Tweet
Donald Trump not included d
--------------------------------------------
Well there's my covfefe moment why the fuck did it post like that. Anyway here's a list of the main reasons why America sucks not including Trump:
Wealth Inequality
1. The richest 1% own more than the "bottom" (relative use of the term here) 90% of Americans combined. But it's ok because America is super fair and only the most talented of con-artists and snake oil salesmen can reach the top.
2. The richest 0.1% (which is still 300,000 people) make what? more than $5 mill a year? Now imagine the richest 0.01% which is still 30,000 people - they probably make $50 mill a year or more.
3. Here's the kicker: the richest 0.1% or 0.01% have convinced idiots like Kthx that the system is fair through an elaborate propaganda network and an appeal to certain economic grey areas (more on this later I guess)
4. Now people like Kthx go around mocking people who make less money, or are poor, unaware that they are a small fish as well on account of never meeting anyone from that 0.01%. If people like Kthx make $100k a year that is quite a good salary - but remember there are people who spend your yearly salary in a week. You aren't anybody important by any stretch.
5. The rich keep the poor arguing against each other, perhaps not as a sinister conspiratorial plan but a logical game theoretical pathway that each player can reach independently. To assume rich people don't know they are rich, and wouldn't spend a good amount of money and effort to keep it that way, isn't giving enough credit. Far from brilliant tacticians, I'm sure if you put the average educated American in their shoes they could reach the same or similar conclusions. The rich want to stay rich and they are also the most empowered.
6. Most problems in America stem from this dynamic, nay, most problems in the world arise from this dynamic as I hope to show. Let's move on to another topic but keep in mind they all arise from this root cause.
How Wealth Inequality Relates to the Average American
- Millions of Americans cannot afford health care, in contrast to countries like the rest of the civilized world (great country btw) that can afford, on much smaller economies, to provide healthcare for their citizens.
- While productivity has risen predictably, wages have stagnated due to forces arising from this inequality.
- General quality of life suffers predictably but in unseen ways. 40 million Americans live in poverty. Poverty is a strong causal factor of further life issues such as crime, mental illness, poor family planning, poor health, drug use, homelessness, education and it all spirals downward.The Military-Industrial Complex
1. Prior to WW2, America was incredibly isolationist. This is a suitable strategy if you can imagine: America is the newest country and it occupies ALMOST an entire continent that was only recently discovered. It's also an ocean away from any world superpower of the time. Any strategist could tell you this is very beneficial, and it would be just as beneficial for America not to overeach their nascent power and instead focus on building and growth in your relative safety. In Starcraft when you find out your opponent is at the furthest possible starting point, expanding early becomes a good strategy: time is perhaps the most valuable strategic resource and America with its position in the world had plenty of it before WW2.
2. After WW2 the geopolitical landscape was changed forever due to the nature of technology. 20 years before, enemy planes were barely a thing to be considered for America at least. Now, after WW2, planes can strike globally with massive bombs that can wipe out entire cities. There was hardly a resting moment between the two but the geopolitical dynamics changed dramatically.
3. The Korean War, Vietnam War, arming rebel groups that align with your interests, the Gulf War, then the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars. Hope I'm not missing any. After WW2 there are two threats that serve essentially the same purpose: the red scare (communism) and the Islamic scare (dictators and terrorists).
4. The communist threat was arguably more grave: as a political system it would pave the way for ruthless dictators to terrorize their people, not because communism itself is flawed although it well could be, but rather because brutal authoritarians love a good power vacuum. The Islamic threat is not as grave: power in the late 20th/early 21st century is a lot more decentralized. Only a country like North Korea, which has intentionally kept its population in the dark for decades, is able to pull it off. With the communications of today people are a lot less susceptible to being controlled on such a mass scale. Even ISIS, which at its peak controlled a good portion of Syria and Iraq, could only do so in such a poor area of the world, and even then there's no saying how long they could maintain it even without foreign intervention. If they held Syria for even 5 years is that really any amount of time in a geopolitical context?
5. Iraq did not have nuclear capabilities, they were not hiding Bin Laden evidently and why should they - Saddam and the Saudis had no particular good relations. Iraq and Afghanistan don't even share a border. There was no reason to ever enter Iraq besides oil and don't tell me the Bush administration or Americans in general had a soft spot for the Iraqi people being oppressed. It was all about oil and relieving pressure on a key US ally Saudi Arabia. The fact that we were VERY ARGUABLY doing some good in the region is a very minor point - it is not America's job to police the Middle East.
How the MIC Relates to the Average American
1. In 2016 the Department of Defense had a budget of $580 Billion. The military is an investment in many ways: it employs people, opens up new resources (Iraqi oil for example) and partnerships, it protects the image of America as a strong and safe investment, and more.
2. Meanwhile in America there is a gun in almost every home, cities like Chicago have a shooting every 3 hours and a person is murdered every 12 hours. The Middle East is likely safer than some American neighborhoods.
3. Some "Most Manco-Like:" character shoots up a school every year or so in a mass shooting spree. Everyone feels bad, the cable news shows have their programming for the next few days, newspapers sell more copies, and people buy more guns ironically.
4. Americans are somehow convinced that if they needed to rebel against their 580 billion dollar/year government, they're going to do it with their household firearms. Let me tell you idiots something. If the government decided to turn against the population the best use for the gun in your home is to shoot yourself in the head and save yourself the trouble. Of course nobody has a gun for that reason, they have it because it makes them feel powerful and hey, I didn't shoot anybody so why should my toy be taken away?
5. Of course even if you wanted to destroy all the guns in America there would just be a black market. Create more conflicts so you can create more arms so you can create more jobs (and by jobs I mean wealth for the people who matter). America would be shooting itself in the foot economically by banning guns, since they are one of the biggest suppliers. Which brings me to the next topic.
Corporate America
One of my favorite topics, almost every problem in America can somehow be traced to the corporation. Nobody in America became rich without it - it is the vessel of greed and corruption and its properties make it especially valuable. The corporation is legally required to maximize the profit of its shareholders. While someone without a mental handicap might imagine the goal of a corporation to be something like, "maximizing the welfare of its stakeholders" that just didn't have the same pizazz. No, the modern corporation is required to be the legal incorporation of excessive greed. No shareholder can be held responsible - all they did was fund the operation! No employee is responsible either - they were only listening to the boss. Your boss isn't responsible either, he was following his boss' orders and so on. So you pay a single dude a bunch of money to be accountable. But they're rarely held accountable because that would be intellectually dishonest to the extreme - everyone is culpable to an extent there's simply no way of pursuing everyone. So the whole idea of holding someone accountable is thrown to the wind - great job, America. The system works so well (not at improving your country, mind you, but in generating wealth anonymously for the top 0.01%) that it's implemented fucking everywhere: healthcare (which by definition should be PERMANENTLY REMOVED from the private sector, as far as actual care goes), prisons (America's prison pop. per capita is the highest in the world lol), defense (perverted incentives when you mix unaccountable greed with a powerful military), schools, you name it. Here's how the private sector works, in principle:
1. There are three ways for a business to make more profit: increase revenue, decrease costs, or pay less taxes. Some accountant will tell you there are only two (the first two) but I list three for simplicity.
2. Increasing revenue is difficult since its not entirely within your control: you can try to increase your sales or introduce a new product/service but it is never a guaranteed success. Decreasing costs is within your control and therefore much easier.
3. Your prison needs new clothing for its inmates. There is no reason not to purchase the cheapest option, as your goal is to maximize profit within your legal boundaries. Your private school needs a new building. The cost of building a new school is less than the cost of dealing with a few potential lawsuits (injuries and such) down the road, if they were to occur. You are legally required to not build that new school. As for the customers, the next closest school is 10 miles away so they won't be switching any time soon (search wikipedia: inelastic demand)
4. Your employees are amazing - they really add value to the company. Labor is just another cost, though, and everyone is replaceable. Except you, the one making the final decision on everything. It doesn't matter if you sit behind a desk all day signing papers, you're the star. Not the employees who do the actual work for your business. Imagine if businesses paid their labor their true value (not some artificially inflated or deflated value based on supply/demand relating to a superficial imposed authoritarian hierarchy). The CEO would be paid far less and that's unacceptable, not for any reason besides that's how the structure is.
5. Change (internal and external) and innovation is a cost, as well. Covering America in broadband coverage sure is expensive, let's charge Americans for the services they already pay for. Developing new drugs is really expensive, too, so let's increase the price of insulin. Title II sucks - we liked it when we could price discriminate and you didn't have the option to switch providers. Now THAT was a great time for us. Under Title II we'd lose hundreds of millions in potential revenue, so let's pay the government a few million to heavily consider keeping things as they were. Change costs money and businesses aren't about spending more money - there's no mandate that says they have to care about Americans or progress or poor people.
6. Also we want less taxes. Not so we can pay our employees more, or give our prisoners better beds and clothing - that would be absurd. We simply want more money, is that so difficult to understand? BUT HEY WAIT LISTEN HEY - it's good for the economy I promise! Sure you could simply give money to people who need it and it would enter the economy immediately (and not some rich 0.01%'ers bank account) but that's socialist talk. Eventually people will benefit, after I've benefitted by 10x more, but come on. Hey, I'll give you $150,000 if you give me $500,000 - is that such a bad deal? Don't you want money you sick, corrupted husk of a human being?
The Media
1. People are right to question the media. Here's an idea: no media outlet, especially if its privately owned, is without bias. It's usually good business, though, to pratice fair and unbiased journalism and media practices because many people aren't stupid and usually don't want biased news.
2. If people knew the news was fake they wouldn't watch it. They'd watch Game of Thrones or read PPS latest book or something. I think pps should be writing books for the public at large or at least be a celebrity outside of TW - he's said some of the most original but stupid things I can think of and therefore embodies the American spirit.
3. News channels like Fox News prey on the average American. They feed you biased bullshit and foster the divide between Americans because it makes Rupert Murdoch and his rich buddies richer. If you ever want to know if a news org. is biased just follow the money. What does CNN gain by pushing anti-gun opinions (if they are even biased in this way)? Does it make Ted Turner money? What do Rupert Murdoch and friends have to gain by telling you Obamacare is terrible? It costs them nothing to say it, either, but they have everything to gain from it. What does Fox News have to gain by pushing anti-Islam opinions? Well, half the population will probably be cool with the next invasion of Iraq, for one.
4. Often the bias is so subtle that even otherwise intelligent or good people can fall for it if they're already leaning conservative. Make no doubt that Rupert Murdoch and his friends see the media as a tool for protecting their other investments, or the Fox News brand itself. If Fox News decided to report on the news accurately and fairly tomorrow there'd be nothing to distinguish it from CNN, and other news channels that already do a good job of just reporting the news. By advertising yourself as the "other viewpoint" of the news you create a brand that is only sustained by continuing that viewpoint. It's how Alex Jones made a news network off of "InfoWars" and alternative news: in reality he has zero advantages over an established new network but by fabricating a viewpoint he's created a product - and people love it. Problem is they confuse it with reality.
In truth, people have the most power in this world. If we were of a single mind, would there be anything stopping us from eradicating poverty, war, nuclear weapons - anything, really - from this planet? Of course not. It's all as possible as landing on the moon, traveling to Mars, or opening your balcony window. Break free of the propganda and individualistic mindset that you did everything yourself - that no luck was involved, that nobody deserves your help. Kthx: if you were born in Uganda you wouldn't even be here making 10k posts like a complete poop stain, how do you not realize this? From the very start you had some advantage in the world, so why do you treat others like they are subhuman for not having as much as you do? Is that what you base your entire value on - wealth and circumstance that you didn't even earn? And you don't even realize how truly worthless you are compared to people with real power in the world. So what is the point of you, and millions of other Republicans and Democrats (mostly Republicans lets be fair) dividing yourselves when if you worked together you could overcome every obstacle in the world, if that was your goal. Or is it your goal to shitpost on Trenchwars forums all day long? Many people look at America with contempt - it's not just America's fault of course, the whole world is starting to use this corrupt capitalist system because it's so effective. Do you really want such a great nation, founded on such promising ideals, to become a wasteland of decerepit morals and greed? It's not just Republicans either I have to emphasize, but they are by far the worst offenders. Seems to me people in America like being evil, like being greedy, like being cruel to their neighbour, and don't see the irony in their situation: that they are far more similiar to the peoplen they mock than they realize, far closer to poverty than they know, and much farther from good than they'd like to think. Enjoy your elitist shithole of a country that divides and conquers you like all the other peons, that makes 10000x more off a tax cut than you do, and looks at you with the same contempt that you have for your poorer neighbour. Enjoy sitting on your computer coming up with such original insults like "fag" and.. well that's it and patting yourself on the back for your supreme contribution to this world. Faggot.
Might be updating this list but this is a general outline of the corrupt nature of American political economy in my opinion. Take it, leave it, research more, update your opinions, don't, I don't care. I can log onto this game and destroy the zone within minutes dare me. I'll probably donate when I have money (likely not this month, definitely wasn't last month when I first thought of donating). Normally I could donate $20/month or so, and for all the enjoyment I've had these past months I think I owe something. I give away my pub money as well so nobody can say I'm greedy or don't practice what I preach. Fly safe idiots, don't be like that one warbird on the right tube.
--------------------------------------------
Well there's my covfefe moment why the fuck did it post like that. Anyway here's a list of the main reasons why America sucks not including Trump:
Wealth Inequality
1. The richest 1% own more than the "bottom" (relative use of the term here) 90% of Americans combined. But it's ok because America is super fair and only the most talented of con-artists and snake oil salesmen can reach the top.
2. The richest 0.1% (which is still 300,000 people) make what? more than $5 mill a year? Now imagine the richest 0.01% which is still 30,000 people - they probably make $50 mill a year or more.
3. Here's the kicker: the richest 0.1% or 0.01% have convinced idiots like Kthx that the system is fair through an elaborate propaganda network and an appeal to certain economic grey areas (more on this later I guess)
4. Now people like Kthx go around mocking people who make less money, or are poor, unaware that they are a small fish as well on account of never meeting anyone from that 0.01%. If people like Kthx make $100k a year that is quite a good salary - but remember there are people who spend your yearly salary in a week. You aren't anybody important by any stretch.
5. The rich keep the poor arguing against each other, perhaps not as a sinister conspiratorial plan but a logical game theoretical pathway that each player can reach independently. To assume rich people don't know they are rich, and wouldn't spend a good amount of money and effort to keep it that way, isn't giving enough credit. Far from brilliant tacticians, I'm sure if you put the average educated American in their shoes they could reach the same or similar conclusions. The rich want to stay rich and they are also the most empowered.
6. Most problems in America stem from this dynamic, nay, most problems in the world arise from this dynamic as I hope to show. Let's move on to another topic but keep in mind they all arise from this root cause.
How Wealth Inequality Relates to the Average American
- Millions of Americans cannot afford health care, in contrast to countries like the rest of the civilized world (great country btw) that can afford, on much smaller economies, to provide healthcare for their citizens.
- While productivity has risen predictably, wages have stagnated due to forces arising from this inequality.
- General quality of life suffers predictably but in unseen ways. 40 million Americans live in poverty. Poverty is a strong causal factor of further life issues such as crime, mental illness, poor family planning, poor health, drug use, homelessness, education and it all spirals downward.The Military-Industrial Complex
1. Prior to WW2, America was incredibly isolationist. This is a suitable strategy if you can imagine: America is the newest country and it occupies ALMOST an entire continent that was only recently discovered. It's also an ocean away from any world superpower of the time. Any strategist could tell you this is very beneficial, and it would be just as beneficial for America not to overeach their nascent power and instead focus on building and growth in your relative safety. In Starcraft when you find out your opponent is at the furthest possible starting point, expanding early becomes a good strategy: time is perhaps the most valuable strategic resource and America with its position in the world had plenty of it before WW2.
2. After WW2 the geopolitical landscape was changed forever due to the nature of technology. 20 years before, enemy planes were barely a thing to be considered for America at least. Now, after WW2, planes can strike globally with massive bombs that can wipe out entire cities. There was hardly a resting moment between the two but the geopolitical dynamics changed dramatically.
3. The Korean War, Vietnam War, arming rebel groups that align with your interests, the Gulf War, then the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars. Hope I'm not missing any. After WW2 there are two threats that serve essentially the same purpose: the red scare (communism) and the Islamic scare (dictators and terrorists).
4. The communist threat was arguably more grave: as a political system it would pave the way for ruthless dictators to terrorize their people, not because communism itself is flawed although it well could be, but rather because brutal authoritarians love a good power vacuum. The Islamic threat is not as grave: power in the late 20th/early 21st century is a lot more decentralized. Only a country like North Korea, which has intentionally kept its population in the dark for decades, is able to pull it off. With the communications of today people are a lot less susceptible to being controlled on such a mass scale. Even ISIS, which at its peak controlled a good portion of Syria and Iraq, could only do so in such a poor area of the world, and even then there's no saying how long they could maintain it even without foreign intervention. If they held Syria for even 5 years is that really any amount of time in a geopolitical context?
5. Iraq did not have nuclear capabilities, they were not hiding Bin Laden evidently and why should they - Saddam and the Saudis had no particular good relations. Iraq and Afghanistan don't even share a border. There was no reason to ever enter Iraq besides oil and don't tell me the Bush administration or Americans in general had a soft spot for the Iraqi people being oppressed. It was all about oil and relieving pressure on a key US ally Saudi Arabia. The fact that we were VERY ARGUABLY doing some good in the region is a very minor point - it is not America's job to police the Middle East.
How the MIC Relates to the Average American
1. In 2016 the Department of Defense had a budget of $580 Billion. The military is an investment in many ways: it employs people, opens up new resources (Iraqi oil for example) and partnerships, it protects the image of America as a strong and safe investment, and more.
2. Meanwhile in America there is a gun in almost every home, cities like Chicago have a shooting every 3 hours and a person is murdered every 12 hours. The Middle East is likely safer than some American neighborhoods.
3. Some "Most Manco-Like:" character shoots up a school every year or so in a mass shooting spree. Everyone feels bad, the cable news shows have their programming for the next few days, newspapers sell more copies, and people buy more guns ironically.
4. Americans are somehow convinced that if they needed to rebel against their 580 billion dollar/year government, they're going to do it with their household firearms. Let me tell you idiots something. If the government decided to turn against the population the best use for the gun in your home is to shoot yourself in the head and save yourself the trouble. Of course nobody has a gun for that reason, they have it because it makes them feel powerful and hey, I didn't shoot anybody so why should my toy be taken away?
5. Of course even if you wanted to destroy all the guns in America there would just be a black market. Create more conflicts so you can create more arms so you can create more jobs (and by jobs I mean wealth for the people who matter). America would be shooting itself in the foot economically by banning guns, since they are one of the biggest suppliers. Which brings me to the next topic.
Corporate America
One of my favorite topics, almost every problem in America can somehow be traced to the corporation. Nobody in America became rich without it - it is the vessel of greed and corruption and its properties make it especially valuable. The corporation is legally required to maximize the profit of its shareholders. While someone without a mental handicap might imagine the goal of a corporation to be something like, "maximizing the welfare of its stakeholders" that just didn't have the same pizazz. No, the modern corporation is required to be the legal incorporation of excessive greed. No shareholder can be held responsible - all they did was fund the operation! No employee is responsible either - they were only listening to the boss. Your boss isn't responsible either, he was following his boss' orders and so on. So you pay a single dude a bunch of money to be accountable. But they're rarely held accountable because that would be intellectually dishonest to the extreme - everyone is culpable to an extent there's simply no way of pursuing everyone. So the whole idea of holding someone accountable is thrown to the wind - great job, America. The system works so well (not at improving your country, mind you, but in generating wealth anonymously for the top 0.01%) that it's implemented fucking everywhere: healthcare (which by definition should be PERMANENTLY REMOVED from the private sector, as far as actual care goes), prisons (America's prison pop. per capita is the highest in the world lol), defense (perverted incentives when you mix unaccountable greed with a powerful military), schools, you name it. Here's how the private sector works, in principle:
1. There are three ways for a business to make more profit: increase revenue, decrease costs, or pay less taxes. Some accountant will tell you there are only two (the first two) but I list three for simplicity.
2. Increasing revenue is difficult since its not entirely within your control: you can try to increase your sales or introduce a new product/service but it is never a guaranteed success. Decreasing costs is within your control and therefore much easier.
3. Your prison needs new clothing for its inmates. There is no reason not to purchase the cheapest option, as your goal is to maximize profit within your legal boundaries. Your private school needs a new building. The cost of building a new school is less than the cost of dealing with a few potential lawsuits (injuries and such) down the road, if they were to occur. You are legally required to not build that new school. As for the customers, the next closest school is 10 miles away so they won't be switching any time soon (search wikipedia: inelastic demand)
4. Your employees are amazing - they really add value to the company. Labor is just another cost, though, and everyone is replaceable. Except you, the one making the final decision on everything. It doesn't matter if you sit behind a desk all day signing papers, you're the star. Not the employees who do the actual work for your business. Imagine if businesses paid their labor their true value (not some artificially inflated or deflated value based on supply/demand relating to a superficial imposed authoritarian hierarchy). The CEO would be paid far less and that's unacceptable, not for any reason besides that's how the structure is.
5. Change (internal and external) and innovation is a cost, as well. Covering America in broadband coverage sure is expensive, let's charge Americans for the services they already pay for. Developing new drugs is really expensive, too, so let's increase the price of insulin. Title II sucks - we liked it when we could price discriminate and you didn't have the option to switch providers. Now THAT was a great time for us. Under Title II we'd lose hundreds of millions in potential revenue, so let's pay the government a few million to heavily consider keeping things as they were. Change costs money and businesses aren't about spending more money - there's no mandate that says they have to care about Americans or progress or poor people.
6. Also we want less taxes. Not so we can pay our employees more, or give our prisoners better beds and clothing - that would be absurd. We simply want more money, is that so difficult to understand? BUT HEY WAIT LISTEN HEY - it's good for the economy I promise! Sure you could simply give money to people who need it and it would enter the economy immediately (and not some rich 0.01%'ers bank account) but that's socialist talk. Eventually people will benefit, after I've benefitted by 10x more, but come on. Hey, I'll give you $150,000 if you give me $500,000 - is that such a bad deal? Don't you want money you sick, corrupted husk of a human being?
The Media
1. People are right to question the media. Here's an idea: no media outlet, especially if its privately owned, is without bias. It's usually good business, though, to pratice fair and unbiased journalism and media practices because many people aren't stupid and usually don't want biased news.
2. If people knew the news was fake they wouldn't watch it. They'd watch Game of Thrones or read PPS latest book or something. I think pps should be writing books for the public at large or at least be a celebrity outside of TW - he's said some of the most original but stupid things I can think of and therefore embodies the American spirit.
3. News channels like Fox News prey on the average American. They feed you biased bullshit and foster the divide between Americans because it makes Rupert Murdoch and his rich buddies richer. If you ever want to know if a news org. is biased just follow the money. What does CNN gain by pushing anti-gun opinions (if they are even biased in this way)? Does it make Ted Turner money? What do Rupert Murdoch and friends have to gain by telling you Obamacare is terrible? It costs them nothing to say it, either, but they have everything to gain from it. What does Fox News have to gain by pushing anti-Islam opinions? Well, half the population will probably be cool with the next invasion of Iraq, for one.
4. Often the bias is so subtle that even otherwise intelligent or good people can fall for it if they're already leaning conservative. Make no doubt that Rupert Murdoch and his friends see the media as a tool for protecting their other investments, or the Fox News brand itself. If Fox News decided to report on the news accurately and fairly tomorrow there'd be nothing to distinguish it from CNN, and other news channels that already do a good job of just reporting the news. By advertising yourself as the "other viewpoint" of the news you create a brand that is only sustained by continuing that viewpoint. It's how Alex Jones made a news network off of "InfoWars" and alternative news: in reality he has zero advantages over an established new network but by fabricating a viewpoint he's created a product - and people love it. Problem is they confuse it with reality.
In truth, people have the most power in this world. If we were of a single mind, would there be anything stopping us from eradicating poverty, war, nuclear weapons - anything, really - from this planet? Of course not. It's all as possible as landing on the moon, traveling to Mars, or opening your balcony window. Break free of the propganda and individualistic mindset that you did everything yourself - that no luck was involved, that nobody deserves your help. Kthx: if you were born in Uganda you wouldn't even be here making 10k posts like a complete poop stain, how do you not realize this? From the very start you had some advantage in the world, so why do you treat others like they are subhuman for not having as much as you do? Is that what you base your entire value on - wealth and circumstance that you didn't even earn? And you don't even realize how truly worthless you are compared to people with real power in the world. So what is the point of you, and millions of other Republicans and Democrats (mostly Republicans lets be fair) dividing yourselves when if you worked together you could overcome every obstacle in the world, if that was your goal. Or is it your goal to shitpost on Trenchwars forums all day long? Many people look at America with contempt - it's not just America's fault of course, the whole world is starting to use this corrupt capitalist system because it's so effective. Do you really want such a great nation, founded on such promising ideals, to become a wasteland of decerepit morals and greed? It's not just Republicans either I have to emphasize, but they are by far the worst offenders. Seems to me people in America like being evil, like being greedy, like being cruel to their neighbour, and don't see the irony in their situation: that they are far more similiar to the peoplen they mock than they realize, far closer to poverty than they know, and much farther from good than they'd like to think. Enjoy your elitist shithole of a country that divides and conquers you like all the other peons, that makes 10000x more off a tax cut than you do, and looks at you with the same contempt that you have for your poorer neighbour. Enjoy sitting on your computer coming up with such original insults like "fag" and.. well that's it and patting yourself on the back for your supreme contribution to this world. Faggot.
Might be updating this list but this is a general outline of the corrupt nature of American political economy in my opinion. Take it, leave it, research more, update your opinions, don't, I don't care. I can log onto this game and destroy the zone within minutes dare me. I'll probably donate when I have money (likely not this month, definitely wasn't last month when I first thought of donating). Normally I could donate $20/month or so, and for all the enjoyment I've had these past months I think I owe something. I give away my pub money as well so nobody can say I'm greedy or don't practice what I preach. Fly safe idiots, don't be like that one warbird on the right tube.
.. If you believe you are racist.. feel bad and fix it! No one should want to be a racist or excuse that type behaviour in my book. I think it didn't provide overall benefits also.. the open minded tribes who could meet, greet, trade and learn from new cultures usually were the ones who came out ahead. Also being exclusionary and prejudice could have caused unneeded violence and wars. That behavior could literally destroy your entire tribe too. Genes get stronger the more you mix too.
Comment