Page #221
Pages: #1... #216 #217 #218 #219 #220 #221 #222 #223 #224 #225 ...#778
New Comment Rating: 11 Similar topics: 1.Food stuff 2.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 3.A Forum Topic 4.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II 5.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF III Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
"the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinions of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil in case he do otherwise. To justify that, the conduct from which it is desired to deter him, must be calculated to produce evil to some one else. The only part of the conduct of any one, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign."
I then got to thinking how this could/should be applied to drug legislation. Should, as Mill seems to indicate, the State decriminalise all drugs and go on to treat addiction as a medical, rather than criminal, issue? Would this remove the shadow of organised crime from the production and distribution of substances?
Given how some US states have started down that route I wondered what other opinions are out there.
The regulated drugs would be costly the dealers could sell cheaper as no tax and so forth. Again, nothing wrong with looking for a solution, but this may not be it.
People still get arrested for making moonshine.just not on as large a scale as it used to be
only registered users can see external links
Sad,very sad.
I know a neighbor lost his son about 12 years ago to some similar shit. It was sad, his 15 year old son went in the bathroom and stood on a chair,was jurking off with a belt around his neck looped around a hook over the door,the father and mother heard a loud noise and the father had to really struggle to get the door open,only to find his son dead,with his dick in his hand and a broke neck,
What the HELL are people thinking pushing this sort of thing and why is it even legal for it to be on the net to learn in the first place?
It really makes no sense. When I went to get a associates degree in electronics, there were jobs available that would recoup the cost of my education.
After a few years in the trade I went a different path.
But I can't understand these folks that went 4 years+ to get a degree in something that there are not enough jobs in that field and the pay is not high enough to recoup the cost.WHY would anyone go thru the trouble of getting a useless degree knowing they couldn't afford the cost in the first place?
The point is that students should be making an informed choice and realise when the degree that they want to take offers no real prospect of employment. If they realise that and still want to follow that line of study then that is fine.
There is no shortage of jobs for them here. I checked a job offer site and within 20 km there are 297 job offers, with salaries ranging from €2400 (for an apprentice) to $8340 per month (for a project leader).
I need an electrician to convert my fuse-box from 1-phase to 3-phase and I get no replies to my emails, because they are all overbooked. They ask $300 for 5 minutes of work and up to $1100 if they actually have to pull some cables, so I imagine they could pay off their study debt pretty quickly.
--------------------------------------- added after 10 hours
I tried for the 4th time today to eat at the new local arbys restaurant. Staffing issues prompts the doors to be locked.
average of 12 to 16 cars in line at any given time at the drive thru. Nope not interested in a picnic lunch.had enough of that shit during the plandemic.
I want to sit down,and eat like a normal American.
only registered users can see external links
Seeing the truth,
But still believing the lies.
-unknown-
also -unknown-
and I’m not sure about the universe.” ― Albert Einstein
-Albert Einstein-
“Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get.”
-Forrest Gump-
Charles P Pierce
ben franklin
Martin Luther King Jr.
-unknown-
― Aldous Huxley
only registered users can see external links
Huxley was a pacifist
In 1953, Huxley and Maria applied for United States citizenship and presented themselves for examination. When Huxley refused to bear arms for the U.S. and would not state that his objections were based on religious ideals, the only excuse allowed under the McCarran Act, the judge had to adjourn the proceedings.[41][42] He withdrew his application. Nevertheless
Now this little tidbit, he actually may be making a bit of sense.
Huxley outlined several major concerns: the difficulties and dangers of world overpopulation; the tendency towards distinctly hierarchical social organisation; """the crucial importance of evaluating the use of technology in mass societies susceptible to persuasion;""" the tendency to promote modern politicians to a naive public as well-marketed commodities.[
what I have in triple quotes is a viable issue that should be addressed.Facebook for example .
At least you've educated yourself I suppose. A pacifist, huh? Now isn't THAT interesting.
So you, phart, brag about bombing other Nations back to the Stone Age and Huxley, a well-read intellectual, was a pacifist. Hmmm, who to agree with? Tricky, huh?
PS. Did you know that Huxley (and C S Lewis) died on the same day as JFK?
PPS. Don't Google "C S Lewis", I made him up just to see if you're paying attention!!
"What does the phrase not my circus not my monkeys mean?"
There's a Polish proverb which millennials often use today: “Not my circus, not my monkeys.” It's a way of saying, “Don't drag me into your drama and your issues—I'm not getting involved.”
BOOM! And you were spot on with saying the author being a random Polish person. JustWill, have I told you lately that you amaze me!?
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Just for giggles WHY would you rather have someone whose "cheese is slowly sliding off her cracker" than a Democrat? You may disagree with their ideology, but do you really think that NONE of them are well-meaning people with a thirst for public service? Fucking hell, dude. If I was a bot aiming to show that I was an ignorant cunt, with no regards for data or evidence, I would struggle to be more ridiculous than you're being.
Did a naughty Democrat abuse you as a kid or something?
Democrats can not be trusted to take care of money or maintain anything. Go read the thread in reference to that shit hole town in Mississippi and see what democrats do.
Place has been fucked over by democrats since the 60's.
My favourite phartism goes along these lines:
Phart: "I read online that there's definite proof that x happened. Of course, if you Google it now there's no trace of the article I DEFINITELY read. Probably deleted by Democrats." You're a fucking idiot.
Watch this,
I can agree with the people not wanting low income housing ruining their neighborhoods BUT to preach affordable housing and then fight it,is kinda hypocritical.
"The situation remains resistant to change". "It's a small step in the right direction" - all quotes from YOUR video. Listen to the 13th minute of the video again.
Do you think that, if Republicans controlled California, the housing situation would be demonstrably better? If so, I'd like to see how your reasoning could lead you to that conclusion.
I'm no fan of either of your main political parties. They both support capitalism. They are both in the pockets of big business and lobbyists. They are both "led" by old clowns. However, I'm not so myopic to think that one party is shit and the other is amazing - which is what you, and all the other "threats to democracy", seem to espouse.
As an aside: you still haven't answered any of the points I made about patriotism and foreign policy. Oh, and you're still a fucking idiot. It must be true because I Googled "Phart is a fucking idiot" and there was a whole piece by some US newspaper that proved it. Of course, if you try to Google it now that article has been deleted by aliens/ultra Republicans/the KKK or some other reactionary force!!
As proof, I offer his "it is obviously an FBI setup because the picture of the TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS Trump stole is of them in a not very neat pile on the floor" rant over in his "feelings" thread.
If you believe that the Feds would raid Trump's "palace" without pretty convincing reasons for doing so, you're more of a fucking idiot than I gave you credit for.
Maybe they're still in the evidence-gathering stage?
Maybe they want the old cunt to surrender documents he shouldn't have, so that he doesn't go to jail?
Maybe the evidence wasn't quite as incriminating as they supposed it would be?
Maybe they're waiting for him to instigate another insurrection before they slap the cuffs on?
Why don't you ask Alex Jones, or one of the other super-reliable sources that you normally rely upon?
Occam's Razor would suggest that they raided his home because they had a fucking good reason for doing so. All
your nutty conspiracy theories will not obscure that.
PS. I suspect, nevertheless, that Trump's boiler suit will colour match his complexion at some stage.
2. I am not going to take the time to explain to you why calling it a "fake setup" doesn't mean what you think it means.
3. They aren't "so called" important papers, they are ACTUALLY important papers. The fact that they are clearly labeled TOP SECRET and CLASSIFIED sort of gives that away.
4.Relax, they are stolen DOCUMENTS, not slices of ham. Putting them on the floor won't contaminate them.
5. So, your problem with this whole deal is that the FBI photo was "kinda tacky" and not with the fact that Trump stole (and lied about having) documents that he wasn't legally supposed to have? Seriously?
New Comment Go to top