[EugenicHegemony] Income Tax debate advice

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:19am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote: snip

----Plutocratic despotic rule. You're equivocating on a very simple terminology, and you're just doing it to be a dick. I already explained how the president is now the check signer who does as he's told. His power is used in a despotic fashion.
Excuse me? Are you saying that a dictionary is wrong about the meaning of this word? care to post evidence of this? You wont be able to, but I suspect that you will try to shift the goal posts again.

How dishonest.

Now if you were to say that GWB was one side of a elected dictatorship in a two party system, I might let you off, but you just were not smart enought t work that out.

Plutocratic means any puppet president, and I was very clear on that. Why are you such a condescending fuck?

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:20am

This just goes to show that you're not reading anything I post and only want to argue with me.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:22am

Did you miss this quote I already posted a few posts back condescender?

"We must face the appalling fact that we have been betrayed by both the Democratic and Republican Parties."
~Martin Luther King, Jr.

Of course you did, because you're not reading my posts and only waiting for the next argument.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2006-01-23 05:23am

EugenicHegemony wrote:
Politics is about coercion, and I am not talking about that. Relativist ideological secularism is a theory that you don't care for, and that's fine. Your statement is no more fact than mine.

Politics is about governance and who does it. Or do you seriously think that one can govern with out concent in one form or another?

-----Care to show you what?

What a theory is.

I posted one oneof my theories, and you ignored it. You want to be a dick, then fine, be one.

Such a shame that your 'theory' did not really match the definition of a theory and consisted of appeals to authority and unsubstantiated opinion.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2006-01-23 05:25am

EugenicHegemony wrote:I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, and none here care to listen to anything I have to say anyway.

Oh, we listen, we just do not agree because you have not posted anything of value. But you are free to leave at any time if you do not like it.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:30am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote:
Politics is about coercion, and I am not talking about that. Relativist ideological secularism is a theory that you don't care for, and that's fine. Your statement is no more fact than mine.
Politics is about governance and who does it. Or do you seriously think that one can govern with out concent in one form or another?

-----Politics is about force, and one exerting their will over another. In my system that is nonexistent.

-----Care to show you what?
What a theory is.

-------I posted my theory and it's called: relativist ideological secularism.

I posted one oneof my theories, and you ignored it. You want to be a dick, then fine, be one.

Such a shame that your 'theory' did not really match the definition of a theory and consisted of appeals to authority and unsubstantiated opinion.

-----Of course it did, and does as it's my ideas and subjective reasoning that make my theory what it is. I even applied it in practical terms to present day America.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2006-01-23 05:31am

EugenicHegemony wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote: snip

----Plutocratic despotic rule. You're equivocating on a very simple terminology, and you're just doing it to be a dick. I already explained how the president is now the check signer who does as he's told. His power is used in a despotic fashion.
Excuse me? Are you saying that a dictionary is wrong about the meaning of this word? care to post evidence of this? You wont be able to, but I suspect that you will try to shift the goal posts again.

How dishonest.

Now if you were to say that GWB was one side of a elected dictatorship in a two party system, I might let you off, but you just were not smart enought t work that out.
Plutocratic means any puppet president, and I was very clear on that. Why are you such a condescending fuck?

Actually, a plutocratic or to be more exact in this context, plutocracy, simply means government by the very weathy. And that is not despotism.
By the way, Im not being condecending, just pointing out your errors and lack of understanding of words.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2006-01-23 05:33am

EugenicHegemony wrote:This just goes to show that you're not reading anything I post and only want to argue with me.

Oh, come now. I do read what you post, its just that I dont agree with you.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2006-01-23 05:34am

EugenicHegemony wrote:Did you miss this quote I already posted a few posts back condescender?

"We must face the appalling fact that we have been betrayed by both the Democratic and Republican Parties."
~Martin Luther King, Jr.

Of course you did, because you're not reading my posts and only waiting for the next argument.

Oh, I saw it, and I dismissed it for the irrelivant appeal to authority that it is.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:36am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote: Excuse me? Are you saying that a dictionary is wrong about the meaning of this word? care to post evidence of this? You wont be able to, but I suspect that you will try to shift the goal posts again.

How dishonest.

Now if you were to say that GWB was one side of a elected dictatorship in a two party system, I might let you off, but you just were not smart enought t work that out.
Plutocratic means any puppet president, and I was very clear on that. Why are you such a condescending fuck?
Actually, a plutocratic or to be more exact in this context, plutocracy, simply means government by the very weathy. and that is not despotism.
By the way, Im not being condecending, just pointing out your errors and lack of understanding of words.

I know exactly what it means and you're equivocating on the meanings of these words. When a dictator rules or has ruled he has not done so alone as the elite (upper class) ruled with him. I chose to use the words nationalized economic despotism to convey this. Not to mention plutocracy same as the Roman Empire. Did they not have a dictator and a plutocary at the same time?

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:39am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote:Did you miss this quote I already posted a few posts back condescender?

"We must face the appalling fact that we have been betrayed by both the Democratic and Republican Parties."
~Martin Luther King, Jr.

Of course you did, because you're not reading my posts and only waiting for the next argument.
Oh, I saw it, and I dismissed it for the irrelivant appeal to authority that it is.

No, it means exactly what he said. They have sold us out in a plutocratic despotic fashion for their selfish interest's and their special interest's.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:41am

EugenicHegemony wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote:Did you miss this quote I already posted a few posts back condescender?

"We must face the appalling fact that we have been betrayed by both the Democratic and Republican Parties."
~Martin Luther King, Jr.

Of course you did, because you're not reading my posts and only waiting for the next argument.
Oh, I saw it, and I dismissed it for the irrelivant appeal to authority that it is.

No, it means exactly what he said. They have sold us out in a plutocratic despotic fashion for their selfish interest's and their special interest's.

yeah, and that's why they blew his brains out the day after he told the people to withdraw their capital form the U.S. banks, and commit class economic ware fare.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2006-01-23 05:46am

EugenicHegemony wrote:

-----Politics is about force, and one exerting their will over another. In my system that is nonexistent.

Evidence please.

--------I posted my theory and it's called: relativist ideological secularism.

No, I asked you to show that you understand what a theory is, not what you call your collection of unsubstantiated opinion

-----Of course it did, and does as it's my ideas and subjective reasoning that make my theory what it is. I even applied it in practical terms to present day America.

That is not a theory, its called conjecture In short you have posted a bunch of wild arse guesses, assumption and surmise and tried to make your warped veiw of reality fit it.

Oh, learn to use the quote functions.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:50am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote:

-----Politics is about force, and one exerting their will over another. In my system that is nonexistent.
Evidence please.

-----The U.S. Imperialism in Central Asia

--------I posted my theory and it's called: relativist ideological secularism.
No, I asked you to show that you understand what a theory is, not what you call your collection of unsubstantiated opinion

-----No, it's a theory, and you can call it anything you please, I don't give a fuck.

-----Of course it did, and does as it's my ideas and subjective reasoning that make my theory what it is. I even applied it in practical terms to present day America.
That is not a theory, its called conjecture In short you have posted a bunch of wild arse guesses, assumption and surmise and tried to make your warped veiw of reality fit it.

-----That's your subjective opinion. I 'guessed' at nothing. It's my theory, and you can take it or leave it. It doesn't matter to me if you take a long walk off a short pier.

Oh, learn to use the quote functions.

-----I'll do it this way.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2006-01-23 05:50am

EugenicHegemony wrote:
No, it means exactly what he said.

Do you know what an 'appeal to authority' is?

They have sold us out in a plutocratic despotic fashion for their selfish interest's and their special interest's.

Wonderfull, you still dont know the difference between despotism and plutocracy.

yeah, and that's why they blew his brains out the day after he told the people to withdraw their capital form the U.S. banks, and commit class economic ware fare.

Evidence please.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:57am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote:
No, it means exactly what he said.
Do you know what an 'appeal to authority' is?

------it's also known as 'logical fallacy',and there is nothing fallacious about that statement. Why are you being condescending again?

They have sold us out in a plutocratic despotic fashion for their selfish interest's and their special interest's.
Wonderfull, you still dont know the difference between despotism and plutocracy.

Yes I do, and I explained how they go hand in hand.

yeah, and that's why they blew his brains out the day after he told the people to withdraw their capital form the U.S. banks, and commit class economic ware fare.
Evidence please.

-----Well, I think it's odd that the day after he called for economic warfare he got his head blown off Kennedy style. Not to mention, the CIA had been wiretapping, and investigating him for years.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 05:59am

He was a powerful, and influencial, cult of personality.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 06:33am

SirNitram wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote:
SirNitram wrote: Red herring. The privately-minted coinage is accepted and there are no legal barriers to using it as tender. Therefore the monopoly you demand must exist does not. Fuck off and go back to chanting anarchic slogans, you trolling shitwad.
So what? It's an alternative to the U.S. monetary system, and not even accepted everywhere. When there is no longer a monopoly on the fiat interest bearing U.S. currency then you can make that claim. Do you not get that, or are you just a fucking idiot?
I get what you're trying to claim, but that doesn't make your argument logical. Besides, a monopolized bank would mean I couldn't invest down the street at one of four. Like most cretinous, would-be intellectuals, you fall short because you don't know what the words mean. The monopoly is verifiably not in place, and it's objective reality which is shitting on your head.

It's 100% logical. It's a national monopoly and it matters not which flavor of bank you choose to store your interest bearing loot. The banks pitiful savings rate does nothing to counter the automatic interest on all U.S. currency. We buy back the FED per congressional record, and ditch the controlled and manipulated loaned interest. Why haven't we done that? This is the kind of information that should be on the news, and not that divisive propaganda crap they shove into our heads on the nightly news.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-01-23 07:05am

Oh, hey, fuckstick's back! So are you going to actually provide the evidence of a nationalized economy I asked for back on page two? Or are you going to be a trolling piece of shit? Myself, I'm going to bet the latter.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 07:13am

Surlethe wrote:Oh, hey, fuckstick's back! So are you going to actually provide the evidence of a nationalized economy I asked for back on page two? Or are you going to be a trolling piece of shit? Myself, I'm going to bet the latter.

I gave it to you, you fucking loser. Now either read it, or sit down, and shut the fuck up. If you're a lazy fuck who doesn't want to read what these economist's have to say then too bad. I'm not going to type it all out here when I have it queued for this very purpose.

http://eugenichegemony.blogspot.com/200 ... onomy.html

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-01-23 07:29am

EugenicHegemony wrote:
Surlethe wrote:Oh, hey, fuckstick's back! So are you going to actually provide the evidence of a nationalized economy I asked for back on page two? Or are you going to be a trolling piece of shit? Myself, I'm going to bet the latter.
I gave it to you, you fucking loser. Now either read it, or sit down, and shut the fuck up. If you're a lazy fuck who doesn't want to read what these economist's have to say then too bad. I'm not going to type it all out here when I have it queued for this very purpose.

http://eugenichegemony.blogspot.com/200 ... onomy.html

I don't have time to read through your fucking blog. Summarize it and post it here or concede defeat, asshole.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 07:31am

Surlethe wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote:
Surlethe wrote:Oh, hey, fuckstick's back! So are you going to actually provide the evidence of a nationalized economy I asked for back on page two? Or are you going to be a trolling piece of shit? Myself, I'm going to bet the latter.
I gave it to you, you fucking loser. Now either read it, or sit down, and shut the fuck up. If you're a lazy fuck who doesn't want to read what these economist's have to say then too bad. I'm not going to type it all out here when I have it queued for this very purpose.

http://eugenichegemony.blogspot.com/200 ... onomy.html
I don't have time to read through your fucking blog. Summarize it and post it here or concede defeat, asshole.

Go fuck yourself you lazy science fuction whore. Read when you're not playing magic thesuckmyathering....

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 07:34am

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-01-23 08:56am

EugenicHegemony wrote:Go fuck yourself you lazy science fuction whore. Read when you're not playing magic thesuckmyathering....

Oh-hoh, fuckwit here is clever enough to infer, from my presence on an intelligent board, that I am a science fiction fanwhore who plays magic the gathering! Since you're so intelligent and know better than me, why don't you build a bijection between T_p and T_c; first prove the cardinality of the two sets is the same, and then build an injection which is not surjective from T_p to T_c. Do you even know what those terms mean, moron? Probably not, since your knowledge base is only slightly greater than that required to reproduce, you imbecilic frontal lobe-lacking dumbass. Concession accepted.

EugenicHegemony · Post by **EugenicHegemony** » 2006-01-23 09:22am

Surlethe wrote:
EugenicHegemony wrote:Go fuck yourself you lazy science fuction whore. Read when you're not playing magic thesuckmyathering....
Concession accepted.

No consession will be had from me dont you those things are fucking Facist-Commie-Hippie! For those interested and not too lazy to find out, I'd like to tell you all now about how good an ass licker I am. So, if you want your salad tossed, just give me a call. If you don't want to read that factual information then you can fuck off bitch. I'm not going to explain any of it to you why should I have to justify my asslicking fetish to you government lackies! It's like the whole thing with my dog all over again. It's there to read, and if you choose not to, then I don't give a fuck what you do.

Science fuction fucktard.