|
Twerkteam Pizza posted:Maybe it's because the U.S. has a horrible habit of pumping a poo poo-TON of unnecessary drugs into mothers giving births so that insurance companies can make bank, or that Doctors often elect to do C-sections because insurance companies won't cover child-birth if it lasts more than 12 hours? Just wondering your response to this you piece of garbage. I didn't know about this. I learned something new today! That's horrifying. For-profit healthcare might not be such a great thing, guys!
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 05:45 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 03:22 |
|
If you subsidize long birthing labor, you're just going to get more of it, that's economics. If socialized health care is going force others to pay for your childbirth no matter the duration, what's to stop women from flippantly running up astronomical tabs on the taxpayers' dime with leisurely 80-hour labor? And where's the incentive to avoid costly complications when the financial cost is shifted to someone else?
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 05:52 |
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:Looks like you just proved jrod's point! You clearly took the multitude of skills developed as a dishwasher and leveraged them into a more prestigious job selling comics and comic accessories, which I can only assume are polymer vaginas and suspenders. From what I've seen of other nerd stores comic accessories means poo poo loads of the Magic: The Gathering Trading Card GameTM trading cards.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 06:10 |
|
jrodefeld posted:Egalitarianism is not an animating principle of libertarians, which should come as no surprise to you. Of course, that would require you to have compassion for people who aren't exactly like you. quote:If we had never abandoned the Gold Standard but instead Nixon vowed to cut government spending and resume the link between the dollar and gold, we would have seen far less income inequality, less corporate greed, fewer (or none at all) speculative bubbles and Wall Street gambling. As others have said before for me your batshit gold buggery is irrelevant and unhelpful. quote:But, for the libertarian, the problem with this entire situation is not that income inequality is an inherent concern, but that the money that has accrued to the politically-connected rich has been stolen from the middle class through debasement of the currency, through taxation and through subsidy. Thus, justice would require us to redistribute stolen loot to the rightful owners, not out of a desire for greater "equality" but out of a desire for restitution. Do you really think a one time restitution is going to help high economic inequality in the long run? More importantly, how the gently caress do you get the wealthy to pay it in your Libertopia? Who's going to do it? Do you know some sort of incantation? Are you a wizard? quote:Like I said earlier though, it is true that market economies closer to libertarianism have less general income inequality than do more Statist societies. But that's not true at all. Really, if you want to live the "American Dream" you should move to Denmark. Here's another fun little graph: quote:The inequality that we would see in a free society would be that which came about "naturally", through our inherent difference in ability while respecting private property and contract. I'm assuming by "free society" you mean "free market society". What capitalism does naturally is move toward the concentration of wealth and power. That's where representative governments can step in. By maximizing the inclusion of the many in order to create prosperity. The government creates the conditions for owners, entrepreneurs, workers, and customers to thrive in. This balancing of power does not hurt the economy, it's essential to it. Morality aside, in simple economic terms high economic inequality is incredibly loving stupid. Does it make any sense for the top 1% to earn 20% of the income while some of their employees are paid so little they have to apply for government benefits? Does it make any sense to have large swathes of the population earning so little that they can't contribute to the economy in any meaningful way? The plutocrats at the top can not make our economy work by themselves. It takes a robust middle class to create real economic growth. That takes livable wages, affordable healthcare, access to quality education, and the progressive taxation necessary to invest back into the infrastructure that helps the middle class. Do you have any idea how much this could help everyone? Things like single payer healthcare not only helps those just getting by, it lessens the risk taken by entrepreneurs starting new businesses. It also removes the burden of providing insurance from small businesses. Fair living wages mean you have more people able to spend disposable income, more customers. More customers means increased demand. Increased demand creates the need for more jobs to meet that demand. It's that feed back loop that drives our economy. That's why egalitarianism matters. It's not just the moral thing to do, it's the smart thing to do. Edit: Jrode, talk to Literally The Worst about minimum wage jobs. I believe it's pertinent to what I just said. HP Artsandcrafts fucked around with this message at 06:46 on Feb 10, 2016 |
# ? Feb 10, 2016 06:23 |
|
paragon1 posted:From what I've seen of other nerd stores comic accessories means poo poo loads of the Magic: The Gathering Trading Card GameTM trading cards. And hilariously expensive tabletop roleplaying game-sets. Don't forget those
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 06:23 |
|
jrodefeld posted:Egalitarianism is not an animating principle of libertarians, which should come as no surprise to you. However, there is a problem in the United States (and presumably in other countries as well) with undeserved wealth accruing to the top 1%, the politically connected and large corporations. In that case, there is indeed income inequality in excess of what would exist in a genuine free market and this phenomenon should be addressed. None of these words really explain how a minimum wage job prepares you for anything more than more minimum wage jobs. Also, what makes you think you'd be anything other than impoverished in your ideal society? You've got the business sense of a houseplant and appear to be naive as all hell in believing that people won't try to pull a fast one on you to relieve you of your hard earned gold pieces in a law-free/regulation free society.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 06:30 |
|
BUG JUG posted:I am a real life historian and I had never heard of Theoretical History until today. I now want to hate assign it to graduate students and watch them rip it apart. Same, except I have heard of it but not by this name; it's usually called "historical fiction."
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 06:40 |
|
1000101 posted:None of these words really explain how a minimum wage job prepares you for anything more than more minimum wage jobs. Also, what makes you think you'd be anything other than impoverished in your ideal society? You've got the business sense of a houseplant and appear to be naive as all hell in believing that people won't try to pull a fast one on you to relieve you of your hard earned gold pieces in a law-free/regulation free society. Without Statist interference the market for pirated blu-rays would explode. I assume here that jrod is somehow better at copying other people's work than competitors. Somehow.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 06:49 |
|
spoon0042 posted:Without Statist interference the market for pirated blu-rays would explode. I choose to believe you mean that the literal building that the store is in would go up in flames due to a gas leak.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 06:55 |
I actually think that if you take it honestly, libertarian perspectives have a really brutal fundament. I think that the argument would be that it would be better to have perfect liberty (by their standards) and vast misery and destruction, than our current system, because misery, suffering, etc. are meaningless in the face of the inherent "morality" of so on and so forth.
|
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 07:10 |
|
It's the amazing self-owns that keep me coming back to this thread. Racism is impossible in a truly free market, and the minimum wage is bad for blacks because in a truly free market they'd do equal work for less pay than whites! It's not anyone's business what free people choose to put in their bodies, but if I think Skittles are drug paraphernalia and they're found on your corpse then you probably deserved to be killed! Libertarians are a priori incapable of racism because that's a collectivist ideology incompatible with a belief in individual autonomy free of group associations, but it just makes sense to assume anyone who has the same skin color as a Crip is one too! The state is the biggest threat to minority rights, but you gotta love the way they racially profile Arabs it makes me feel safe! I hate the state, gee I wish the cops and the FBI wouldn't let the first and fourteenth amendments get in the way of enforcing law and order! Freedom and liberty are the most important values, but if we have to have a state better an absolute monarchy than a constitutional democracy! The constitution is an illegitimate contract with no authority, but when it comes to slavery, segregation, and women's rights it's better to respect the text than to uphold individual rights by executive order or judicial fiat! VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 07:27 on Feb 10, 2016 |
# ? Feb 10, 2016 07:13 |
|
VitalSigns posted:It's the amazing self-owns that keep me coming back to this thread. This. It's definitely what gives me the most entertainment-value here, watching JRode tie himself in knots and contradicting himself at every turn. Possibly the most perfect example yet being: jrodefeld posted:But what if I was concerned about an ISIS attack on Los Angeles? Would I be unreasonable in being extra cautious about Middle Eastern men who were also Muslims? Would that make me a bigot, even though the clear evidence shows that nearly all ISIS members are Muslims who are of Middle Eastern descent? Offering up the definition of bigotry in action, followed by... jrodefeld posted:I worded that imprecisely. What I meant was if you were a member of the police or homeland security who was investigating a purported plot by ISIS to attack Los Angeles, would you make the assumption based on the statistics that the attacker would be of Middle Eastern descent and also a Muslim? Or would you really think it is reasonable that you'd suspect the elderly Jewish grandmother just as much as the twenty-something guy who just flew in from Syria? Note the immediate shift of the goalposts and trying to obscure what he actually said. It's a thing of beauty: The absolute inability to recognize any error in the underlying views he himself holds on full display. Note especially the last, bolded part, where he's trying to imply that he would never be bigoted, while it would still be completely reasonable for a cop to be. "Oh poo poo, I said something that might have sounded a bit bigoted. However, I, JRodefeld, am not a racist or bigot! I am Libertarian! I am incapable of holding such silly ideas due to Logic and Reason and First Principles! Therefore, I only made an error in my presentation! As soon as I fix that, they will see that I am not racist at all." Like I said earlier, JRodskij, you're not very good at this, are you?
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 07:52 |
|
VitalSigns posted:Short answer to the problem of tracing property rights to ensure the prevailing allocation is just: you don't. You pick right now as the starting point (conveniently right after you conquer all you want/are able to grasp, and enrich yourself as much as you can with centuries of expropriation and slavery) and from now on taking is wrong and you have to deal with me peacefully if you want any of the land or resources I somehow control. GunnerJ posted:Hoppe has a rather more elaborate and revealing answer here: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/09/hans-hermann-hoppe/smack-down/ Those quotes are hilarious. Not only does he misinterpret Rawls (whose representatives certainly have general knowledge of economics and sociology), he can't even apply his own theory of justice consistently. I guess that's why I stick to Nozick and his followers over H³ and so on as representative examples of libertarians: they aren't insane. GunnerJ posted:Incidentally, jrod has attempted to address this himself and then gave up on addressing rebuttals: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3745862&pagenumber=36&perpage=40#post452903373 As far as I can tell, this actually isn't an answer to my question: my question was about the fact that applying a rectification principle is intractable, so that the more just option would be redistribution towards groups likely to be victims of past injustices (he just begs that question). He argues that this would be unjust, but my contention was that it would be the most just of the options available to a libertarian (perhaps whenever historical chains and counterfactuals could be worked out, transfers could be modified on a per-individual basis to satisfy the libertarian - it's not really important). quickly fucked around with this message at 08:18 on Feb 10, 2016 |
# ? Feb 10, 2016 08:15 |
|
quickly posted:As far as I can tell, this actually isn't an answer to my question: my question was about the fact that applying a rectification principle is intractable, so that the more just option would be redistribution towards groups likely to be victims of past injustices (he just begs that question). He argues that this would be unjust, but my contention was that it would be the most just of the options available to a libertarian (perhaps whenever historical chains and counterfactuals could be worked out, transfers could be modified on a per-individual basis to satisfy the libertarian - it's not really important). Ah, I guess I misunderstood you... though in fairness, that post of his doesn't really answer anyone's questions.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 08:22 |
jrodefeld posted:
You'd probably get a better reception here if you at least tried to back up claims like this with evidence. Give it a try. Which market economies have the lowest income inequality levels? Which market economies do you consider closest to libertarianism? Rank your top ten
|
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 10:31 |
|
Nessus posted:I actually think that if you take it honestly, libertarian perspectives have a really brutal fundament. I think that the argument would be that it would be better to have perfect liberty (by their standards) and vast misery and destruction, than our current system, because misery, suffering, etc. are meaningless in the face of the inherent "morality" of so on and so forth. It's because libertarian ideology is fundamentally focused on individual dominion and order. The libertarian ideological struggle isn't ensuring that the most people have the most freedom; rather, it's trying to resolve the contradiction of them as individuals being allowed to do what they want, while also having a framework of authority to ensure that undesirable people, ideas, and events (basically, everything associated with other individuals) are kept at bay and subdued. Hence the focus on the sanctity of contracts (because they can be used to exclude those who aren't part of the contract or agreement, while also being a means of forcing people to uphold them), the focus on privatization (because then they could discriminate in their businesses, while also compelling other businesses to discriminate), "dispute resolution organizations" that are basically hired guns who are ideologically aligned or wholly amoral, and Hoppe's nonsense about convenant communities and the like. It also explains the overlap with the racist right, because all of the above are an ideological and political means to an end - getting to exclude or kill minorities (and maybe enslave them), trampling over the poor and vulnerable for your own benefit, enshrining whatever ideology and government you see fit over the lands you own, and so forth. Hence the love of Civil War "lost cause" narratives, the support for apartheid-era South Africa, and so forth; all more or less colonial/neo-feudal societies with an elite (typically white, of course) lording it over black vassals. Though, to be fair, I'm certain that many libertarians would ultimately see fit to enslave anyone freely, regardless of skin color, if it suits their purposes. Basically, what you mention regarding libertarian perspectives being focused on some inherent morality, irrespective of the actual misery and suffering they entail, is very much in line with the orderly world of medieval societies. You do what (authority figure above you) demands, because that's the way of things, and going against it is a sin or insult or transgression against order and will cause you to burn in hell or lead to anarchy. Again, the emphasis on property rights and contracts; what's the difference between those and swearing an oath of loyalty to the lord of a fief, in a libertarian society? Kthulhu5000 fucked around with this message at 10:37 on Feb 10, 2016 |
# ? Feb 10, 2016 10:35 |
|
GunnerJ posted:Same, except I have heard of it but not by this name; it's usually called "historical fiction." Not a historian (Sociology and English Rhetoric undergrad), but I've heard of it too! Usually we call it "hackneyed fiction"
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 15:11 |
|
Holy poo poo
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 15:19 |
|
jrodefeld posted:Like I said earlier though, it is true that market economies closer to libertarianism have less general income inequality than do more Statist societies. Wait, you've refused in the past to consider the USA's health care inefficiency as proof that free market health care is worse because even though the USA's is worse than single-payer socialist systems it's still really far from libertarian and thus can't be used as evidence. Which states do you consider libertarian enough to serve as good representations for income inequality, exactly?
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 15:21 |
|
Karia posted:Wait, you've refused in the past to consider the USA's health care inefficiency as proof that free market health care is worse because even though the USA's is worse than single-payer socialist systems it's still really far from libertarian and thus can't be used as evidence. Which states do you consider libertarian enough to serve as good representations for income inequality, exactly? jrodefeld posted:The problems that exist in the United States today have to do with State policy that has largely undone the great prosperity and productive capacity of our once great free market economy. The growing gap between rich and poor has nothing to do with the free market and everything to do with our abandonment of a sound currency and our embrace of reckless fiat monetary policy which has empowered the parasitic and unproductive rich while punishing the poor, the savers, and the productive entrepreneur who bears the brunt of the regulations heaped onto the economy. It is indeed a rigged game but don't blame this on the free market or libertarian ideology! TLDR: The most libertarian countries are a bunch of states with socialized health care and two Gulf states with literal slavery. The better life expectancy of the non-slaveholding countries proves that free market health care is superior to the US's mixed system that's strangled by the heavy foot of government interference.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 15:28 |
|
Also, bringing up someone's racism is not "character assassination" or dodging their arguments. We believe that racism is morally repugnant and arbitrary. If a person's arguments are basically about justifying or reinforcing racial subjugation of out-groups (Woods, Hoppe, Rothbard, Rockwell, DiLorenzo, etc.) then attacking the person's racial bias is attacking their argument!
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 16:10 |
jrodefeld posted:
And yet my country (Norway) which is pretty loving far from being libertarian have less income inequality than yours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_..._World_Bank.svg
|
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 16:18 |
|
What do you think about this post? From the Jrod quarantine thread. Grand Theft Autobot posted:Absolutely, Libertarianism does indeed have a long history. The problem is that has become inextricably tied to White Supremacy because Libertarian language and argumentation gave segregationists excellent cover for pursuing their true goals. Phillips explains, long before Atwater expressed it, that you can't go to Eden Prairie, MN and say "Niggers in your businesses! Niggers in your schools!" and expect to be taken seriously, but you can say poo poo like "Business owners have the right to do business with whomever they choose! The government shouldn't tell you what to do with your property!" or "You should be able to manage your own schools in your own neighborhoods, and you shouldn't have to accept busloads of children from Minneapolis or anywhere else!" and everyone nods in agreement.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 16:55 |
|
jrodefeld have you literally ever done anything that's not you blindly, incompetently piggybacking off another person's work in your life? (no, you haven't)
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 17:34 |
|
Given that he relentlessly cites sources that he hasn't read and refuses to defend or discuss, I wonder if he actually watches any of the movies he pirates.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 17:42 |
|
quote If I was walking down the streets of Compton in Los Angeles and I see a young black man who fits a certain description or is acting in a suspect way, I might legitimately concluded that he is probably a gang member, only because a majority of Crips and Bloods members happen to be black. I'm not going to make the same assumption about a middle aged white guy because there aren't any middle age white guys in the Crips and Bloods gangs. This right here is all the evidence needed to determine you're broken , regardless of any political ideology. You would also be surprised at the number of middle aged white guys associating with or/and participating in activities that groups such as the Bloods and Crips engage in.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 18:17 |
|
Alhazred posted:And yet my country (Norway) which is pretty loving far from being libertarian have less income inequality than yours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_..._World_Bank.svg Let me see if I can't anticipate jrode's rebuttal here... First off, that list if from the World Bank, which is run by Second, even if it were unbiased, Norway is a state, therefore, ergo, concomitantly, ipso dolor, hasta lumbago, it is only achieving this through theft from the productive members of society and transferring that stolen wealth to worthless parasites and it is thus immoral. Third, Mises. Fourth, it doesn't count because Norway is using dirty fiat currency instead of pure, unadulterated, lovely gold. Fifth, *Faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrt* ... Let's see if I'm right! TLM3101 fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Feb 10, 2016 |
# ? Feb 10, 2016 18:17 |
|
TLM3101 posted:Let me see if I can't anticipate jrode's rebuttal here... If Laissez Faire was still around, I'd love a thread dedicated to simply parodying and mocking Libertarian talking points like this.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 18:28 |
|
Also, whites used to consume a lot more public goods in the cities until those services were desegregated. Whites in Atlanta basically abandoned public transit entirely after bus service was desegregated. Whites joined tax revolt movements because their taxes paid for public goods that they had ceded entirely to blacks. So, in effect, privatization efforts received an enormous boost from desegregation. The Georgia Legislature adopted a change to the state constitution that would have allowed the state to eliminate public schools and replace all the funding with vouchers so that white parents could send their kids to all-white private schools. The purposes of voucher programs have really not changed all that much since then. Obviously, the most prominent example of the privatization movement is suburbanization. I say that because suburbanization implies (generally) lower taxes and less public services, the use of private automobiles instead of public transit, private clubs and private schools, and a greater de facto control of residency by socioeconomic class. After all, the burbs are the home of HOAs, and if a developer wants to create de facto segregated housing they just exclude low cost designs, and because there aren't any services or public places you end up with far smaller indigent populations. Minnetonka, a wealthy suburb west of Minneapolis, had a huge public outcry when Goodwill tried to open a store there. Nearly all of the outrage centered on the fact that "Those type of people don't live in Minnetonka, and we don't want them coming here to shop at Goodwill." Ask your family and friends from the 'burbs to list their top reasons for living there. I bet it goes something like this: 1. Better Schools 2. Less Crime 3. Lower Cost Housing by size 4. More land/living space There are more than this, but most people I talk to mention these. Well, the first two things on this list are basically a coded way of saying, "No Black People." White Flight from the cities following Brown v Board and other decisions is being mirrored in the suburbs currently. When I was born, my suburb was overwhelmingly white. Over the course of my childhood and teenage years, the southern half of my suburb grew increasingly black, and white families that lived around me gradually sold and moved north. A large county road running through the middle of the suburb became both a geographic and racial boundary line. When I was younger I was sent to public school, because it was a "good school." All of a sudden, though, it became a "bad school" and I was sent to private school. Eventually, we packed up and headed north like our neighbors, and I was back in public school. I haven't lived in that suburb since 2004, and I moved to the city after college. Every now and again I run into someone from there, or I see someone from high school on facebook, and if they are white they have now moved even farther north, and if they are black, chances are they have moved into previously white northern areas. And all the whites keep saying poo poo like, " So happy we made the move to Ham Lake! The school system is so great!" edit: I should add, another aspect of Suburbanization as Privatization is that suburbanites by and large still commute to work in the central city. So, they pay no property taxes to support the city, they actively vote in state and national politics for anti-city legislation, but then turn around and leech off the city every day at work. They consume fire, police, streets, water/sewer, etc. plus they have jobs that wouldn't exist without the city, while giving back only a small amount in sales taxes on lunches or happy hours. Then, they leave the city and completely distance themselves from all the problems of the city. Grand Theft Autobot fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Feb 10, 2016 |
# ? Feb 10, 2016 18:35 |
|
VitalSigns posted:If you subsidize long birthing labor, you're just going to get more of it, that's economics. Reduce the cost of birth and the laws of supply and demand indicate there will be infinite births. Constant tidal waves of infants, dripping and crying, destroying the world. Is this what you want, statists? Maybe if we prevent the minorities from having babies...
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 18:42 |
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Reduce the cost of birth and the laws of supply and demand indicate there will be infinite births. Good news! Israel, the 39th freest country in the world, is way ahead of you.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 18:58 |
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:If Laissez Faire was still around, I'd love a thread dedicated to simply parodying and mocking Libertarian talking points like this. That's exactly what this thread is for already!
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 19:12 |
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:Also, whites used to consume a lot more public goods in the cities until those services were desegregated. Whites in Atlanta basically abandoned public transit entirely after bus service was desegregated. Whites joined tax revolt movements because their taxes paid for public goods that they had ceded entirely to blacks. So, in effect, privatization efforts received an enormous boost from desegregation. The Georgia Legislature adopted a change to the state constitution that would have allowed the state to eliminate public schools and replace all the funding with vouchers so that white parents could send their kids to all-white private schools. The purposes of voucher programs have really not changed all that much since then. man, i live in a neighborhood in the bay area that went from being mostly white when i was born to being almost exclusively asian now; the high school was 56% white and 30% asian in the 1991-1992 school year and is like 90% asian and 6% white now. my main takeaway was that white folks generally don't like to live around racial minorities, even when they're The Good Ones™.
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 19:25 |
|
True
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 19:37 |
|
Is there a legend on what the different colors mean there? I'm guessing they correspond to different racial demographics. vvv Thanks Goon Danton fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Feb 10, 2016 |
# ? Feb 10, 2016 20:58 |
|
Nolanar posted:Is there a legend on what the different colors mean there? I'm guessing they correspond to different racial demographics. red = asian blue = white green = black orange = latino ...to add onto what i posted, there's only one white family on my entire block left that has school-age children, and they elect to homeschool them instead of sending them to the 95% asian elementary school, which also regularly contends for having the best test scores in the entire state and is the reason real estate here is so expensive. like, why the gently caress would you live here and pay a million dollars for your house when you're not even going to send your kids to the school that makes your house so goddamn expensive. Jerry Manderbilt fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Feb 10, 2016 |
# ? Feb 10, 2016 21:08 |
Jerry Manderbilt posted:red = asian I know in my area there doesn't seem to be much "flight" but there definitely aren't new white families moving in, and when old folks who bought when the neighborhood developed die, their children seem inclined to sell the house and resume their lives elsewhere.
|
|
# ? Feb 10, 2016 21:23 |
|
I'm beginning to think jrod isn't going to discuss Tom Woods' call for school resegregation with me.
|
# ? Feb 11, 2016 01:29 |
Grand Theft Autobot posted:I'm beginning to think jrod isn't going to discuss Tom Woods' call for school resegregation with me. Jrodefeld: Is your hatred of the scientific method due to reality's well known liberal bias?
|
|
# ? Feb 11, 2016 01:41 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 03:22 |
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:I'm beginning to think jrod isn't going to discuss Tom Woods' call for school resegregation with me. He probably can't hear you over the sound of his dentist drilling new holes in his teeth and/or his ongoing trepanation.
|
# ? Feb 11, 2016 01:47 |