tumblrites?
You seem like a deer in headlights
>5 stories are all from multiple countries across 2 continents, almost a billion people
Wow what a terrible epidemic! This certainly wasn't worth helping over a million people escape certain death in the middle east!
> if you really think your average middle eastern/north African male is homophobic or misogynistic you are a legitimate retard though
You haven't talked to any middle eastern/north african men in a while have you?
No I don't have any refugee centers in my area thankfully(yet)
Are you implying your average north-african/middle easterner is liberal on the issue of gay rights?
You realize their countries imprison homosexuals right?
Watching low information voters recite talking points is both hilarious and painful. I can't help but think this is the first time most in LGBT has actually been forced to explore these issues.
>we can't cut military spending because they'll just use their crazy ninja military skills and contacts to kill anyone who tries
Holy shit what the fuck are you smoking?
Did you forget to take you psych meds?
You're telling me that if you're a guy with a short term arbitrarily elected by complete strangers coming to take away the money and toys of functioning sociopaths that they aren't going to threaten to kill you or actually do it.
I guess in your world military coups and dictatorships just don't happen. I guess in your world JFK was shot just because. That sounds like a neat alternate reality.
Why are liberals so intent on defending the most racist, sexist, homophobic religion to have ever existed in the history of ever? It pretty much stands against everything liberals supposedly stand for.
And yet, Islamic malaysians are extremely peaceful, even moreso than western christians.
The middle east is only violent because we've entrenched their countries with war for generations. Iran was extremely secular in the 70s, until the united states really started fucking them over. Extreme times yield extreme views.
If muslims really were as extremist as that picture suggests, there would be nonstop terrorist attacks going on at all times in western countries where muslims immigrated to.
Exactly, which is why it absolutely baffles me that libtards are trying so hard to defend it. Hopefully the "liberals love Islam" meme will eventually die out when they start letting them into this country and they start setting fags on fire and throwing them off of buildings.
I'm going to be completely honest.
I don't care.
As a gay I've already been singled out as an evil cis white male of the evil ooga booga patriarchy.
My existence like any other white male is abnormal to these leftists creatures.
Also gay rights is a non issue, especially even more so when compared to actual problems facing America.
I'm voting for Trump.
Ridiculous. You're voting for potentially the next dictator because a bunch of spooky scary skeletons on the internet laughed at you for being white?
When Trump is rounding up the muslims and mexicans, you can be assured that gay men like yourself will end up in the same black umarked vans.
But anon don't you want to be able to sue instead of go somewhere else to get a wedding cake made? Surely that's more important than silly concerns about being stoned to death or thrown off a building.
You can be opposed to a group enforcing their religious laws on society, while at the same time also be opposed to hatred of individuals who are members of that group. I think that's pretty much what the liberal attitude is towards both Muslims and Christians.
>the Republican that's practically a Democrat and has been a Democrat in the past
>omfg guys look out it's sie Trumpenfuhrer!
Yeah no. In the next few months he's going to suck the conservative dicks he has to suck to get the nomination but after that he's pretty much middle of the road on social issues other than concerns about America's future regarding mass immigration.
He's effectively the best candidate for gays because not only does he not hold the conservative Christian beliefs about homosexuality and want to keep out homophobic Muslims, his nomination and election will do major damage to both the hardcore religious and the Neoconservative factions within the Republican party.
This is pathetic fear mongering to attempt to distract from the real issues that unchecked immigration is killing this country.
>"Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level"
That's 113 Billion that could be reinvested in failing infrastructure, poverty programs and work force development for NATIVE US citizens, etc.
Yet you want to sit here and fear monger like a fucking cuck.
How do you expect native born citizens to continue to compete?
I doubt you've read the news and seen multiple reports how tech firms and even places such as Disney have fired and replaced their work force with third world imports due to lucrative tax and incentive deals. So why would I want that? Why would I want any US worker deprived of a job for some third world chuckle fuck?
Honestly I could go on for days about this, but I know you're entirely too stupid for it.
Also Trump proposed a temporary measure to halt muslims from entering the country until they can be properly vetted. Nothing illegal about that in the US code.
Get fucked, commie.
totes bruh, love the sarcasm.
>This is pathetic fear mongering to attempt to distract from the real issues that unchecked immigration is killing this country.
And SJWs telling you to check your white, cis, male privilege is somehow a "real issue"? Immigration is a real issue, being told it's wrong to hurl slurs at people is not.
>Yet you want to sit here and fear monger like a fucking cuck.
Yet you're the one fearmongering about SJWs.
>I doubt you've read the news and seen multiple reports how tech firms and even places such as Disney have fired and replaced their work force with third world imports due to lucrative tax and incentive deals. So why would I want that? Why would I want any US worker deprived of a job for some third world chuckle fuck?
That's called capitalism. Why SHOULD a company hire someone that demands more pay for the same work?
Trump is the only candidate that treats gays as humans instead of pandering to them and acting like they are children who need to be taken care of.
>it's called capitalism to incentivize companies into taking 3rd worlders to work and companies to outsource
>muslim rights a bloo bloo
So citizens of another country have a right to come here and be refugees or take welfare and jobs?
Yeah nah son, get the fuck out of here with this pedantic shit.
Immigration and temporarily halting muslim immigration are in the wheelhouse of economics and national security
There is literally no fundamental right to immigrate to the United States and if there was there would be 1 billion people here overnight who don't care about any of your rights because those rights are not a part of their culture.
He just said that to pander to his anti-Muslim base. When he actually goes to do an executive order he's going to write it in a way that won't get overturned by the Supreme Court by saying, "No immigrants from this list of countries until we figure out how to vet them"
>i-it's all just a meme, guys! /pol/ doesn't actually hate anyone!
You are pathetic. Fucking filth. You're everything wrong with our culture today. Trump will lose and progressivism will continue like you never existed.
How stupid are you.
US Code 1182, inadmissible aliens.
>"Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by president. Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
Trump called for halting immigration from specific countries. Nothing illegal other than hurting your feelings
Just go ahead and bend over now and save face.
>progressivism will continue like you never existed.
I think I will not feel bad when the Muslims come to share their cultural with you.
>Cute. Way to deflect on the issue of immigration.
You're the one that started deflecting by whining about SJWs.
>Here's a hint, it's called crony capitalism kiddo.
It's only tangentially related, crony capitalism is when businesses have undue influence in government. Hiring the cheapest workers available is literally half of the fundamental basis of capitalism. Sure, pro-immigration lobbying could be considered crony capitalism, moving businesses to Africa or Asia for cheap labor definitely wouldn't be, however.
Yeah, but anyone who is "too gay" (i.e. not straight-acting) is still considered degenerate
No, but discrimination against people on the basis of race or religion IS a violation of our basic principles. If we're going to restrict immigration, we should base it on other criteria, say:
>limit on total immigrants per year
>background checks for every immigrant, forbidden entry if they have terrorist connections
>immigrants with communicable diseases denied entry until treated
>preference given to immigrants who speak English and/or have useful skills/education
Businesses are created through contract with the government. Therefore businesses are public. No one's FORCING you to start a business, but if you do, you have to follow the government's rules regarding such.
I'm not seeing how that is terribly different from what Trump is likely to do. He's running for office and using talking points. It's not as though he's going to stand up in front of his audience and read off 30 pages of details on an immigration plan. He's going to summarize in a way that will bring out cheers from his audience, that's how running for office works. Stop being so butthurt. Any immigration restrictions are better than what Sanders or Clinton have planned.
Yes, but in a true laissez-faire capitalist society, there would be literally nothing to stop businesses from moving overseas to get cheap labor. The end result is the same: American workers wouldn't be able to compete economically.
>Businesses are created through contract with the government.
People don't seem to understand sociopaths abusing hierarchies. Are you one of those people who thought every national socialist in WW2 was a bad babykilling cannibal or something?
Not all Muslims are bad, but they are all Muslim. Non-observing Muslims don't count for the purposes of these kinds of conversations, the same way that non-observing Christians wouldn't count in others. Those are people who just practice the faith or claim to be of it basically by cultural osmosis.
The problem with Muslims is their religion hasn't undergone the reformation, and they don't really have a separation of church and state. This results in the majority of them being observing Muslims instead of the very small minority we have in parts of the West who are for most intents and purposes secular. Due to the fact that most Muslims are still very religious, they are still very exploitable - and happen to be exploited by people who want to butcher LGBT individuals.
Reminder that Hillary is beating Bernie in all the polls.
Reminder that Trump is now beating Hillary in the same polls.
in a laissez faire capitalist society, there's nothing to suggest that American workers wouldn't be able to compete
infact there's plenty of historical evidence that the opposite is true
that said, restricted immigration in a socialistic welfare state is just good sense
>the government will kill you if you don't pay them bribes
>therefore their control is just
I never said any of that, but "business" is DEFINED as a contract with the government. Sure, you can sell some things without such a contract, but that's not a "business". Business is DEFINED by the legal requirements and privileges of said contract.
It's very unlikely that the government will actually KILL you for running an illegal business, unless you're resisting arrest (and even then you'll probably survive unless you're black) or dealing in drugs or weapons or something. But claiming it's somehow "unjust" that you can't benefit from a contract without upholding your end of the deal is just silly. Am I somehow being wronged when a store refuses to let me take something without paying for it? Why then is it wrong for the government to deny you the privileges of being a business unless you do your part in entering the business contract? Oh right, because as soon as you call something "government" libertarians think everything it does is literally murder.
Because that's part of the government's terms, in order to protect the rights and welfare of the people. It's like any other contract though; if you don't like the terms, don't agree to them. It's that simple.
What about the moors who invaded spain and the turks who invaded greece and the ottomans who invaded byzantium and marched on to rome?
What of the siege on Mecca and Muhammad killing an entire tribe of Jews.
>You are pathetic. Fucking filth. >progressivism will continue
Liberalism in a nutshell.
but its MY business
the government has no legitimate claim upon my business
why on earth would it?
i'm not a slave am i? are you a slave? otherwise we're free men and we can trade with eachother as we wish without other people being able to stop us
>general election poll
>the general election hasnt even started
>but its MY business
Yes, in the same sense that your driver's license is YOUR driver's license. The government still defines what the license means, in terms of what it does and doesn't allow you to do, and in certain cases can declare it invalid. The legal entity of a business is similar.
>the government has no legitimate claim upon my business
Your "business" as a legal entity owes its entire existence to being acknowledged by the government. Sure, they can't just take away your business without very good reason, but they CAN define what a business is or isn't allowed to do.
>i'm not a slave am i? are you a slave? otherwise we're free men and we can trade with eachother as we wish without other people being able to stop us
We can, but that's not a "business"
not the same anon but you are really retarded desu
Not at all businesses are the same with or without government involvement. That's like saying the government can tell you who you can fuck or what type of haircut you can get. unless you are some sort of bootlicker you really shouldn't run to mommy government over shit like that. you dont stop being a citizen with rights when you have your own business although sjws will make you think that
You're free to leave the country, and thus no longer be subject to the social contract. That means it's literally impossible for it to count as slavery. Your whole attitude/rhetoric "Oh poor me, I'm so oppressed for having to follow the law" is incredibly dismissive and insulting to anyone who has ever suffered through ACTUAL slavery.
get back in the field and gib me more money. i deserve 15$/ hr to mop your floors. you may own that business but it is mine to tell you what to do with it. feel lucky you get 10% of your profits
you understand that unless you stop businesses from leaving a country, they will. you can stop them by treating them right or by complete force, either way if they leave you tank the economy.
Not the person you're responding to but the government kills anyone that crosses them no matter how harmless they are. They don't care about society, they care about maintaining power.
>The Chemist's War
>Kent State shootings
to name a few. The only reason why Bundy and his family didn't get torn to shreds was because he was smart enough to get /pol/tier wackos to keep a live feed going so they couldn't make up something to get away with cold blooded murder. Is the entire federal government full of power hungry sociopaths? No, of course not. I don't even believe they make up the majority. But it only takes one in the right position to cause massive damage. We need to admit these people exist, that they're in power, and that something needs to be done.
No, merely agreeing to sell something to your friend/neighbor doesn't qualify as a business. A "business" is a specific legal construct formed between one or more individuals and the government. You get certain benefits from entering such a contract, but also have to accept certain restrictions.
And no one's saying that you lose your rights by entering a business, the business is a separate legal entity from its owners, the business and its owners have different legal rights. That's the whole point of incorporating a business and is the origin of the "corporations are people" meme.
>bernie is the most pro lgbt candidate
I think you're forgetting someone.
Trump? Yeah I wouldn't mind if he won. Having an amendment to the anti-discrimination act that would apply to us would be great. It would be terrible if Hillary won, though. I have a hard time trusting that DOMA supporting pinkwasher.
historically that isn't even true. businesses aren't sanctioned by the government and have existed even in societies that we're next to anarchism. the closest thing you are describing corporatism which is not capitalism. take an econ class
The individuals that form a business are free to leave. Do you think people somehow give up their personal rights to leave the country when they incorporate a business?
>Not the person you're responding to but the government kills anyone that crosses them no matter how harmless they are. They don't care about society, they care about maintaining power.
The government doesn't automatically kill anyone that gives them problems, it's only extreme cases where they deem it necessary. Sure, they make mistakes sometimes, but they're only human. And government is inevitable - eliminate one, and a new one will take its place. And I'd certainly prefer the current government - one which does not kill citizens lightly, and at least purports to follow the Constitution and its own laws, to an armed mob taking whatever they want by force.
Nope, Anarchism is naive. We need some form of government to protect us but we tend to get too comfy and forget that they're supposed to be working for us. Governments need to be kept small enough that we can throw out the assholes when they do too much damage but they need to be large enough to effectively enforce *our* laws. We need a Goldilocks size government
How is that retarded? If anything, you're retarded for thinking business law is anything like actual slavery. Seriously, spend a couple years in actual slavery and then tell me how business law is even remotely comparable to that.
>The government doesn't automatically kill anyone that gives them problems
depends on the government lel
when you take away rights from companies and tax the shit out of them, they leave. look at America, the rich commonly use tax havens, the reason why is that taxation is so high that they move their money to avoid this. large businesses leave and big money leaves when governmental abuse, what you are advocating for, happens. any economist will tell you that, myself included. Reread you whole comment, it's self contradictory.
>depends on the government lel
Sure, obviously. That was kind of my point - the US government, and those of most western countries, tend to be fair and reasonable - killings of citizens are the exception, not the rule. And we have freedom of speech - sure, it's not an absolute, but most of the restrictions on freedom of speech (hate speech laws, no shouting fire in a crowded theater, no slander/libel) are to protect the people, not the government. We're generally free to criticize the government, and the government is bound to follow the will of the people to some extent, given that we have free elections. And this doesn't really benefit the government directly - the only way it does is that the government realizes it's better to have people that are actually loyal rather than kept in place through fear.
You're INDIVIDUAL rights are not being taken away. You don't lose any rights as an individual from incorporating a business. And you're free to engage in economic activity as an individual, without the special restrictions placed on businesses - but you don't get the special benefits either.
The only way to prevent it is to remind every generation that it's possible and what the consequences of completely trusting people in power are. Like I said we got too comfy. We need to wake up, kick the two parties to the curb and never forget what happened.
>this somehow means all governments are a bad thing and we'd be better off without them
Quick google search
>this somehow means all governments are a bad thing and we'd be better off without them
Agreed. That poster is loco
Who anon? All I see in that photo is some old hag that supported the Defense of Marriage act until she realized that she could get votes from the queers by pretending to care about them.
If you polled white Christians the amount that answered to that would be the same as the amount of terrorists in Muslim world. That is how bad they are that extremist Christians are the same as your average Muslim.
Because you underestimate what Musiim immigration will do to gay people? Look Muslims born and raised in America were against Texas banning sharia law. There are parts in Europe run by Sharia law and Muslims and the media ignores it. Swedish media condones Muslim crime. Plenty of gay people have died in Europe because of Muslims. You might be playing into the Jews hand with Cultural Marxism, but it's simple Muslims are sub humans who actually hate and want to kill me. Not just ideologically opposed to marriage.
Obviously Trump. Pro-gay marriage and anti-Muslim immigration. Bernie is a SJW as such he is conditioned that Muslims are better than white gays. He is literally Sweden he will get government to cover up Muslim attacks on gay people.
Any group so barbaric is obviously sub human. None of these "bigoted" white Christians want to kill me. As far as Cultiral Marxism you are only proving it. You value Muslims because they are a destroyer of the west and ignore the detriment they pose to you because "muh white privilege" like I said you'll be sorry when they start killing gay people. Make the right choice.
>Bernie is a SJW as such he is conditioned that Muslims are better than white gays
>Any group so barbaric is obviously sub human.
Incorrect. Human is a purely biological classification. Culture has nothing to do with it.
>None of these "bigoted" white Christians want to kill me.
Chances are some of them do, unless you're going to say the likes of the WBC somehow don't count as "bigoted white Christians". But yes, I get your point.
>You value Muslims because they are a destroyer of the west
Incorrect. Not everyone who disagrees with your ideology and memes wants to destroy western civilization.
>ignore the detriment they pose to you because "muh white privilege"
>Make the right choice.
Which is to encourage reasonable restrictions (like background checks) on immigrants, NOT to buy into crazy /pol/ memes. That's like saying drowning yourself is the "right choice" when you're thirsty.
Source? The closest I can find to that is a report that 99% of the population is Islamic countries think homosexuality is morally wrong. That is not the same as saying it should be punishable by death - there are numerous behaviors that I consider morally wrong, that doesn't mean I think people should be killed for it. And banning people from immigrating for "thinking" gays should be killed is essentially the same as a ban on "thoughtcrime". A better solution is make them pledge to follow our laws when immigrating (with emphasis on the no violence against women or LGBT people) with any such violation resulting in immediate deportation with no exceptions.
51% of Muslims support Sharia law. Sharia law calls for the killing of homosexuals, so a majority of them actually do support killing gays.
Depends on where you take the statistics, the poorest the region the bigger the support.
My personal view is that any immigrant should only receive a permanent visa after 10 years, where he'll be periodically tested to see how much of the western culture he assimilated. That's basically the same thing that's done for ex-convicts.
But of course, none of the people who are in favor of the immigration won't even think of that.
>My personal view is that any immigrant should only receive a permanent visa after 10 years, where he'll be periodically tested to see how much of the western culture he assimilated. That's basically the same thing that's done for ex-convicts.
That seems reasonable. Although, as mentioned above, if applied specifically on the basis of their race or religion, it could be argued to be in violation of our basic principles (which logically, should still be applied, even if the person isn't an actual citizen).
Nope, it's obviously for ANY immigrant, no matter where he or she comes from.
I'm personally looking to move into another country and while I have to do a shitload of things to actually be allowed in, many of those "refugees" are not only invited, but receive free shit.
>Human is a purely biological classification
Agreed on that and I'm not the person you responded to but maybe we can start referring to backwards groups of people as sub-human not to mean beneath "real" humans but as a people with lack of humanity. With that definition I see no problem calling Muslims or Republicans sub-human trash