Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

How to fix Detroit

The news is full of stories of Detroit, and understandably so. It’s an unmitigated disaster. But I know how to fix it.

Seriously, I do!

I have a plan that would cost the state of Michigan nothing – not a cent. It wouldn’t cost DC anything either, and it would turn Detroit into the most thriving city in North America. As a bonus, it would give the remaining property owners in Detroit a financial windfall.

Here’s the plan:

The federal government (in writing) forbears taxes, regulations, laws, and impositions for a hundred years to the area of the current municipality of Detroit and to all persons and commercial entities resident there.

The government of the state of Michigan forbears taxes, regulations, laws, and impositions for a hundred years to the area of the current municipality of Detroit and to all persons and commercial entities resident there.

All municipal government agencies within Detroit are disbanded.

All state and federal offices within the city of Detroit are disbanded.

The federal government guarantees that entry and exit to/from Detroit will remain unchanged from the current conditions, and that no obligations will be placed upon residents of Detroit in any other place.

Federal and state governments immediately cease all payments to residents of Detroit. (They may resume payment to those persons if and when they are no longer resident in Detroit.)

The final legal document would be more complex than this, but those are all the main points necessary.

What this plan does is to return Detroit to its natural state – to the way it was managed when the first settlers arrived. (In other words, not managed at all.)

And think of the money that will be saved by Michigan and the feds. Billions per year.

And Then… And then we have a free for all… and a good one. Think of Hong Kong, but easy to get to.

Businesses would begin to relocate the next morning. Hundreds of them, thousands of them. The people who still owned and lived in their homes would be offered lots of money for their properties.

Libertarians and conservatives, disgusted by the gang in DC, would load up and drive to Detroit.Productive former residents would return. Thousands of opportunity-seekers, anarcho-capitalists, and pot-smoking hippies would be gathering their money and buying property.

Detroit would, within only a few years, become the coolest city on the planet – by FAR.

But, But… “But there won’t be any police!”

“There won’t be any courts!”

“It will be non-stop murder, death, and mayhem!”

You wanna bet? Do ya? (And you don’t think Detroit has non-stop mayhem already?)

The people who come to Detroit would be coming to escape from their chains and to be productive. These are precisely the kinds of people who clean up a town. And with no taxes to pay for a hundred years, they’d have plenty of extra money to spend on whatever services (security or otherwise) that they wanted.

The Truth

The truth, of course, is that the state and fed guvs will never agree to a plan like this one, for a single reason:

Because they fear it would succeed.

They’ll let every last person in Detroit rot before they’ll let a group of producers live free of their chains.

Detroit returned to its natural state would expose the great lie of the government game – that we can’t survive without them.

by Anonymousreply 22309/02/2013

[quote]With conservatism a muddled, spent and failed movement, only libertarianism remains a viable obstacle to progressivism

go away, NOW

by Anonymousreply 407/24/2013

OP's point is to have a "tax-free" zone where corporations can incorporate, raising all boats in Detroit!

Except of course that it wouldn't. Look at other tax havens like Palau and Caymans. Not at all the libertarian paradise OP would lead us to believe.

by Anonymousreply 607/24/2013

The Feds will come to the rescue. The Mayor will continue to spend more than than they take in and in five years they'll be back in the same mess.

by Anonymousreply 807/24/2013

"Look at other tax havens like Palau and Caymans."

Or Somalia! It's the ultimate libertarian paradise! Why, I bet our immensely productive OP is on his way there now, so he can be free free free to pursue his fabulous libertarian lifestyle without all that pesky government interference!

by Anonymousreply 907/24/2013

[quote]Please give a more nuanced critique or STFU.

You're mentally ill, and are beyond clueless about economics, politics or history. Stop annoying us with your insane spambot drivel.

How's that?

by Anonymousreply 1207/24/2013

tl,dr

by Anonymousreply 1307/24/2013

Why stop there?

by Anonymousreply 1407/24/2013

How long until slavery is instituted?

by Anonymousreply 1507/24/2013

In what world does letting Detroit be a tax free zone, not cost the Federal government or the State of Michigan anything? Detroit is a mess, but there are still a ton of tax revenues generated there. To say nothing of the lost revenues that you imagine from all the people and companies moving there. A land with no public services, police, or fire protection. No road repair, no street lights, no snow plowing in the winter, the city would shut down till spring I suppose.

by Anonymousreply 1607/24/2013

[quote] the state and fed guvs will never agree to a plan like this one, for a single reason:

Because it, like you, is batshit crazy.

Look, insane OP, you will never, ever convince the DL, let alone this nation that your Lord of the Flies Living plan is a grand idea. It's not what we want, it's not going to happen.

If you prefer other, less regulated countries then please, for fuck's sake, GO THERE. Live there and be free of America's oppressive tyranny.

by Anonymousreply 1707/24/2013

Let me fill you in on some Detroit history. Since Coleman Young was in office the city has been plagued with years and years of corruption and instead of focusing on the people and wealth of the city the people who have ran the city have only focused on themselves. I grew up there. I know. My parents grew up in Detroit and then when the civil rights movement started many white people moved north which made the divide of whites and blacks even larger. I lvoe Detroit. It is and always will be my home, but in order for it to come back it will take years and the right people to step up.

by Anonymousreply 1807/24/2013

Young whites have been gradually moving back into the city but it will take a while and a lot more fresh blood before some semblance of stability and order can be achieved.

by Anonymousreply 1907/24/2013

R20 et al - what you are proposing is essentially what Detroit was for the last few decades - the government has been functionally stagnant, almost non-existent beyond providing a lot of the employment (and thus income) in the area. That's the reason businesses and middle class citizens have been moving out of the city - lack of policing (thus high crime) and crap city services.

The few remaining really nice neighborhoods have been paying (and can afford to pay) outside companies to provide services for them, not depending upon the city.

btw the Muslims in the area, mostly in the western suburbs, are not poor - no idea where that idea comes from other than blatant ignorance

by Anonymousreply 2407/24/2013

R21 your post is nothing but bad information

if you believe otherwise link to your sources

by Anonymousreply 2507/24/2013

Detroit is already full of home-based businesses that operate without oversight and pay no taxes. Anyone who has spent any time there knows this.

Detroit is very spread out and needs tightening. The area contains many toxic sites that need to be cleaned up. To deal with those issues requires some central authority.

It is a very scary place and many people would never consider settling there, no matter what the inducements.

by Anonymousreply 2707/24/2013

No, R26, I don't think I will. I said exactly what I wanted to say and you are not a serious person, dear.

xoxo,

R17, Not As Crazydumb McStupidass As You

by Anonymousreply 2907/24/2013

[quote][R4]- Please give a more nuanced critique or STFU.

NO! the surest sign of a web forum going under is when libertarians start to run rampant. You go away, I still like the DL sometimes, with you, it isn't worth it.

by Anonymousreply 3007/24/2013

[quote]The people that worship government power would be shocked when Detroit became the "Hong Kong" of the US, and the parasites in DC would shit their britches.

dummy

by Anonymousreply 3107/24/2013

Boy, that's exactly what Michigan needs -- a shitload of libertarian extremists squatting in our backyard.

by Anonymousreply 3207/24/2013

[quote]The average annual pension payment for Detroit municipal retirees is about $19,000. Retired police officers and firefighters receive an average of $30,500. Top executives and chiefs can receive $100,000. Police and firefighters don't pay into the Social Security system so they don't receive Social Security benefits upon retiring.

Just to clear up some misconceptions.

by Anonymousreply 3307/24/2013

Libertarians live in a fantasy world. In Ron and Rand Paul's universe, business should be allowed to discriminate against unwanted groups because that is "liberty." Women who don't want a pregnancy should be forced to carry it to term, though. Ugh.

by Anonymousreply 3407/24/2013

[quote]If Detroit was allowed to secede, becoming a "free city-state" with no state or federal control, it would result in thousands of companies relocating and making it their home within months.

oh, brother. . . . .

by Anonymousreply 3607/24/2013

[quote] If it was a free city-state, unburdened by federal regulations, then the clean-up could be quid pro quo- I clean it, and you give me a 50/50 split in ownership

ideally, but only a fool would think of that actually transpiring under these conditions.

[quote]Cont-

where the fuck are you cunting and pasting this tripe from?

by Anonymousreply 3807/24/2013

[quote]I hope you're reading these replies, and see how they would rather be slaves than free, and will look at the link.

stoned much?

by Anonymousreply 4107/24/2013

We need some medication for R39/R40/and a shitload of the other posts on this thread.

Here, have some sugar.

by Anonymousreply 4207/24/2013

[quote]But I know how to fix it. Seriously, I do!

No you don't. What you have is a fantasy (and a rather silly one, at that), which is why you couldn't even be bothered to muster any kind of logic, reason, or actual data to support it.

[quote]Please give a more nuanced critique or STFU.

Please provide a post worthy of a more nuanced critique or STFU.

[quote]Please provide a coherent, point by point refutation. Please.

Please provide a coherent, point by point argument. Please.

[quote]Then I realized the two major parties were virtually identical

Well, sure, if you're a moron. Out here in the real world, not so much.

[quote]and discovered Austrian economics and libertarianism and Ron Paul.

Oh, you mean the guy who's been totally and consistently wrong for more than 30 years? That explains a lot.

[quote]ideally, but only a fool would think of that actually transpiring under these conditions.

Yup, but that is indeed what he is: a fool. Ignorant of history, ignorant of human nature, ignorant of the reality out here in the real world. All you can do is point and laugh.

by Anonymousreply 4307/24/2013

[quote]I know this is a big leap, but government is not a panacea. It is the opposite- it inhibits and destroys innovative ideas, and makes people dependent.

And therein is your problem. Out here in the real world, government is neither a panacea nor its opposite. It's only in your black-and-white world that you will interpret this post as "worshipping" the government because the shades of gray simply don't exist for you, particularly when you're posting drunk as you appear to do most nights.

by Anonymousreply 4607/24/2013

[quote]Oh, wait, that describes the USA.

Oh, wait, no, it doesn't. Next?

by Anonymousreply 4707/24/2013

What's interesting, and revealing, about these fantasies is that some limited data do exist to support (or fail to support) their proposals, as different countries and locales, different areas of the economy, have differing levels of government regulation and oversight. If such proposals truly did lead to the paradise this moron envisions, it should show up in those data: there would be a clear correlation.

Sadly for him, no such correlation exists. Those few studies that tried to find such an economic correlation were quickly debunked as the fantasies they are. Out here in the real world, the anarchy he wants just doesn't lead to paradise, as we've seen over and over again throughout history.

by Anonymousreply 4907/24/2013

R48, I love you. You just copy and paste what you read on Lew Rockwell and then post what you think are compelling arguments, but you just make the case for more government since you are obviously a product of home schooling.

Oh, and whenever someone challenges you, you resort to childish and pathetic name-calling. Q.E.D.

Next?

by Anonymousreply 5007/25/2013

Girls, Girls! You're both drunk.

by Anonymousreply 5207/25/2013

The socialists can see that R51. Libertarians have always denied the existence of corruption, and the influence of the rich on judges and property rights. Thus it can be seen that they are not serious people but mere poseurs.

by Anonymousreply 5307/25/2013

[quote]What if those "free commerce zones" became wildly successful?

What if pink unicorns flew out of your butt? That's an equally likely outcome.

[quote]Wouldn't that show that government is incapable of managing society?

No. Next?

[quote]"Pollution" - air, water, ground- would be ruled by property rights and contract, and would dramatically reduce the amount of pollution. Too bad the socialists can't see that.

We "can't see that" mostly because it's not true. You'd have to identify the source of your problems, prove in a court of law that that source was indeed the source, and tie that source back to the offending company. And you have to do this entirely on your own time and your own dime. Guess what? You won't be able to.

by Anonymousreply 5507/25/2013

I had written: "It's only in your black-and-white world that you will interpret this post as "worshipping" the government because the shades of gray simply don't exist for you, particularly when you're posting drunk as you appear to do most nights."

Re: R54: Q.E.D.

by Anonymousreply 5607/25/2013

[quote]girls, you're both drunk tonight!

Dang, bitches be cray-cray tonight

by Anonymousreply 5707/25/2013

Meanwhile, out here in the real world, it's not shit and it's not your neighbor; it's a chemical compound whose effects are a bit more subtle than lead, perhaps increasing your risk of cancer by, say, 10%, and whose effects are not well understood and may take decades to be felt. And it's someone like Chrysler, who has funded studies that dispute even what little information you have available.

You'd like to prove the effects, of course, but you can't because you don't have the money and hey, guess what? In this libertarian paradise of yours, the government doesn't fund such studies and has no regulations that require that Chrysler provide them.

So Chrysler will argue in court that your cancer is normal and that there's nothing wrong with the chemical that they're pumping into your groundwater and the burden of proof will be on you to prove otherwise. You're right about one thing, though: the case won't last for years. It will be over in hours because you don't have any proof and you don't have the money to get any.

But wait, it's even worse than that, because it's not just Chrysler pumping crap into your groundwater. It's Exxon-Mobile, Alcoa, Archer Daniels Midland, and so on, and it's not just one chemical compound, it's a few dozen. And it might not be just one compound affecting you; it might be a combination of two or three of them, harmless on their own but deadly in their combination.

And now you don't even know which company or compound, or combination of compounds, is causing your respiratory problems or your cancer at the age of 35. And you have no way of figuring it out.

But wait, you can get your local government to help, right? Good luck with that. They need the revenue those corporations bring in and they need the jobs and the tax revenue that comes from those people working for those corporations. And the corporations are constantly threatening to pull up stakes and move to a more friendly locale, which means that even your friends and neighbors might be against you as you try to raise public awareness of the problems.

So, basically, you're screwed and all you can do is kiss your ass goodbye. But hey, "liberty and freedom," right?

by Anonymousreply 5907/25/2013

Gee, R58, that must be why you wrote: " If Detroit became a 'free state' then black and white and yellow and brown PEOPLE could come together and forget about race and religion and actually work together." Because you recognize so much about human nature and all....

Oh, wait....

by Anonymousreply 6107/25/2013

[quote]What if those "free commerce zones" became wildly successful?

Aren't these TIF zones? Villages around the rust belt have been using these as carrots to attract businesses for the last 18 years. As soon as the incentives expire, businesses move on to the next gullible village leaving unusable paved wastelands behind.

If you want to do business, you have to be able to do so without relying upon welfare. Bain Capital is not the type of business any city should want to attract.

by Anonymousreply 6207/25/2013

ROFL... And yet, so far, you have posted nothing but insults, R60. If I'm so "stupid," it should be easy to deal with me. What does it say about you that you can't?

by Anonymousreply 6307/25/2013

Shh, R62, we're reading bedtime stories tonight. Don't let reality intrude on the fantasies.

by Anonymousreply 6407/25/2013

It's the last. The businesses libertarian-fool would tract would be loathsome in the extreme. I dread government control, I fear corporate control far far more.

by Anonymousreply 6507/25/2013

So, why how is life in that libertarian paradise, Somalia?

No regulations, everyone has guns...

by Anonymousreply 6607/25/2013

R67, go to sleep and sleep it off, you got a bad batch clearly. Talk to your dealer.

by Anonymousreply 6807/25/2013

[quote]Can you not see that this is the result of quasi-omnipotent government, and that real property rights would be the remedy?

Nope, mostly because it's not true. And you know it, too, which is why you didn't even try to muster a counter-argument. You just waved your magic wand and wished yourself back to fantasy land. There is no "quasi-omnipotent government" anywhere in my post at R59. And "real property rights" doesn't solve a damned thing with those very real-world scenarios.

[quote]I feel sorry for you-

Personally, I'm amused by you. And very thankful that your fantasies will never become reality.

[quote]Someone who believes in the transformative and purifying power of government slavery is too willfully ignorant (or stupid) to see how freedom could fix such a problem.

ROFL... Oh, go ahead, enlighten us. You failed utterly in your other thread where I first posted that. All you had there was insults and wishful thinking, just as that's all you have here.

[quote]I feel sorry for you, R59. I'm glad I'm not as ignorant and blind as you are.

Perhaps, but you're a hell of a lot funnier.

Oh, and I'm still waiting for even a single quote of mine that demonstrates that I'm "Someone who believes in the transformative and purifying power of government slavery." Anyone? Anyone?

by Anonymousreply 7007/25/2013

[quote]Slavery is when someone can control your every movement, monitor every behavior and take anything from you arbitrarily.

So I'm confused. How are you posting on the internet from the death camps?

Oh wait, you're not in a death camp? So if you're able to bulk post tons of libertarian bullshit to the internet, how is your every movement being controlled? What has specifically been taken away from you?

by Anonymousreply 7107/25/2013

[quote]Many people don't care about skin color, or religion, or sexual orientation. You obviously do. Why?

ROFLMAO.... Nice try. I see you're resorting to your normal tactics when you get your ass handed to you. Nice to know that some things never change.

by Anonymousreply 7207/25/2013

[quote]You seem to be the only poster too simple or stupid to understand that ADM, Alcoa, Exxon, etc. could not exist in a free market.

Utter bullshit, which is why you don't even try to defend that silly assertion. Look up "economies of scale" and "barriers to entry" and get back to us when you actually understand, well, anything.

[quote]These mega corporations and mega banks only exist because they are symbiotic government organs, existing only because of the powers granted by the Federal Reserve and USGov.

Uh-huh, right. Yeah, because people don't need oil/gas, there are no economies of scale which lead to mergers and growth, there are no advantages to size which lead to greater size....

Oh, wait....

by Anonymousreply 7507/25/2013

[quote]That's your masterpiece!

Nope, just a post that you can't handle, which is why you're resorting to childish insults. Q.E.D.

[quote]Fact free but full of shit!

And yet you aren't able to muster a coherent counter-argument. Why is that?

[quote]Really, how do you do it?

It's called common sense. You should look into it.

[quote]How do you pretend to be intelligent but post such moronic bullshit that anyone with a high-school education can see through?

And yet, somehow, you can't actually respond to anything I wrote in that post. What does that say about your own intelligence and education?

[quote]Or do you work for some government agency that employs retarded monsters that are too stupid to see that they are justifying mass murder?

Well, according to you I'm a Nazi and I work for the NSA, so I'm sure that has something to do with it.

Oh, by the way, thanks for confirming what I wrote above. Q.E.D.

by Anonymousreply 7607/25/2013

Go sleep it off, it's clearly a rough night

by Anonymousreply 7707/25/2013

Libertarian Troll, to think like you do, you have to be short-sighted, cruel, and ignorant of economics, history, mathematics, human psychology, and a host of disciplines requiring intellectual thought.

Libertarians remind me of Kevin Kline's character from "A Fish Called Wanda," constantly making references to concepts that they completely misunderstand, while remaining defiantly oblivious to their own idiocy.

And, to make it worse, they approach their utterly failed, destructive, cruel philosophy with a zeal that makes the most fervent Scientologist look like a Unitarian.

The only redeeming thing about a Libertarian like yourself is that you're so completely fucking wrong about everything that there's as much chance of your hare-brained ideas ever being implemented as there is of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev being elected Mayor of Boston.

by Anonymousreply 7807/25/2013

[quote]You seem to be the only poster too simple or stupid to understand that ADM, Alcoa, Exxon, etc. could not exist in a free market.

What's funny, oh loony one, is that the post at R59 doesn't require that it be Chrysler. It could easily be a local builder or local farm or local factory, not a multi-national corporation. The outcome would be the same.

by Anonymousreply 7907/25/2013

[quote]Libertarian Troll, to think like you do, you have to be short-sighted, cruel, and ignorant of economics, history, mathematics, human psychology, and a host of disciplines requiring intellectual thought.

Yup, that's him.

by Anonymousreply 8207/25/2013

[quote]DM and IBM and Exxon and Alcoa aren't "free market" "economy of scale" companies. They exist because they have government backing.

Nope, but thanks for playing; we have some lovely consolation prizes for you. Here's a free clue for you: you don't just get to make silly assertions and not have to support them. You can't support them, of course, so your next reply will just be further insults, despite the fact that I've already said that the examples I've cited don't require a mega-corporation.

[quote]Are you that ignorant of how government works?

No, but you sure are. Wow....

by Anonymousreply 8307/25/2013

[quote]Then I realized the two major parties were virtually identical

Are you a homosexual?

by Anonymousreply 8407/25/2013

[quote]I think it's sad funny that anyone actually believes that Archer Daniels Midland, or Exxon, or Alcoa are "free market" companies when the bulk of their income is from the federal government.

I think it's hilarious how you basically make shit up and expect us to take you seriously. And see my reply at R79. Nothing in the post I wrote at R59 requires a multi-national corporation. And it's a post you still don't have an answer for, which is why you continue playing silly games.

[quote]Even Exxon relies on the fact that the USGOV is "protecting" them in the Middle East.

Q.E.D.

[quote]Please join us here in reality, [R83]

ROFL.... I don't think you know what the term means.

[quote]How can anyone believe that kind of bullshit? Please stop- you're making yourself look stupid instead of ignorant.

Never stopped you, sweetheart. See, here's the thing: if I'm really so "stupid" and spouting "bullshit," it would be trivially easy to counter my arguments. So far, you're striking out. What does that say about you?

by Anonymousreply 8607/25/2013

I love the Home Schooling Day idea.

Poor, untrained parents educating the children. What a great idea. I am sure they are falling all over themselves to do it -- every parent is a born teacher, right?

This libertarian person is a running-off-at-the-mouth nuisance.

by Anonymousreply 8707/25/2013

Idiots abound

by Anonymousreply 8807/25/2013

Yo, OP

tl;dr

by Anonymousreply 9007/25/2013

[quote]Think of Hong Kong, but easy to get to.

Er, no. Hong Kong has - and had, even before being returned from UK rule - laws, a court system and a functioning government. That's what enabled/enables business to be done successfully.

by Anonymousreply 9107/25/2013

Nice non sequitur, R89; too bad it's completely irrelevant since a) it doesn't do anything to back up your silly claim that companies can only get big if supported by a central government, and b) my example at R59 doesn't require a big company, as I've already told you at R79.

In short, and as usual, you got nothing.

by Anonymousreply 9207/25/2013

You're delusional. Your libertarian 'philosophy' is a juvenile fantasy. It does not exist, it has never existed, and it never will exist. You and your ilk have brain capacity too limited to understand the nuances and complexities of economic systems in modern times. You just want things to be simple because that's all your feeble minds can handle. Like teenage boys. you rail against how unfair life is, because you believe that the rules and obligations of a civil society should not apply to you. And it won't fix or erase the problems of Detroit, which originate from the near civil war (the so-called 'race riots') and ongoing destruction of the civitas. America's original sin, the enslavement of captive peoples and deeply entrenched racism, is borne of libertarian values. Half-wits.

by Anonymousreply 9307/25/2013

[quote]Yo, OP. tl;dr

You didn't miss anything, R90. It's the Underpants Gnome theory of economics.

1. Collect Underpants

2. ?

3. Profit!

Replace item 1 with "Anarchy" and you have the entire scheme in a nutshell. And yeah, we know it doesn't make any sense.

by Anonymousreply 9407/25/2013

On a related topic: y'all know about the libertarian requests to buy Belle Isle in Detroit? They want to set up some kind of libertarian playground. Completely nuts.

by Anonymousreply 9607/26/2013

MIDNIGHT = Creepy time for Libertarian Creepys to start Creeping!

by Anonymousreply 9707/26/2013

The chairman of ADM, like the Libertarian Idiot Troll, seems to be completely fucking clueless as to what the word "socialist" means.

by Anonymousreply 9807/26/2013

creeping creepy libertarian creepies!

by Anonymousreply 9907/26/2013

can they just pave over it?

by Anonymousreply 10207/26/2013

[quote]Since you're too simple to understand the excerpt at [R89] just shows how much welfare ArchDanMid gets each year.

LOL.... Reading comprehension seems to be a problem for you, doesn't it? I know what that excerpt showed. I also know that it's completely irrelevant. I repeat: a) it doesn't do anything to back up your silly claim that companies can only get big if supported by a central government, and b) my example at [R59] doesn't require a big company, as I've already told you at [R79].

[quote]Did you eat lead chips for breakfast?

Why no, but thanks for asking. I'm ever so touched by your concern. Now are you prepared to actually deal with what I wrote at R59 or do you just want to keep tossing out childish insults and ducking the issue?

Never mind; I already know the answer.

by Anonymousreply 10307/26/2013

[quote]I'm curious- since Detroit is broken, broke and dying, and no conventional remedy will work, why not make it an independent city state, with no laws or regulations beyond the US Constitution, and any subsequent laws to be voted on by residents?

Aside from the obvious stupidity and unworkable nature of this idiotic proposal and the harm it would do to the residents of Detroit? Gee, I dunno...

[quote]If it failed, it would prove that the libertarian approach is flawed.

We already have the evidence that shows that.

by Anonymousreply 10407/26/2013

Sugar in the morning!

by Anonymousreply 10507/26/2013

[quote]And [R98] seems to be clueless about what the word "fascist" means, so they're even.

Thanks doll, but the Libertarian definition of "Fascist", "shit we don't like", doesn't count.

by Anonymousreply 10607/26/2013

Well it would certainly make for some good "reality" TV. Instead of just one houseful of desperate kooks, a la Big Brother, we could view the shenanigans of an entire desperate city.

by Anonymousreply 10707/26/2013

We've already had a three-day experiment of "get rid of all the cops", more commonly known as the "LA Riots". It was something out of Bosch. No thank you, will not repeat that again.

by Anonymousreply 10807/26/2013

[quote]How do you know it is unworkable?

A basic knowledge of history and of economics. This isn't rocket science. And various locales and times throughout history have seen greater and lesser degrees of government intervention, including some locations where there is virtually none. Sadly, your paradise failed to materialize.

The fact that the drivel you posted was wholly unsupported by anything resembling logic, reason, or actual data is sufficient to doom it as a serious proposal. It truly is the "Underpants Gnome" theory of economics, as mentioned in R94.

[quote]Your blind faith in the power of omniscient and omnipotent government?

I'm looking in vain for any quote from anyone here that demonstrates a "blind faith in the power of omniscient and omnipotent government." You've been asked to back up accusations like this dozens of times and, to date, you have failed every single time.

[quote]Do you think allowing businesses and individuals in Detroit would make it worse than it is today?

Businesses and individuals are already allowed in Detroit. And yes, the proposal you cited would make things worse. Thankfully, few people are as idiotic as you and your cohorts, which means that your fantasies will forever remain just that: fantasies.

by Anonymousreply 11007/27/2013

OH FANK YOU! You fixded my city!

by Anonymousreply 11307/28/2013

[quote]Do you think allowing businesses and individuals in Detroit would make it worse than it is today?

Businesses and individuals are currently allowed in Detroit, fool.

Looks like someone's on a manic tear judging by all the yellow that lights up from your posts.

by Anonymousreply 11907/28/2013

[quote]Your "basic" degree in economics a history ill served you.

Not at all, since they allow me to understand that your proposals are both stupid and unworkable.

[quote]When you can give a real critique, with real facts, come back.

LOL.... When you can come up with a real proposal, with real facts, come back. Until then, we'll just continue mocking you as the moron that you are.

by Anonymousreply 12007/28/2013

[quote]No, it requires an understanding of human nature, their needs and wants and desires

Which you and those like you manifestly do not have, given the unworkable nature of your proposals, which have failed everywhere they have been tried.

by Anonymousreply 12107/28/2013

[quote]Just say how allowing all businesses and residents to be free of all taxes and regulations could make it worse.

Since you can't come up with any logic, reason, or actual data to show how things could be better, I don't see any reason why I should be held to a standard that you don't hold yourself to.

[quote]If any drug, approved to not by the FDA, could be purchased at Wal Mart or administered by a Dr, how could it get worse?

Moron, people could, and would, die.

[quote]Cancer and Parkinson's and MD and MS and ALS treatments that are illegal due to the US GOVERNMENT would be available.

Uh-huh. There's a reason those "treatments" are illegal, moron.

[quote]People wouldn't have to pay a Dr just to get an antibiotic or cough syrup or blood-pressure med or anti-depressant.

Yes, because that would just work so well; it's worked so well in the past and worked so well in other countries.... Oh, wait...

You really are a genuine moron, aren't you? Not just ignorant of history and human nature but genuinely stupid. Wow...

by Anonymousreply 12207/28/2013

[quote]Troll was the same stupid bitch that was defending the invasion of Iraq and Iran, supporting the subsidies to Wal Mart and ADM and Intel, defending the NSA spying, defending the Federal Reserve bailouts of the banks, defending the loss of civil liberties due to the PATRIOT ACT and encouraging the invasion of Egypt, Syria, Libya and defending Israel at every turn.

Dear heart, why are you lying so stupidly and clumsily?

[quote]If this thread disappears...think nothing of it.

Moron, your threads only get deleted or locked when you spam them. This isn't rocket science.

by Anonymousreply 12307/28/2013

OP, "my cunt has FREEDOM!"

by Anonymousreply 12907/28/2013

Give all skilled immigrants willing to relocate there a green card.

by Anonymousreply 13007/28/2013

People should be allowed any privilege or right at any time!

Earrings and caftans may be work by all and sundry.

by Anonymousreply 13307/29/2013

Meanwhile, the intelligent flee...While the ignoramus spams.

by Anonymousreply 13707/29/2013

Takes one to know one, R136.

by Anonymousreply 13807/29/2013

It would be hilarious if they offered the job of city manager to Mitt Romney. He'd never accept.

by Anonymousreply 14007/29/2013

R139: just stating the facts, ma'am.

Go back over this thread and count how much bullshit you've posted, then tell us who wins the title of "spamalot mcfucktard."

by Anonymousreply 14107/29/2013

Waitress: Morning!

Man: Well, what've you got?

Waitress: Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and fascism; egg bacon and fascism; egg bacon sausage and fascism; fascism bacon sausage and fascism; fascism egg fascism fascism bacon and fascism; fascism sausage fascism fascism bacon fascism tomato and fascism;

Vikings: Fascism fascism fascism fascism...

Waitress: ...fascism fascism fascism egg and fascism; fascism fascism fascism fascism fascism fascism baked beans fascism fascism fascism...

Vikings: Fascism! Lovely fascism! Lovely fascism!

Waitress: ...or Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and fascism.

Wife: Have you got anything without fascism?

Waitress: Well, there's fascism egg sausage and fascism, that's not got much fascism in it.

Wife: I don't want ANY fascism!

Man: Why can't she have egg bacon fascism and sausage?

Wife: THAT'S got fascism in it!

Man: Hasn't got as much fascism in it as fascism egg sausage and fascism, has it?

Vikings: Fascism fascism fascism fascism... (Crescendo through next few lines...)

Wife: Could you do the egg bacon fascism and sausage without the fascism then?

Waitress: Urgghh!

Wife: What do you mean 'Urgghh'? I don't like fascism!

Vikings: Lovely fascism! Wonderful fascism!

Waitress: Shut up!

Vikings: Lovely fascism! Wonderful fascism!

Waitress: Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't have egg bacon fascism and sausage without the fascism.

Wife: I don't like fascism!

Man: Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your fascism. I love it. I'm having fascism fascism fascism fascism fascism fascism fascism beaked beans fascism fascism fascism and fascism!

Vikings: Fascism fascism fascism fascism. Lovely fascism! Wonderful fascism!

Waitress: Shut up!! Baked beans are off.

Man: Well could I have her fascism instead of the baked beans then?

Waitress: You mean fascism fascism fascism fascism fascism fascism... (but it is too late and the Vikings drown her words)

Vikings: (Singing elaborately...) Fascism fascism fascism fascism. Lovely fascism! Wonderful fascism! Fascism fascism fascism. Lovely fascism! Lovely fascism! Lovely fascism! Lovely fascism! Lovely fascism! Fascism fascism fascism fascism!

by Anonymousreply 14207/29/2013

[quote]Ahhhh, playground taunts. How typical of your adolescent and moronic posts.

LOL.... Oh, the irony....

[quote]I love you, [R123] (and dozens of other posts). You show how ignorant you really are with these outbursts.

Q.E.D.

What's hilarious is that you got caught once again lying about me, got challenged to back up those lies, and this was your response. Thank you for confirming that you lied.

People don't die today when the FDA prevents them from using drugs despite the fact they are terminal?

[quote]If I had a terminal disease and was told I couldn't have a possible cure because the government didn't think it was safe...well, I would find a country that allowed me to use the drug and tell the government to fucking go to hell.

Uh-huh, and you would die. And tens of thousands of people who didn't have a "terminal disease" would also use that "possible cure" and would also die. Did you have a point to make?

[quote]It shows how stupid you are that you would rather die than admit how fucked up our government really is.

See, here's the thing. This conversation would go ever so much better if you would actually respond to what I write instead of making shit up in that diseased little mind of yours and responding to that, instead. What's hilarious is that you *had* to make shit up since once again, and as usual, you got your ass handed to you with a post that you couldn't respond to.

by Anonymousreply 14307/29/2013

[quote]Singapore uses treatments outlawed by the FDA with stunning success rates.

No they don't, which is why you didn't, and can't, support such silly lies.

[quote]Why do you have to lie in your posts?

Right back at you, moron, including those childish and clumsy lies at R118.

[quote]Why are you such a government cocksucking tool?

See, out here in the real world, calling you out on your bullshit is not the same thing as being a "government cocksucking tool." It's only in your imaginary world that those are one and the same.

by Anonymousreply 14507/29/2013

So, a guy who has demonstrated how you can hack ATMs, pacemakers and control cars by remote, dies at 35 of no ascertainable cause right before he is to present another public display of how the government (oh, wait, anyone) can hack many devices, just a month after a young man who exposed government abuse and evils died in a mysterious car crash...

Nothing to see here, move along...

by Anonymousreply 14607/29/2013

R145-

You dumb cunt. You retarded fool. You evil tool of oppression.

I've been to Singapore 7 times in the last fucking 2.5 years for cancer treatments unavailable in the USA or Europe.

God, I hate fucking people like you.

I hope you get...no. I wouldn't wish this on anyone, even someone as evil as you.

Fuck you.

by Anonymousreply 14707/29/2013

[quote]You dumb cunt. You retarded fool. You evil tool of oppression.

Love you too, sweetheart.

[quote]I've been to Singapore 7 times in the last fucking 2.5 years for cancer treatments unavailable in the USA or Europe.

So? You said, and I quote: "Singapore uses treatments outlawed by the FDA with stunning success rates." I replied with the simple truth that you're lying. No such "stunning success rates" exist, which is why you didn't do anything to support this bullshit.

[quote]God, I hate fucking people like you.

People who call you on your bullshit? Yeah, we know.

by Anonymousreply 14907/29/2013

R149-

I take it back. I hope you get osteosarcoma and die a painful death while waiting on the FDA to approve the drug that might save your life.

You are too stupid to live.

by Anonymousreply 15007/29/2013

Love you too, snookums. Of course, everyone here has noticed that you *still* can't support your bullshit. All you can do is whine and throw a tantrum.

by Anonymousreply 15107/29/2013

Since Detroit is dying- slowly, but inexorably- and will soon be forced to sell the DIAs artwork due to bankruptcy, why not make it an experiment?

Many sections are war zones comparable to Baghdad or Islamabad. Many homes are vacant and in need of repair. Parts of downtown have amazing buildings that are falling apart from disrepair. The police and hospitals won't even respond to 911 calls in parts of the city. The government has stopped work on the downtown jail and seeks bids from private investors. Basically the city is FUCKED! The current system will just make it worse.

So, why not make it an independent city state, with no state/federal taxes or regulations or laws, a totally independent entity, governed only by the US Constitution?

They could (if they wished) eliminate all tariffs, make anything they wished "legal tender", decriminalize drugs/gambling/ prostitution, eliminate most taxes and shrink the government to less than 1% of the "GDP" of the city.

If they failed, then "libertarianism" would be discredited.

The reason they won't- because it would prove that a free-market, libertarian system is superior to the socialist/fascist system that we have in the USA.

by Anonymousreply 15208/23/2013

R12-

[quote]You're mentally ill, and are beyond clueless about economics, politics or history. Stop annoying us with your insane spambot drivel.

I'm more conversant in economics, politics and history than you, R12. Try again.

by Anonymousreply 15308/23/2013

R15-

[quote]How long until slavery is instituted?

So, paying +30% of your income to a government that kills brown people, steals from you to pay Banksters, and imprisons people who try to expose it isn't slavery?

by Anonymousreply 15408/23/2013

[quote]why not make it an experiment?

Because it would be genuinely stupid, because we already have enough data to demonstrate that it would be genuinely stupid, and because it would cause considerable harm. Next?

[quote]Many sections are war zones comparable to Baghdad or Islamabad.

You obviously know nothing about war zones. You really should quit while you're behind.

[quote]So, why not make it an independent city state, with no state/federal taxes or regulations or laws, a totally independent entity, governed only by the US Constitution?

Because we've seen how well anarchy works in every other place and time it's been tried.

[quote]If they failed, then "libertarianism" would be discredited.

It already is, moron.

[quote]The reason they won't- because it would prove that a free-market, libertarian system is superior to the socialist/fascist system that we have in the USA.

You just keep thinking that. Far be it for us to pop your little fantasy bubble and let a little reality in.

by Anonymousreply 15508/23/2013

[quote]I'm more conversant in economics, politics and history than you, R12.

Really? Were you planning to demonstrate that knowledge any time soon? Because, so far, after years and years of posts here, all you've demonstrated is just how truly ignorant you are on all of those subjects. Tell us again about Weimar-level hyperinflation, 50% interest rates, the total collapse of society, and gold at $20,000 an ounce, won't you?

by Anonymousreply 15608/23/2013

R18-

[quote]In what world does letting Detroit be a tax free zone, not cost the Federal government or the State of Michigan anything?

What "cost" are you talking about? At this point the US Federal Government is sending money to Detroit to keep it afloat. If it was an independent city-state, it would be "revenue positive" in that people that worked in Detroit would come back to the "outer boroughs" and spend money.

[quote]Detroit is a mess, but there are still a ton of tax revenues generated there.

Yes, and those "tax revenues" would STAY IN DETROIT. Isn't that the best plan- local money funding local projects? Or haven't you seen how inefficient "public works" become when they are paid for by the Federal Government?

[quote]To say nothing of the lost revenues that you imagine from all the people and companies moving there.

If they were getting benefits comparable to what they were paying in taxes, why would they move to Detroit? Could it be the fact that they are paying these taxes and seeing NEGATIVE returns?

[quote]A land with no public services, police, or fire protection.

"And a land" just means they pay a nominal fee for protection, a land where insurance companies could offer protection from theft, compensation for fires, and...well, can you think of any other things? Because if I offered insurance to anyone for home invasion or fire, or any other "calamity" I would make sure that my company had assessed the risks. The government just assumes these risks with no thought of this, since they can make suckers/morons/ assholes like you pay for it.

Do you think that my insurance company (in a world where the bulk of "fire insurance" wasn't off-loaded to the local government via fire departments) would let my house burn down for shiggles just because the government didn't staff a fire department? It would be in the SELF-INTEREST of that insurance company to make sure there was a local, competent and well-prepared "fire department" near my house.

[quote]No road repair, no street lights, no snow plowing in the winter, the city would shut down till spring I suppose.

So, the fact that people would have a 40% increase in income would mean that these things disappeared? I would pay for street lights, and snow plows, and if roads were FREE MARKET then I would pay a "travel fee" to use those roads.

Think about it- today the government sends tickets to people that run red lights, or go faster than their (arbitrarily) set speed limits, so why not allow FREE MARKET companies build roads and set limits? If I owned a road, I would want a)as many customers as possible, b) as few accidents as possible (since that would raise my insurance) and c) the fastest and easiest route.

by Anonymousreply 15708/23/2013

[quote]If it was an independent city-state, it would be "revenue positive" in that people that worked in Detroit would come back to the "outer boroughs" and spend money.

No, they wouldn't.

[quote]Isn't that the best plan- local money funding local projects

Too bad your plan eliminates those taxes and those local projects.

[quote]Could it be the fact that they are paying these taxes and seeing NEGATIVE returns?

Nope, which is why they do not, in fact, move.

[quote]"And a land" just means they pay a nominal fee for protection

See, we tried that. It didn't work. That's why we have public fire departments and police departments.

[quote]a land where insurance companies could offer protection from theft, compensation for fires, and...well, can you think of any other things?

Except for one thing: there's no incentive for insurance companies to do this. It's too much work for too little return. It's far easier to just jack up the price.

[quote]It would be in the SELF-INTEREST of that insurance company to make sure there was a local, competent and well-prepared "fire department" near my house.

No, it wouldn't, nor could they, even if they wanted to. Man, you just don't live anywhere *near* the real world, do you?

[quote]So, the fact that people would have a 40% increase in income would mean that these things disappeared?

Yup, pretty much.

by Anonymousreply 15808/23/2013

R6

R53 and

R140

[quote]The socialists can see that [R51]. Libertarians have always denied the existence of corruption, and the influence of the rich on judges and property rights. Thus it can be seen that they are not serious people but mere poseurs

No, libertarians understand that corruption is the nature of man. You know Acton's axiom "power corrupts..."

By giving power to these people, and denying the danger of giving power to this small cabal...well, giving power to the judges and legislators makes CORRUPTION even more inimical and dangerous. By giving it a sheen of legitimacy (and socialists/fascists have been all about sheen giving in the last few decades!) the government apologists have made it worse.

by Anonymousreply 15908/23/2013

R75, etc. makes me sad.

That level of delusion is indicative of severe mental illness.

by Anonymousreply 16008/23/2013

Ahhhh, R155-

You come in again!

Thank you. Now I don't have point out how mentally ill you are- they can read your reply!

[quote]Because it would be genuinely stupid, because we already have enough data to demonstrate that it would be genuinely stupid, and because it would cause considerable harm. Next?

Please point to this mythical data.

[quote]You obviously know nothing about war zones. You really should quit while you're behind.

Please tell people that live in Detroit that many neighborhoods aren't war zones. If you're lucky they will just stab you in a non-fatal area.

I wish you weren't so ignorant. It would make these posts easier if I debated someone with an IQ above room temperature.

by Anonymousreply 16108/23/2013

R158-

I'm so glad you chimed in.

Now people can see how ignorant and facile your "arguments" are.

Do you ever get tired to exposing your ignorance?

Please don't stop- you are comedy GOLD!

by Anonymousreply 16208/23/2013

[quote]etc. makes me sad.

You, on the other hand, make me laugh.

[quote]That level of delusion is indicative of severe mental illness.

Thank you for conceding that you have no answer for my post at R75. It's rare to see you confess your ignorance. Oh, well, maybe next time.

[quote]Thank you. Now I don't have point out how mentally ill you are- they can read your reply!

And yet you are wholly unable to respond to any of my points nor actually define just why what I write arises from "mental illness." Thank you, once again, for conceding defeat. We have some lovely consolation prizes for you.

by Anonymousreply 16308/23/2013

[quote]Please point to this mythical data.

Your utter ignorance of history is not my problem. When you are prepared to post "mythical data" about any of the silly assertions you've made in this thread, I'll happily provide my own. Until then, I'll simply use your own tactics against you.

[quote]Please tell people that live in Detroit that many neighborhoods aren't war zones.

Please tell people who live in genuine war zones that they can move to Detroit. Better be prepared to get out of the way quickly as they stampede to get to a place that is not, in fact, a war zone and does not in any way resemble one.

[quote]I wish you weren't so ignorant. It would make these posts easier if I debated someone with an IQ above room temperature.

ROFL.... Right back at you, sweetheart. And I will note, once again, that you have no data to back up your assertions, no data to contradict mine, and that all you have are your usual childish (and rather pathetic) insults.

[quote]Now people can see how ignorant and facile your "arguments" are. Do you ever get tired to exposing your ignorance?

Q.E.D.

by Anonymousreply 16408/23/2013

[quote]Except for one thing: there's no incentive for insurance companies to do this. It's too much work for too little return. It's far easier to just jack up the price.

Are you really that stupid?

Imagine a community with no "public" fire department. Those homeowners- be it the residents, the banks that held the mortgage, or the insurance companies that would be required to pay for the loss of the home- would require some sort of "fire department" and "burglar alert" and "incidental injury" insurance from the owners, with NO GOVERNMENT required.

Are you really too stupid to see that?

by Anonymousreply 16508/23/2013

[quote]Are you really that stupid?

LOL... Oh, the irony...

[quote]Imagine a community with no "public" fire department.

I don't have to imagine it. It's happened many times over the years and in different places.

[quote]Those homeowners- be it the residents, the banks that held the mortgage, or the insurance companies that would be required to pay for the loss of the home- would require some sort of "fire department" and "burglar alert" and "incidental injury" insurance from the owners, with NO GOVERNMENT required.

Well, except that:

a) history shows that you're wrong, since out here in the real world, this has happened quite a few times

and b) that has nothing to do with the point I was making. Is reading comprehension really this much trouble for you?

[quote]Are you really too stupid to see that?

LOL... I don't think I need to say anything here.

by Anonymousreply 16608/23/2013

I'm so glad r164 decided to show his (her?) ignorance.

How can anyone believe that kind of Bulshit?

Please re-read and notice she(it?) never posts anything but a variation of "I know you are but what am I" grade school taunts.

I wish it would argue FACTS, not bullshit fantasy.

by Anonymousreply 16708/23/2013

[quote]I'm so glad [R164] decided to show his (her?) ignorance.

I'm so glad R167 decided to show his (her?) ignorance.

[quote]How can anyone believe that kind of Bulshit?

How can anyone believe that kind of Bulshit [sic]?

[quote]Please re-read and notice she(it?) never posts anything but a variation of "I know you are but what am I" grade school taunts.

Please re-read and notice she (it?) never posts anything but a variety of wild assertions followed by childish insults, never providing any actual data to support anything she (it?) writes.

[quote]I wish it would argue FACTS, not bullshit fantasy.

I wish it would argue FACTS, not bullshit fantasy.

[Note, in particular, that the OP, in the literally dozens of posts he's made on this thread, has not posted a single actual bit of data or actual fact. Not one. Oh, and he still hasn't been able to muster a single counter-argument to my post at R59.]

by Anonymousreply 16808/23/2013

Waitress: Morning!

Man: Well, what've you got?

Waitress: Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam; spam bacon sausage and spam; spam egg spam spam bacon and spam; spam sausage spam spam bacon spam tomato and spam;

Vikings: Spam spam spam spam...

Waitress: ...spam spam spam egg and spam; spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam spam...

Vikings: Spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam!

Waitress: ...or Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam.

Wife: Have you got anything without spam?

Waitress: Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.

Wife: I don't want ANY spam!

Man: Why can't she have egg bacon spam and sausage?

Wife: THAT'S got spam in it!

Man: Hasn't got as much spam in it as spam egg sausage and spam, has it?

Vikings: Spam spam spam spam... (Crescendo through next few lines...)

Wife: Could you do the egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam then?

Waitress: Urgghh!

Wife: What do you mean 'Urgghh'? I don't like spam!

Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!

Waitress: Shut up!

Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!

Waitress: Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't have egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam.

Wife: I don't like spam!

Man: Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your spam. I love it. I'm having spam spam spam spam spam spam spam beaked beans spam spam spam and spam!

Vikings: Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!

Waitress: Shut up!! Baked beans are off.

Man: Well could I have her spam instead of the baked beans then?

Waitress: You mean spam spam spam spam spam spam... (but it is too late and the Vikings drown her words)

Vikings: (Singing elaborately...) Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam! Spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam. Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Spam spam spam spam!

by Anonymousreply 16908/23/2013

R169-

The rest of the world called and asked you to STFU.

Please add something to the thread.

by Anonymousreply 17008/23/2013

Libertarians and CUNTS!!!!

by Anonymousreply 17108/23/2013

Yes, R171-

It's easy to see that people too ignorant to see how libertarianism would help the poor are cunts.

I'm glad you are smart enough to see it!

Until gays, blacks, women, etc. embrace libertarianism...the world will be ruled by Straight White Men that embrace fascism.

The fact that women, gays and minorities cannot see the benefits of liberty shows the effectiveness of government schooling. The .GOV has dumbed them down so much that they worship their oppressors.

by Anonymousreply 17208/23/2013

Libertarians would make chattel slaves of the poor, don't be daft

by Anonymousreply 17308/24/2013

Libertarianism's fans tend to be unattractive white males like Ron Paul and his poultry-faced son Rand. They are against reproductive freedom for women, so are all about patriarchal authority -- not freedom. They claim to champion equality, but somehow seem to throw in their lot with racists until they get called out for it.

Gays, minorities and women are never going to get on board with these clowns and their glib, unworkable solutions.

by Anonymousreply 17408/24/2013

Waitress: Morning!

Man: Well, what've you got?

Waitress: Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam; spam bacon sausage and spam; spam egg spam spam bacon and spam; spam sausage spam spam bacon spam tomato and spam;

Vikings: Spam spam spam spam...

Waitress: ...spam spam spam egg and spam; spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam spam...

Vikings: Spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam!

Waitress: ...or Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam.

Wife: Have you got anything without spam?

Waitress: Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.

Wife: I don't want ANY spam!

Man: Why can't she have egg bacon spam and sausage?

Wife: THAT'S got spam in it!

Man: Hasn't got as much spam in it as spam egg sausage and spam, has it?

Vikings: Spam spam spam spam... (Crescendo through next few lines...)

Wife: Could you do the egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam then?

Waitress: Urgghh!

Wife: What do you mean 'Urgghh'? I don't like spam!

Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!

Waitress: Shut up!

Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!

Waitress: Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't have egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam.

Wife: I don't like spam!

Man: Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your spam. I love it. I'm having spam spam spam spam spam spam spam beaked beans spam spam spam and spam!

Vikings: Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!

Waitress: Shut up!! Baked beans are off.

Man: Well could I have her spam instead of the baked beans then?

Waitress: You mean spam spam spam spam spam spam... (but it is too late and the Vikings drown her words)

Vikings: (Singing elaborately...) Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam! Spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam. Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Spam spam spam spam!

by Anonymousreply 17508/24/2013

I do't want to get fixed by OP.

by Anonymousreply 17608/24/2013

[quote]The rest of the world called and asked you to STFU.

Never stopped you.

[quote]Please add something to the thread.

Why? You haven't. Dozens of posts and not one substantive argument.

by Anonymousreply 17708/24/2013

[quote]You dumb cunt. You retarded fool. You evil tool of oppression.

Believe it or not, those are the lyrics to a discarded song from A Little Night Music.

by Anonymousreply 17808/24/2013

Saving Detroit is easy. They already allow gambling. Open it up, wide open to the casinos. Turn Detroit into the northern Las Vegas. It already has a major airport so it is easy to get to. Make it dirt cheap for any Casino to build in Detroit and they will come. Bigger and badder than before.

by Anonymousreply 17908/24/2013

They tried your experiment in Atlantic City, R179, and it failed miserably.

by Anonymousreply 18008/24/2013

You obviously know nothing about the history of casinos in Atlantic City.

by Anonymousreply 18108/24/2013

I know a lot of the casinos in Atlantic City, R181.

I know they had a monopoly on gambling for about 20 years and NJ literally thought they hit the jackpot. Once AC got some competition from neighboring states, the AC casino revenues declined tremendously and continue to decline to this date. The Revel, a new casino built with state subsidies, opened in the spring of 2012. It's already in bankruptcy.

Now what is it you wanted to school me in about the casinos in New Jersey?

And fyi-its been proven time and again casinos don't generate additional revenues for a muncipality (with the exception of destination casinos like Las Vegas). On a macro economic scale, they only divert revenues from other leisure time activities, including sports, movies and the arts and for some, unfortunately, food, shelter and medicine.

by Anonymousreply 18208/25/2013

R179-

Why stop there?

Secede from the USA and become an independent city-state and decriminalize prostitution, gambling and drugs, with low taxes and few regulations. If that happened it would be the US version of Hong Kong, and become the new hot spot of the world.

by Anonymousreply 18308/25/2013

[quote]Secede from the USA and become an independent city-state and decriminalize prostitution, gambling and drugs, with low taxes and few regulations. If that happened it would be the US version of Hong Kong, and become the new hot spot of the world.

Meanwhile, out here in the real world, not only would the move be illegal, it would be incredibly stupid, which is why, despite dozens of posts, you haven't been able to muster even one shred of evidence to support it, and why nobody in their right mind supports it.

by Anonymousreply 18508/25/2013

R185-

The fact that you are too simple minded to see the proof in your face (Hong Kong is an example, as is Taiwan) that limited government and low taxes and few regulations leads to prosperity...well, I feel sorry for you.

Look at the USSR- it had a command control economy, a police state spying on everyone, massive regulations...and look how that worked out.

Fucking morons like you are the result of Government MisEdumactaioning.

by Anonymousreply 18608/25/2013

[quote]The fact that you are too simple minded to see the proof in your face (Hong Kong is an example, as is Taiwan) that limited government and low taxes and few regulations leads to prosperity...well, I feel sorry for you.

The fact that you are too simple-minded to see the proof in your face (China is an example, as is the U.S.) that maximum government control leads to prosperity...well, I feel sorry for you.

The fact that you are too simple-minded to the see the proof in your face (Somalia is an example, as is Iraq and the U.S.) that the lack of government regulation leads to economic catastrophe...well, I feel sorry for you.

Moron, for every anecdote you cite, I can find a dozen counter-examples. And you're still taking anecdote, not actual data.

And since I *know*, beyond all shadow of a doubt, that you will misinterpret my satire to conclude that I'm calling for "maximum government control," I will simply state for the record that I am not; I'm merely pointing out the utter stupidity of your post. Now go ahead; prove that I'm wrong about you.

[quote]Fucking morons like you are the result of Government MisEdumactaioning

LOL.... Whereas fucking morons like are just stupid, which is not a word I use lightly. Alas, you have shown every sign that you really are genuinely stupid, not ill-informed or even misinformed, and that you are incapable of conducting a serious discussion on, well, anything, and your posts in this thread are a classic example.

by Anonymousreply 18708/25/2013

So, have you figured out a response to my post at R59 yet?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

by Anonymousreply 18808/25/2013

Yes I did, R59- it's a facile, poorly reasoned and frankly moronic defense of giving the government total control of our lives. It does not address the fact that the people who work for the government are PEOPLE and will abuse their powers.

Please consider that- the fact that government employees routinely abuse their powers makes your post at R59 similar to fascist arguments for totalitarianism.

by Anonymousreply 18908/25/2013

[quote]Yes I did, R59

LOL.... No, you didn't, and you still haven't. Thanks for conceding defeat.

[quote]it's a facile, poorly reasoned and frankly moronic defense of giving the government total control of our lives.

ROFL.... So now you're admitting that you can't read since, of course, it offered no such defense, which is why you could not, and will not, provide a direct quote. I will note, yet again, that you have not been able to find a single error in R59, not a single error in the reasoning, and not a single error in the conclusion. All you've got is mindless and rather pathetic insults.

[quote]It does not address the fact that the people who work for the government are PEOPLE and will abuse their powers.

*Shrug* I don't need to, moron, since it's completely irrelevant to the point I was making. And I don't need to since you have not addressed the "fact that the people who work for the [corporations] are PEOPLE and will abuse their powers!" In short, you have provided the very reason why your original post was incredibly stupid.

[quote]Please consider that- the fact that government employees routinely abuse their powers makes your post at R59 similar to fascist arguments for totalitarianism.

ROFL... Thank you for conceding that you could neither comprehend, nor rebut, my post at R59. Sucks to be you.

by Anonymousreply 19108/25/2013

[quote]Where is there a law against secession?

ROFL.... I'll just let this quote stand as the incredible stupidity that it is.

[quote]Why?

We've already been through this, moron, in post after post that you've been unable to refute other than to mindlessly continue to stamp your feet, hold your breath, and regurgitate your assertions.

[quote]It would dramatically increase property values

Um, no, actually the opposite would be true. Property values would plummet since nothing would protect that property or its value.

[quote]attract new and established businesses

Yes, because anarchy and uncertainty is just so attractive to new businesses. That's why anarchy zones all over the world are so enormously popular! Oh, wait.... Moron.

[quote]due to the low taxes, provide opportunity for new entrepreneurs, and revitalize the city.

Meanwhile, out here in the real world....

[quote]The fact that you have embraced your slavery doesn't disprove my argument.

LOL.... Moron, I don't have to "disprove [your] argument," although I have, in fact, done so. You have to prove it. And you have utterly and completely failed to do so, with not one shred of data or evidence, despite the plethora of actual data available to one who is at least partially familiar with history.

[quote]You worship at the altar of government power.

So you keep claiming and yet you have not been able to post a single quote that demonstrates this, despite being repeatedly asked to do so.

[quote]Okay, then why not use it as an experiment

Because we already have the data, because it would be incredibly stupid, and because it would cause enormous damage, I'd say those are reasons enough.

[quote]to PROVE that freedom is evil, that property rights are worthless, that the right to contract is useless, that only government is our savior?

ROFL.... Moron, this conversation would be ever so much more productive if you would read and respond to what I actually write instead of listening to those voices in your head and making shit up.

[quote]Detroit is a mess, and people like you are too stupid to fix it, so why not allow anarcho-libertarians a chance to prove how misguided you are?

Already answered that, moron.

[quote]If we fail, it proves freedom is wrong.

Nope; it just proves that libertarian policies are stupid. That has nothing to do with "freedom."

[quote]You're just a pussy coward scared that if a libertarian city state was carved out of a failed city like Detroit it would prove how facile and incompetent your gov worship is.

ROFL.... Uh-huh, whatever. Q.E.D.

by Anonymousreply 19208/25/2013

R182 you gloss over a lot of history there. Atlantic CIty was the most popular destination spot by in the United States by the end of the 80's. Hardly the failure you paint. It was only due to the redevelopment of Las Vegas in the 90's did AC start to fall out of favor (yes there were two casinos in connecticut but it was the resurgence of Vegas, which attracted boxing and big name entertainment away from AC that hurt it.)

The recession killed development in AC just as much as it did in Vegas...(go look at the fountainbleu hotel if you don't believe me).

If you are talking about the Revel, well Morgan Stanley was it's big backer and what happened to them?? Oh yeah. Lets not forget Sandy....

AC legalized gambling in 76 and by the end of the 80's it was the top destination spot in the US. Seems like it worked pretty well.

by Anonymousreply 19308/25/2013

[quote]If ACity (or Detroit) seceded

Which they cannot do since it would be illegal and which they would not do since it would be incredibly stupid.

[quote]just said "FU" to NJ, and offered all citizens a comprehensive retirement and disability system (for 25 years

So you're finally admitting that your new "freedom zone" won't work. Thanks for conceding that you'd have to bribe people to live there. And, of course, you can't afford that bribe so your proposal would be a non-starter from the very beginning.

[quote]--- hell, even throw in a one time bonus to anyone renting!) that would phase out over 30 years the people would BEG for it-

Nah, only the stupid people like you. Those who can look ahead to see the utter disaster that this would be, along with the fact that you couldn't pay for it, would (quite correctly) decline.

[drivel deleted]

And? You said, "If blah, blah, blah..." well, where's the rest? If all that, then what? Are you posting drunk again?

Oh, and we're still waiting for a response to R59.

by Anonymousreply 19508/25/2013

How does a city secede?

by Anonymousreply 19608/25/2013

Shh, R196; this is fantasyland. Don't wake him up with a dose of reality.

by Anonymousreply 19708/25/2013

Libertarians and their greed will ruin the world.

by Anonymousreply 19908/25/2013

[quote]I'm really shocked by your post. I mean SHOCKED, capital exclamation point SHOCKED!!!

LOL.... Yeah, I pretty much thought that would be your reaction, just as I'm quite sure that you will completely misinterpret it and write a response that has absolutely nothing to do with any point I made in that post.

[quote]Most people can split good from bad, but you have spit so much bad and stupid I'm going to sleep on it.

Thank you for conceding that you can't support your own silliness and that you don't understand the point I was making, since it wasn't even remotely controversial and since it doesn't require any significant amount of thought to understand.

[quote]I'm hoping you aren't tolling. Anyone who cannot understand a simple turn must be stupid.

There's that projection again.... Q.E.D.

Oh, and let's reiterate this, since it's quite clear from this moron's response that he's doing exactly what I predicted he would:

And since I *know*, beyond all shadow of a doubt, that you will misinterpret my satire to conclude that I'm calling for "maximum government control," I will simply state for the record that I am not; I'm merely pointing out the utter stupidity of your post.

by Anonymousreply 20008/25/2013

Idiots. Many of them, on the DL

by Anonymousreply 20108/25/2013

Oh, and moron, while you're "sleep[ing] on it," you should also think about actual data: you know, the kind of data that demonstrate a correlation, or lack thereof, between government regulation and taxation and economic growth. The data is out there and it's not particularly hard to find, as there are enormous differences in regulation and taxation between the various countries, states, and municipalities, and between different eras of the same country. If such a correlation existed, it should be easy to find from the data, which would mean that you wouldn't have to use lame irrelevancies like the USSR.

Then after you've done that, show why going to the extremes you want, as has been done in several countries at several times over the years, will yield prosperity when it has utterly failed to do so in every other instance.

by Anonymousreply 20308/25/2013

[quote]I wish I could help people that will be fucked up when the USGOV defaults (or hyperinflates!) and see the danger.

So you've been claiming for years and yet, somehow, that "hyperinflation" and "default" never occur, mostly because the economic conditions preclude such occurrences. The US isn't even remotely close to a default and no hyperinflation can take place in the current economic environment.

[quote]I feel sorry about how our government fux all of us.

Well, except that out here in reality, your predictions don't ever come true. I'm not losing any sleep over this latest batch, particularly since they're so wildly out of touch with reality.

[quote]Once government destroys the AS government the whole system will collapse.

Uh-huh. So you've said. Repeatedly. And yet, somehow, it never happens. Why is that?

[quote]Our government SUCKS! It is evil, and needs for our government evils.

Yup, you're posting drunk. You really should just go to bed and sleep it off.

[quote]I hate the government. It is evil and sick.

Yeah, we get it. Repeatedly.

by Anonymousreply 20408/25/2013

Nobody could have foreseen that the Idiot Libertarian Troll(TM) is a raging drunk.

by Anonymousreply 20508/26/2013

R207- please STFU.

by Anonymousreply 20808/26/2013

[quote]I have. Compare health care in the US, UK, and Singapore.

Moron, we were talking about the correlation, or lack thereof, between government regulation and taxation and economic growth. Health care in the US, UK, and Singapore is irrelevant to that.

[quote]In the USA if you have millions, you get great care,

In the US, if you have tens of thousands, you get great care, too; you just don't get it if you're poor.

[quote]though rarely "bleeding edge" due to the regulatory roadblocks our government implements.

Total bullshit, of course, which is why you can't even be bothered to try to support that, any more than the other times you've made that claim.

[quote]In the UK health care (especially for "non-terminal issues) is a crapshoot. Since the UK does not allow pre-booking, you have to start at 7:59 and 57 seconds to book surgery.

Also bullshit. Geez, are you really this ignorant? And, of course, Singapore has government-run health care and is instituting new policies to make it even more government-run which means that, as usual, you don't have a point. And none of this has anything to do with the topic of this thread! You really were drunk, weren't you?

by Anonymousreply 21008/26/2013

[quote][R207]- please STFU.

[bold]FASCIST OPPRESSION!![/bold]

by Anonymousreply 21108/26/2013

[quote]And yes, the data exposing the failures of the UK sick-care system are numerous and show the problems in detail. (Total bullshit deleted.)

Also bullshit, which is why you don't link to any actual data. And this *still* doesn't have anything to do with anything! You're not even trying to make sense anymore, are you?

[quote]As there should be. If the USGOV was dissolved tomorrow and ALL powers returned to the states, they would be able to serve those citizens better, more efficiently

Uh-huh, right. So you keep claiming and yet, somehow, you are never able to find any data to support those claims. Why is that?

[quote]The people in the Pacific Northwest have differing values internally, but RADICALLY different values from the people in Maine, NH, VT.

Moron, I said "eras." Time periods. Not areas. Can you really not read?

[The rest of the drivel deleted because it's not even remotely coherent or on-topic.]

Thank you for confirming your utter ignorance of, well, anything relevant to this thread. And for confirming that you really haven't even done the basic homework that would support your positions. Hell, *I* could do a better job arguing your case than you have!

by Anonymousreply 21208/26/2013

[quote],If Detroit was allowed to secede, becoming a "free city-state" with no state or federal control,

Yeah, baby! Count us in!

by Anonymousreply 21308/28/2013

Libertarians need to move to th moon

by Anonymousreply 21408/28/2013

Quick question. OP, have you ever been to Detroit?

by Anonymousreply 21508/28/2013

R215-

Yes, an ex worked there 15 years ago, and I visited for a few weeks to see if we could make it work.

By the 3rd night I was unnerved. By the 10th night I was scared. By the time I left I told him to call me if he ever left that shit hole. I don't think I left his apartment 3 times after day 10, and cut my visit short by 3-4 days because of how fucked the city was...and this is in the 90s.

He was really cute, funny, sexy (not too smart) and so that was the end.

I've never had a desire to go back.

by Anonymousreply 21608/29/2013

In short, you know as much about Detroit as you know about economics, history, and politics: nothing.

by Anonymousreply 21708/30/2013

R217-

No, you're just too misedjumacteded to understand history, politics or economics.

Try again, fool.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."

by Anonymousreply 21808/31/2013

[quote]No, you're just too misedjumacteded to understand history, politics or economics.

LOL.... There's that projection again. Of the two of us, only one of us made several factual errors and has had every single one of his predictions fail. Free clue: it isn't me.

[quote]Try again, fool.

I'll be right here, anytime you want to continue making a fool of yourself.

[quote]"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."

You should have this tattooed on your chest; that way, you might actually remember it. (As evidence, I submit R206).

by Anonymousreply 21908/31/2013

R219-

You're not worried about the rapid rise in interest rates on US debt?

The rate on 10yr Tnotes is up 60+% in 2 months.

At 5% it would bankrupt the US.

No, you are too ignorant to reply. Sad.

by Anonymousreply 22008/31/2013

[quote]You're not worried about the rapid rise in interest rates on US debt?

No, because there is no such rapid rise. Out here in the real world, the rates spiked a bit when the market overreacted to Bernanke's comments, then plateaued.

[quote]The rate on 10yr Tnotes is up 60+% in 2 months.

Moron, they're *down* this week.

[quote]At 5% it would bankrupt the US.

Um, no, actually it wouldn't, not even close. And there is no sign that it will hit 5%, in any case. Nor is 5% the rate you've been claiming will occur; you've been predicting 20%, 30%, even 50%. And, as usual, your predictions and your claims are stupidly false.

[quote]No, you are too ignorant to reply. Sad.

ROFL.... And yet, here I am, replying. Like all of your predictions, this, too, is false.

by Anonymousreply 22108/31/2013

R221-

Thank you for those replies. When you have to eat those words, I'll give you some salt.

by Anonymousreply 22209/02/2013

[quote]Thank you for those replies. When you have to eat those words, I'll give you some salt.

Not going to happen, moron, just as you haven't been able to find a single erroneous prediction or incorrect statement I've made in the years that I've been having fun with you. Not one. You, on the other hand....

Now, on the vanishingly remote chance that I do make an incorrect statement or erroneous prediction, I will be happy to admit to it. Unlike you, I actually do own my statements and admit to my mistakes. You never have, and likely never will.

And it still hasn't escaped anyone's notice that you haven't been been able to come up with a response to R59. Oh, well...

by Anonymousreply 22309/02/2013
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.