patrick.net

Dan8267 says

Tell that to FortWayne. He thinks everyone should behave exactly the same way, the way he wants.

WTF gawd you libbys are insufferable.

Dan8267 says

Most of CA is redneck territory. Only the major cities are liberal.

More liberal elitist hatred as shown by Dan. If you folks don't live in a big city, well you know what Dan and his liberal friends think of you. We already know what he thinks of stay at home moms, we already know what he thinks of people who do not work office jobs, and now this. I think liberals hate just about everyone who is not a gay office worker, because even straight office employees are probaby on Dans chopping block.

Dan8267 says

I take no offense at that; she's my sister and is damn smart like everyone in my family. Intelligence is mostly genetic. That's unfortunate for your children.

Sounds like that "gene" skipped you somehow. Congrats to your sister though.

Dan8267 says

Notice how now of them involve factory jobs.

Since when did factory workers go to college?

How about the millions of people that are in Service oriented jobs working at stores and restaurants?

Lots of dopey college kids got big expensive degrees where there isn't much demand or alot of pay (Psychology, Performing Arts, English Lit) and end up working in the Service industry pouring my coffee at Starbucks.

FortWayne says

I live in CA, it's a liberal mecca.

Dan8267 says

Most of CA is redneck territory. Only the major cities are liberal.

FortWayne says

More liberal elitist hatred as shown by Dan. If you folks don't live in a big city, well you know what Dan and his liberal friends think of you. We already know what he thinks of stay at home moms, we already know what he thinks of people who do not work office jobs, and now this. I think liberals hate just about everyone who is not a gay office worker, because even straight office employees are probaby on Dans chopping block.

Wow, can FortWayne do anything but lie?

How weak is your position that you find yourself compelled to make outlandish and untruthful personal attacks against your opponent instead of debating the actual issues. I've never seen such a blatant and transparent Ad Hominem. You should become the new example of this fallacy replacing

Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."
Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."
Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"
Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."

Well, if we're going to fight this out with Ad Homenins, then I have to say that no one should believe anything FortWayne says because he's a pedophile and a terrorist, also he's a witch. He turned me into a newt. I got better. Burn him!

FortWayne says

Sounds like that "gene" skipped you somehow. Congrats to your sister though.

I showed my sister some of your posts. She said you were an idiot.

Dan8267 says

5. Psychology

counseling, teaching, sales

To be clear here we're talking about mind fucking people into believing things against their best interest.

Not the kind of Psychology that prevents James Eagan Holmes and the Adam Lanza of the world. If anything these people majoring in corporate brainwashing, and Liberal conditioning, create more of them.

Dan8267 says

no one should believe anything FortWayne says because he's a pedophile and a terrorist, also he's a witch. He turned me into a newt. I got better. Burn him!

Real mature there Dan. You really need to grow up to be able to handle adult conversation.

Dan8267 says

I showed my sister some of your posts. She said you were an idiot.

So childlike... you liberals are something.
Did you show it to your mommy for approval too, seeking concensus in the family of "geniuses"?

FortWayne says

Real mature there Dan. You really need to grow up to be able to handle adult conversation.

It's called a mirror. If you don't like what you see in it, you have no one to blame but yourself.

In an adult conversation, you don't falsely accuse the other person of hating everyone else.

Dan8267 says

It's called a mirror. If you don't like what you see in it, you have no one to blame but yourself.

In an adult conversation, you don't falsely accuse the other person of hating everyone else.

You should have your sister explain that to you, since she's got all the smarts in your family. You are not there yet Dan.

FortWayne says

You should have your sister explain that to you, since she's got all the smarts in your family. You are not there yet Dan.

Way to show that "maturity" and "adult conversation". If you can't take it, don't dish it out. At least the insults I fling at you are accurate and are based on your actual statements, not made up bullshit like yours.

I'd have more respect for a conservative who actually stood up for what he believed with the real reasons he believed it, no matter how bad those reasons are, than for a conservative like you who is so ashamed of his true motivations that he has to hide behind lies.

This is a bit above your pay grade Dan, you first need to do some growing up before continuing. Feel free to consult with your sister again, she's the smart one in the family according to you.

FortWayne says

This is a bit above your pay grade Dan

My pay grade is a lot higher than yours.

Speaking of demeaning women. This is an actual Republican campaign ad.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/eXnkvnemSSI

Dan8267 says

Speaking of demeaning women

You already said enough nasty things about stay at home moms Dan, just give it up before you completely fall on your face.

You know, this thread demonstrates an important point. Republicans love to play the role of the victim when they are not. Here's a Young Turks clip that illustrates the point.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/c5JiAug780E

Stay at home "moms" or stay at home whoevers are unnecessarily increasing the financial risk of the household in the name of raising the children. Obviously, a hypothetical household of $100,000 based on 2 adults making $50K each is in lesser financial danger than one adult making $50K with a stay at home "mom" or even a single income of $100K with a stay at home mom.

Dan8267 says

Speaking of demeaning women. This is an actual Republican campaign ad.

Yeah - this is better. Lena Dunham in an Obama Ad saying "your first time" should be Obama.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6G3nwhPuR4

How about the "The Life of Julia" cartoons where it basically says that a woman needs government welfare her whole life?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ig2KmRI-S4A

Not demeaning at all!

dublin hillz says

Stay at home "moms" or stay at home whoevers are unnecessarily increasing the financial risk of the household in the name of raising the children. Obviously, a hypothetical household of $100,000 based on 2 adults making $50K each is in lesser financial danger than one adult making $50K with a stay at home "mom" or even a single income of $100K with a stay at home mom.

My wife is a stay at home Mom. I make just enough to be able to comfortably swing it living in SoCal. We were certainly more flush when she worked full time and we had no kids. But I wouldn't change anything for the world.

Once you factor in all the day-care costs, added stress and exhaustion to the family - it's just not worth it IMO. I really can't imagine working a full time job and have to also deal with the kids. Big caveat that one of the earners has to make enough money.

Dan8267 says

Speaking of demeaning women. This is an actual Republican campaign ad.

Dan that's not offensive, and I understand understanding this is again above your pay grade since you are a typical liberal these days. But you have to learn one day that many men and women want to be married and be good parents, and that's what that ad is about. Something you won't understand, responsibility isn't your thing.

But for the 4th time Dan you are showing your ignorant liberal hatred toward women. Liberals despise any women who likes the idea of marriage and raising a family. Liberals are only interested in women who work, dont marry, and hate men.

Liberals despise family women, stay at home moms, anyone who is not a single feminist dike liberals just hate. Your team is ran by loonies Dan, and you are drinking the coolaid.

FortWayne says

Liberals despise any women who likes the idea of marriage and raising a family.

Nope, you're a lying sack of shit. Liberals have no problem with stay at home moms. It's you conservatives that shit on women if they have to work to raise that family because Reagan killed the middle class.

The median household income, and this is for a dual income family, is $51,900 according to the 2013 stats from the Census Bureau. That's barely enough to raise two kids. Any medical, legal, or career disaster and the family goes impoverished.

Now image if one of those two incomes is lost. Then the income goes down at least to $30,000. That family loses its home. And all this because of conservative economics brought to you by Reagan.

If you actually gave a damn about women staying at home, you'd oppose everything Reagan did because the common mother doesn't have the luxury of not working because of Republican economic policies.

And speaking about despising families, how do you feel about gay men and lesbians adopting? Yeah, I thought so. Total hypocrisy. Assholes like you would keep children in state-run orphanages instead of with loving parents simply because they have the same genitals. Your family values are fake.

Dan8267 says

Nope, you're a lying sack of shit. Liberals have no problem with stay at home moms.

Not true Dan, even you posted above some snobbish comments about how all women should be working, and how marriage is an insult to you (you are such a strange chick). And you are not the first, I've heard plenty of crazy feminists make snobbish comments at stay home moms during the Obama campaign. It got so bad, that Obama had to tell them to cool it.

Dan8267 says

The median household income, and this is for a dual income family, is $51,900 according to the 2013 stats from the Census Bureau. That's barely enough to raise two kids. Any medical, legal, or career disaster and the family goes impoverished.

Then they should not have kids.

The two-income trap is partly caused by the housing bubble.

Dan8267 says

And speaking about despising families, how do you feel about gay men and lesbians adopting?

I totally support gay and lesbian adoptions. It takes a village to raise a child. All couples, gay or straight, should have others in the support system anyway.

Peter P says

Dan8267 says

The median household income, and this is for a dual income family, is $51,900 according to the 2013 stats from the Census Bureau. That's barely enough to raise two kids. Any medical, legal, or career disaster and the family goes impoverished.

Then they should not have kids.

The two-income trap is partly caused by the housing bubble.

Dan if everyone will make double, prices will simply double. Hamburger isn't going to stay $5, it'll become 10. Prices always rise when there is more money floating around.

FortWayne says

Not true Dan, even you posted above some snobbish comments about how all women should be working, and how marriage is an insult to you (you are such a strange chick).

1. Show me the quote where I stated that all women should be working.

2. Show me the quote where I stated that marriage is an insult.

3. The fact that you attempted to degrade me by referring to me as a "chick" demonstrates unequivocally that you believe it's degrading to merely be a woman.

So much for,
FortWayne says

Dan8267 says

FortWayne says

Modern feminist liberals are some of the worst kind of people in the world.

Hypocrisy much? Sounds like you got some hatred of women.

No just the crazies on the left who hate men and women that don't share their opinion.

FortWayne says

Dan if everyone will make double, prices will simply double.

No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor. If that doesn't happen, it's because parasites wearing stupid elephant pins have redirected the wealth from those hard working Americans producing it to the lazy asses who produce nothing.

The entry of women into the workforce should have made the middle class family wealthier and more financial stable. It had the opposite effect because scumbag conservatives used the doubling of the work force to destroy the bargaining power of labor and to exploit that labor.

So, yes, the reason why most women don't have a choice about whether or not to work is because of scumbags like your hero Reagan.

Dan8267 says

No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor

Nope Dan, it would be inflation. You don't even got the basics man.

FortWayne says

inflation

Inflation, if you mean currency debasement, is an independent effect.

Inflation, if you mean cost of living increases, is caused by a real drop in working wages, again, thanks to Reagan.

Here we witness the libby in the wild notice:

He cannot define inflation.

He has no concept that government causes inflation.

He has no idea that his primary disability is his inbility to disciminate, which includes critical thinking.

indigenous says

He cannot define inflation.

Honeybuns, inflation used to mean currency debasement for centuries. In the past few decades, it's been redefined to cost of living increases in order to prevent people from talking about currency debasement. Most people misuse the term.

I'll put my intellect up against your puny one any day. It won't be a contest.

I'm sorry snocums but that is not exactly right.

We will have do the dick measuring contest some other time, when you're not wearing a dress.

indigenous says

We will have do the dick measuring contest some other time, when you're not wearing a dress.

Not necessary. Your wife can vouch that my dick is much larger than yours.

FortWayne says

Dan8267 says

No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor

Nope Dan, it would be inflation. You don't even got the basics man.

If productivity increases then prices decrease. Apparently someone else has trouble with basics as well.

bob2356 says

FortWayne says

Dan8267 says

No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor

Nope Dan, it would be inflation. You don't even got the basics man.

If productivity increases then prices decrease. Apparently someone else has trouble with basics as well.

If everyone makes double the money, prices double too. Did you learn nothing from history?

FortWayne says

bob2356 says

FortWayne says

Dan8267 says

No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor

Nope Dan, it would be inflation. You don't even got the basics man.

If productivity increases then prices decrease. Apparently someone else has trouble with basics as well.

If everyone makes double the money, prices double too. Did you learn nothing from history?

Did you learn nothing from economics? Obviously not. Increasing productivity means producing more product for the SAME cost therefore increasing profits or cutting prices or both. It has zero to do with inflation. Inflation is increasing the money supply in relation to goods and services.

bob2356 says

Did you learn nothing from economics? Obviously not. Increasing productivity means producing more product for the SAME cost therefore increasing profits or cutting prices or both. It has zero to do with inflation. Inflation is increasing the money supply in relation to goods and services.

You beat me to it. Fort Wayne evidently has some fundamental misunderstandings of economics and finance if he thinks that productivity is a function of the number of monetary units paid to laborers.

The productivity of workers has increased by a factor of four over the past half century. This has nothing to do with the money supply. But it is the reason why we are materially better off, as a whole, than we were in the 1950s. Unfortunately, as my reference shows, since the 1980s all increases in productivity have been siphoned from the wealth creators (workers) and given to the parasites (executives and owners).

Dan8267 says

You beat me to it. Fort Wayne evidently has some fundamental misunderstandings of economics and finance if he thinks that productivity is a function of the number of monetary units paid to laborers.

In this post Dan's name is "the pot".

If you're going to try to insult someone either
a. Do it creatively
b. Do it seriously and then support the insult with a good reason

You fail consistently at both.

bob2356 says

Did you learn nothing from economics? Obviously not. Increasing productivity means producing more product for the SAME cost therefore increasing profits or cutting prices or both. It has zero to do with inflation. Inflation is increasing the money supply in relation to goods and services.

What do you think will happen when there is double the money?

Houses went from single income to dual income requirement these days in places where both adults work. It ain't much of a secret. You boys read something in textbook and completely fail to understand it in life, especially when it doesn't fit the liberal ideology.

FortWayne says

liberal ideology.

You don't know what the liberal ideology is, even though I've told you point blank dozens of time. Conservatives are just too stupid to learn.