Click to expand
Rank #2618 on CommentsLevel 319 Comments: Wizard
OfflineSend mail to akkere Block akkere Invite akkere to be your friend flag avatar
|Last status update:|| |
|Date Signed Up:||1/03/2011|
|Location:||In your bedroom fapping to your porn|
|Funnyjunk Career Stats|
|Highest Comment Rank:||#213|
|Comment Thumbs:||20780 total, 23022 , 2242|
|Content Level Progress:|| 6.77% (4/59) |
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
|Comment Level Progress:|| 96.5% (965/1000) |
Level 319 Comments: Wizard → Level 320 Comments: Covered In Thumbs
|Total Comments Made:||7330|
latest user's comments
|#84019 - Understandable. Works the same way with power tools; some peop…||14 hours ago on Politics - politics news,...||0|
|#83903 - You can always just forget the whole "every individual ei…||04/27/2015 on Politics - politics news,...||0|
|#76 - In a world where people make thousands recording themselves pl…||04/27/2015 on Oh No||+18|
|#83899 - What do you define as liberal? Classical liberals commonly hol… [+] (26 new replies)||04/27/2015 on Politics - politics news,...||0|
#83911 - eight (04/27/2015) [-]
Claiming I am liberal is talking out of my ass? Nah, I'll stick to wherever I like and fuck anyone who wants to tell me what I am or am not. But honestly, I'm not sure I really care about labels. I just tend to identify with liberal ideas and notice many of my liberal oriented friends disagree with me entirely on the gun issue.
#83904 - fefe (04/27/2015) [-]
do you believe in free markets?
do you believe in the rights of businesses to refuse services to gay couples?
do you believe in the abolition of welfare, affirmative action, and food stamps?
do you believe that less government=better government?
do you believe that socialism is bad?
do you believe in a flat tax?
do you believe in privatized healthcare?
you're not a classical liberal, shut the fuck up you progressive shit
#83908 - eight (04/27/2015) [-]
You make the mistake of assuming someone has to agree or disagree with every item to fit the label. That's pretty unlikely to happen, unless you're the narrow type that doesn't think for themselves and instead just follows what's popular.
Anyways, better to be progressive than stunted. You don't get anywhere standing still.
#83916 - eight (04/27/2015) [-]
"o you believe in free markets? Yes
do you believe in the rights of businesses to refuse services to gay couples? No
do you believe in the abolition of welfare, affirmative action, and food stamps? No
do you believe that less government=better government? Yes
do you believe that socialism is bad? Yes
do you believe in a flat tax? Yes
do you believe in privatized healthcare? " Indifferent, Both can work, but we need to pick one and stick with it!
#84006 - eight (15 hours ago) [-]
Discrimination laws are not exclusive to the market. It's not as if it's making a special case for businesses.
Wikipedia: Free Market - A free market is a market system in which the prices for goods and services are set freely by consent between sellers and consumers, in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority.
That says nothing about a businesses right to discriminate. It's talking about setting prices and choosing goods and that it's self regulated by the business owner rather than any other authority.
It's as if you hear the word 'free' and assume that it means a businesses owner can do whatever they want in the place of business. That is not the case and that is not what a free market is. Discrimination laws do not impact a sellers right to set a price or decide what products they want to sell.
#84011 - eight (14 hours ago) [-]
Ignored your question? The question was nonsensical. I demonstrated that above.
If you want to talk about a sellers right to discriminate and refuse sale, then we can talk about it. But to try and lump that in under the 'free market' category is completely invalid.
So now that is cleared up, I will answer your question.
"You completely ignored my question, why do you think the government should decide who I or a person do business with? "
Because who you do business with is irrelevant. You're not in business to talk about your personal life. You're not there to make buddies.
You own a business because you want to make a living and you want to be your own boss.
A persons lifestyle should not have any bearing on that. You do not have to like your customers, but if your doors are opened to the public, and the customer is not acting inappropriately, there should be no reason why you don't serve them.
"Why are you forcing that on people?"
It's not being forced. If you own a business, selling a product or service is what you do, that isn't force. If you don't want to sell to customers you may not like, then you should not have started a business open to the public.
#83917 - fefe (04/27/2015) [-]
How exactly is it possible to believe there should be less government, yet believe that welfare, affirmative action, and food stamps should exist, people should not be allowed to refuse service to a gay couple, and healthcare should or should not be privatized?
Guess who makes all that shit work. Yes, it's the government. That's a direct contradiction and not classical liberal in any sense.
#83920 - eight (04/27/2015) [-]
The government could stick their fingers into way more assholes than just aid and discrimination laws for businesses. I never said I was against any government control, I just said less government control the better. That means wherever necessary, I am fine with the government getting involved and where not, they can fuck off. It depends entirely on the issue and that's a pretty long list...There is no "1 size fits all" in politics.
Like I said, I am indifferent to health care. If they can make it work privately, then great. If it would work better with some government control, then that's great too. But this mix and mach bullshit is making things worse. And let's be honest, private healthcare wasn't too hot before UHC, something needed to change and that wasn't likely to happen without government intervention when the problem was caused by the people that run the shit. And now we have two shit systems competing to be the ultimate shit system, fucking over just about everyone below middle class.
#83921 - fefe (04/27/2015) [-]
>The government could stick their fingers into way more assholes than just aid and discrimination laws for businesses.
You're trying to make the topics of welfare, affirmative action, welfare, and business owners' rights to serve who they please sound insignificant here. These are issues of contention that play a large role in shaping the face of a country. Trying to pass it off as "just aid and discrimination laws" is nonsensical. These all require strict government ruling to work.
Again, saying what basically amounts to "I think all these things that require government control should exist, but I also think less government is better" is a contradiction. Most modern day progressives would say the same when it comes to government only being involves when necessary, but the scope of 'necessary' tends to be huge with liberals. This isn't classical liberal thinking. It's modern day socialism.
#83928 - eight (04/27/2015) [-]
"Again, saying what basically amounts to "I think all these things that require government control should exist, but I also think less government is better" is a contradiction. "
I didn't say that in the slightest. That's how you're twisting it though. I will say once more, *if* it needs government intervention, I am fine with it. I do not generally want the government poking around unless necessary. I would prefer less government involvement overall, but this means that some issues will still need government intervention, it just so happens that for discrimination it's necessary and obviously for aid is necessary. That should be pretty clear now.
"These are issues of contention that play a large role in shaping the face of a country. "
Absolutely. But they aren't the only issues. And that seems to be the narrative you're painting here. It's cherry picking.
"Trying to pass it off as "just aid and discrimination laws" is nonsensical."
Discrimination is a big issue for the victims, I agree. But if you give the private business its way, it will continue and will not be solved, because apparently, we don't have enough decent people in the world. Morality is more important than the ego of a business owner as far as I'm concerned. But in terms of government intervention, not a big deal. The business owner will not be affected in any negative way other than getting a little butt hurt and he's still free to insult the living shit out of anybody that walks into his store.
Like it or not, Government aid is a single issue, a massive one, but still just one of many. There's plenty more issues out there. The government might have their hands completely tied up in aid, but that doesn't mean that overall, their prominence is the same among all issues relative to aid. It might be that overall there is less government prominence, it just happens that Aid is where much of their focus goes into. The point is, as long as it's less government meddling in our affairs, I'm happy. I can tolerate some issues where intervention is needed.
If you meant to specify less for each and every issue, which you failed to do, then that's a different matter and I'd say no, because I think that's a bit unreasonable, especially in a country this large and diverse among race and culture where it can be difficult to come to any agreement or compromise. Sometimes you need big brother to set you down a path, rather than leave you in the lobby, bickering for ages without ever moving forward or getting anything useful done.
#83903 - akkere (04/27/2015) [-]
You can always just forget the whole "every individual either fits in x or y" and take your own set of opinions in stride. Thinking of politics in terms of agendas like liberal or conservative and the many sometimes confusing sub-divisions only corrodes opinions and inflicts biases in my personal opinion.
Opinions on different issue-types can change and become circumstantial as you go from the textbook definition, to the news application, and sometimes to even when you find yourself being personally affected by the issue. Agendas kind of disconnect from this principle and force you to only see things in black 'n' white.
|#83898 - Anti-gun in what manner, exactly? I've known some people who a… [+] (2 new replies)||04/27/2015 on Politics - politics news,...||0|
#84019 - akkere (14 hours ago) [-]
Understandable. Works the same way with power tools; some people might come to be a little stand-offish in learning their use because of the risk and need of discipline, as well as the fact that other people can end up mis-using them and harming other people.
What are your thoughts on it legislation-wise?
|#83869 - The specifics are a tad different depending on the culture you…||04/26/2015 on Politics - politics news,...||0|
|#193 - I think this would've been an experiment best made for a brand…||04/26/2015 on Gaben steps in||0|
|#83774 - From what I've seen, the most strict cities generally allow yo…||04/26/2015 on Politics - politics news,...||0|
|#83771 - Europa Universalis IV Strategy-Based Video Game set in bet… [+] (2 new replies)||04/26/2015 on Politics - politics news,...||0|
#83869 - akkere (04/26/2015) [-]
The specifics are a tad different depending on the culture you're jumping into but they all run parallel in that you might;
Marry a daughter or son to another leader's relatives to further relations
Utilize Espionage to do everything from basic spying to even inciting rebellions
Acquire "big friends" to maintain leverage against more hostile neighbors that might be larger than you.
For the European nations, especially ones closest to Austria in the 1444 starting time of most games, you'll have to deal with the Holy Roman Empire, who will hold elections for primary leaders, influence decisions, and either incorporate or outcast some nations depending on how you can manipulate the board.
It takes a good deal getting used to how things work and some things might be teeth gritting at first; you'll have to deal events like peasant wars and such if you aren't careful in how you balance things economically, and some things will even be completely out of your hand like random events that are translated superstitiously to be omens that reduce your nation's stability.
|#83768 - Sure, why not?||04/26/2015 on Politics - politics news,...||0|