Fuck us in the ass again

>>2455119
"...allowing farmers who make less than $500,000 a year in revenue and sell directly to consumers, restaurants or grocery stores within their states or within 275 miles of their farms to avoid expensive food safety plans required of larger operations..."

i know you're a troll but you could at least try a little

its passed, goodbye fresh food.

Haha Americans.

Thats just bullshit, I wouldn't shut my farm down because the FDA told me to. What are they going to do, shoot me? Well fucking do it then, some of us like to eat good food not shit.

>land of the free
>mfw do as we say faggot

Fuck I'm glad I live in the free world

>>2456050
>What are they going to do, shoot me?

>Aquisition laws
>kill you, steal your property
>perfectly legal

>>2456062
Best hope they can run faster than a speeding combine harvester then.

>>2456065
inb4 bullets

>>2456071
Typical American "Herp derp, guns, herp derp, too fat to use my fists or run them over like a normal person"

>>2456072
swing and a miss
I live in a free country, i.e not Amerika
American authorities have the right to shoot your fat fucking ass off your stupid harvester and steal everything you own
enjoy your police state faggot

If anyone is still alive after this, I think everyone is just going to emigrate to a free country or something.

Problem solved, you get all the fresh food you want and America loses taxpayers/citizens/consumers/suckers/etc.

bump

I'm a lead farmer, motherfucker

Not sure if troll.

Also, I can't wait to leave this country. Legislation against stupidity has all but killed off any sort of creativity in America, especially in regards to cuisine.
I swear, one day the US Government will make everyone float suspended in motorized tanks, "For the good of the children!"
Fuck your reactionary need for safety.
Enjoy your sterilized, pasteurized stacks of tiny cubes of food in your absolutely safe, perfect, microbe-free restaurants. I'll be dining on delicious dishes in some Pacific Rim country while laughing at America's slow, inexorable descent into Third-World status.

As always, OP is a faggot.

The problem here isn't giving the FDA more power. The problem isn't 'big government' or anything near the sort.

The problem is that Americans are uneducated swine with an exceptionally poor grasp of ethics, and it shows in their government. Their bible-toting paranoid nation fueled on greed and the backs of third world nations is finally starting to implode as the pattern of abuse it uses in other nations is being applied domestically. Serfdom is coming back as illegal migrant workers are exploited by conglomerated baronies now called corporations that have taken the power away from the government, and put it in to their own hands. Welcome to your dark age, America.

Good riddance.

>>2456427

I find it ironic that you realize so many of those problems, yet fail to hold the government responsible for them.

>>2456432
The government consists of people; of Americans. Americans with good ol' fashioned American greedy, bigoted values. Yes, the government is a problem right now because of this. Not all governments in all places are a problem. If you shrink the government down, you'll just have less oversight with more essentially stupid, indecent people running it. The solution is to make better people, but Americans have opted against this by seeking to destroy their own education system. Perhaps if the highly liberal demographic grew a sack, the country could be a good place again.

Welcome to a year ago / totally debunked fearmongering, douche.

>>2456443
Third world inhabitants so mad

>grow own oregano
>get shot

>>2456446
They should be. If they weren't so damn poor I'm sure they'd have our heads on pikes or making them nikes for 25 cents a day by now.

>>2456451

>>2456443
So you're blaming liberals?

>>2456470

Absoloutely not. Liberals and conservatives--at least in the traditional sense--are both part of the problem.

Liberals want to spend money that we do not have on welfare, handouts, and dubious make-work projects.

Conservatives want to spend money we do not have on idiotic wars and bailing out failed companies.

Both are a problem.

The government has no business making business, health care, and education decisions for the people. Where in the constitution does it say that those things are the government's job?

And by the same token, corporations and special interest groups/lobbys have no business dictating the law.

It is a sad day for all when the business world makes governmental decisions and the government makes business and personal decisions.

>>2456085
>he thinks he lives in a free country!

>>2456476
Ehm... socially liberal does not automatically mean voting democrat. There are plenty of us so disillusioned that we just don't vote because both sides of the two party system are 100% full of shit.

Please, try to separate your image of two puppet parties from the values of people who may or may not vote for them.

>>2456476
>It is a sad day for all when the business world makes governmental decisions and the government makes business and personal decisions.

HOLY SHIT, THIS!!! Someone else who get's it! The government has no bearing making business decisions, beyond basic federal legislations like "It is illegal to pay someone less than X/hour" or "It is illegal to not offer benefits to anyone working more than x hours/week".

By the same token, companies should not have ANY leverage in congress to lobby to have their company have special exceptions. The same rules of business should apply to everyone. True capitalism requires you to make a better product than your competition, or offer an equal product at lower price. It should not be about being able to throw more fiscal weight around to make people ignore your evils while you tattle on the lesser evils of your competition.

>>2456489

I agree. That is why I was careful to write "in the traditional sense" in my post. I understand that there are exceptions, but generally speaking "liberal" = democrat. But yes, I understand that not all "Social Liberals" agree with the Democrats, the same way that the so-called Neocon reublicans aren't exactly "conservative".

>>2456489
Maybe if dumb fucks like you would vote for a third party candidate instead of waste your vote completely it wouldn't be such a two party system.

>>2456492
The problem of a competitive market is that even with equality, the advantage lays with whoever can hide a product defect or exploit someone where the rules don't apply. The exploited undocumented worker will still be around dragging down wages until the government changes immigration policy from one that gives special treatment based on what chunk of land someone was born in.

Outsourcing to places where there are no labor laws will also be a problem; innocent people in other nations will starve to give us better products. This is not ethical, and it doesn't create a good image.

The other problem is that a free market creates an adversarial system where the competition is based on appeal rather than actual function and performance. A pair of tits and promises of a bigger penis sell over a fact sheet showing a superior product that isn't wasting its time trying to make arbitrary appeals to emotion.

None of this would be a problem if ethics came first; nobody would be getting the shit end of the stick. Unfortunately, this will not happen any time soon.

>>2456501
Dumb fuck? I'm sorry, which one of us is trying to advocate for argumentum ad populum as a method of governance? Shut your whore mouth, child.

>>2456496
Okay, we're pretty much in agreement then. I see social liberalism as an answer; it's a complete aside from the idiocy of voting.

>>2456476
On the lines of mixing business and government, the government needs to stop appointing former business heads to government positions. The guys running the FDA, USDA and the like should not also have their hands in the pockets of major farms, pharmaceutical companies and businesses that would be affected by different laws.

The FDA is doing more to protect the interests of major farms that suck Monsanto's cock than they are for protecting what is in the food people eat. Many of their regulations are also out dated and should be reviewed, like the fucking raw foods ban. Raiding small farms with swat teams over milk and honey? Really? Shutting down private food clubs because they're eating things you don't approve of?

A lot of government run organizations have too much misplaced power and misuse their power. They aren't listening to the people that are telling them they are pushing too far and too many people simply don't know what's going on to begin with.
The Earth Crunchy groups that want the world to go vegan have a point about scaling back to local farms and that much of the industrialized food production is producing unhealthy things. Their message however is extreme (Go vegan or you'll die) and turns people away.
A better approach in an informative one that doesn't insist on drastic changes or near cult like membership. Tone down the gore, tinfoil hattery, and general 'ZOMG so Evil!' messages and just push the actual information.
More information to the masses, more concern about what's going on, more positive changes in the way things run.

>>2456502

You are operating under the assumption that all people share equal ethical ideals and have the means to exercise those ideas, which sadly is not true in the real world.

Even in the current market, people have free choice. If you want to support local labor, you can buy made-in-your-country products and locally produced foods. However, that is almost always more expensive than looking around for whomever can make what you want at the lowest possible price.

Personally I buy all local produce becasue I prefer the fresher taste, and I make good money right now, so I can afford it. But a few years back when I was in school I was very short on money. I had two choices: live cheap shopping at Wal-Mart, or starve. Even if I wanted to pay a premium, I just didn't have the money. It wasn't an option.

Remember there are lots of people out there who can't even afford the cheapest of the cheap. Who are you to step in and tell them they cannot buy their cheap food and goods? For some people, that would be a death sentance.

Interestingly enough, the same thing applies to minimum wage laws as well. Minimum wage rarely helps anybody. All it does is eliminate the lowest-paying jobs by either destroying them outright, or it forces them underground (illegal labor practicies, often involving immigrants).

>>2456512
I agree for the most part, but I think the extremists have a place. Those who are more moderate and reasonable will examine the argument to an extremity, and then take the saner parts and pass them along.

The fact is I'm not an extremist because I'm a hypocrite. I eat meat from mammals that have all the neurological features to indicate that they feel emotion, including the full on experience of pain and suffering. If I didn't ignore it just like I try to ignore the fact that I live on the backs of starving families in shitty countries (like most Americans) I'd be considered a kook. This country is weird enough that lying to yourself and remaining ignorant is actually considered the norm, and there's enormous pressure not to buck the trend.

>>2456531
No, I realize that the ethics of this society look like a rotting pile of shit. That's my issue. Religion is still accepted as a source of ethics; this is profoundly deranged. I suggest a concrete form of ethics built on the common desire to live that uses a hierarchy with rights placed above utilitarianism.

You have a rather ethnocentric view of the world. The people here forced to buy from the absolute poorest are forced to do so because only 15% of the wealth is owned by 80% of the population. Your example of wal*mart precisely shows the problem; the poor are forced to buy from those who are a commercial success that got to its place by exploiting the poor. They make and maintain their own serfs. 1 in 100 Americans are employed by wal*mart now, and the company is fortune 500 #1. That's the very problem of the system you're a proponent of.

With a consistent form of humanist ethics accepted by a society, it is possible to have business ethics. The problem is most people are afraid of the idea because they don't understand ethics or critical thinking themselves; they just do what they can to help themselves and alter their ethics after to fit the situation. If not, they have a method of absolution from sin that never costs them more than the gains they received from committing the sin. People really aren't honest or decent by nature; we have to keep one another that way and help eachother along with our theory of mind to encourage a stronger sense of altruism.

>>2456535
Some days I just want to say 'fuck this shit' and start my own farm, grow/slaughter my own food and only buy what I want/need to.
There's a few 5 acre lots around here with decent homes on them for 40-50k right now, I just don't have the money for it yet.

I understand the extremists have an ideal to adhere to, but sometimes I wonder if they can't see how they could inform more people by toning it down. Yeah the food system sucks, but the only solution isn't go vegan.

I don't really know anymore. It rubs me the wrong way to see food being controlled like it is.
>You can't have unpasteurized milk, we'll bust the place down like you're selling meth, but here's this box of preservative laden snack cakes that might contain rat feces.

>>2456558

Let me give you a little 'case study' if you will.

I'm sitting in Idaho right now, and I can buy unpasteurized milk from the local co-op staffed by 'extremist' hippies in one little corner of Boise. Because of importing a few rather extreme individuals who did this. Other Californians who moved to the Boise area jumped all over, and now it's spreading to the local populous. You'll actually find more fruit stands and organic products in the middle of buttfuck nowhere Idaho sometimes because the opportunity for local farmers to stay small and turn a profit on quality food was created by extremists.

>>2456553

I have no problem with Wal-Mart. What's funny is how everybody bitches about how they're supposedly so bad, yet at the same time they conveniently ignore the fact that Wal-Mart has created MILLIONS of jobs.

Where is the problem exactly? So long as people are working according to their free will, and spending according to their free will, I have no compliants. Dont' like wal-mart? That's fine, don't shop there or work there!

As for the distrubtion of wealth, I fail to see how that matters at all. There are people in this world who will give their last penny to a stranger in need. There are other people who you can give a handout to, and instead of humbly saying thank you, they demand MORE. Pic related. In the welfare line, flashing $400 sunglasses and a $500 cell phone.....do you think this guy is poor becasue the man keeps him down, or do you think he needs to rethink his priorities, and maybe consider that he could buy his own food if he didn't have that fancy phone?

Don't steal my wealth and spread it around.
Spread around my work ethic instead.

CHEW IRL, oh boy.

>>2456558

>>I don't really know anymore. It rubs me the wrong way to see food being controlled like it is.
>You can't have unpasteurized milk, we'll bust the place down like you're selling meth

This.

I, the consumer, am perfectly capable of making my own decisions. If the farmer is willing to sell me upasteurized milk, and I am willing to buy it, then who is the government to interfere with that? What I put in my body is my responsibility and my choice.

The only problem I can see even remotely related to this is if someone is misrepresenting their product. However, that is already covered under both criminal as well as civil law, so having the FDA involved is redundant and unnessiary.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that the majority of FDA policies are redundant. I am perfectly capable of choosing what I want to buy without the FDA getting involved. Don't want GMO produce? Fine, don't buy it. The same applies to any other food or product for that matter.

>>2456567
I am aware that they do help by establishing things such as the co-op you've mentioned.
The issues isn't really them, it's the people that ignore them because of their polarized views. people pass off the information they give out as nonsense, especially if it's targeting the main sources of food for many people.

>You beef comes from factory farmed cows, loaded up on unnecessary antibiotics, steroids and kept in shit conditions.
STFU, that's a single uncommon instance, it's not like that everywhere.
>Your eggs come hens kept in battery cages on strict unhealthy diets where they hardly see the sun shine and are breathing their own shit particles.
STFU, I buy free range eggs in the clear cartons!
>Oh you mean the hens that are kept in warehouses walking around in their own shit, packed side by side with 'access' to the outside?
>Your 2% milk is nothing more than murky water fortified with vitamins.
>Your prepackaged meals are loaded with preservatives, sugars and have little nutritional content.
>Your meats are injected with salty water and even food coloring to have a better selling weight and to stay fresh looking longer.
LAlalalalalalala, I can't hear you, you're a big fat liar. The FDA/USDA/Government wouldn't allow any of that.

>>2456576
Wow, see people like you are why I believe the country is hopeless. You're honestly too stupid to have an opinion, so you borrow them from AM talk radio. Let me now gut your profoundly idiotic blathering.

>they conveniently ignore the fact that Wal-Mart has created MILLIONS of jobs.
You think those jobs wouldn't exist if wal*mart never was? Seriously, do you think our needs or capacity to be productive is only fulfilled because someone created wal*mart? You should probably stop huffing glue at breakfast time.

>Where is the problem exactly? So long as people are working according to their free will, and spending according to their free will, I have no compliants. Dont' like wal-mart? That's fine, don't shop there or work there!
My problem is that this country is largely filled with unethical individuals who don't care if a child is forced to work an 80 hour week for less than a dollar per day in some shit hole on the other side of the world. You don't seem to have a problem with this either. You, the average American, are abusing yourself and those around you. Consenting does not mean that I don't have the right to rub your nose in it and do what I can to make sure that people like you have less sway over events in the world. You make this world a shittier place, and I'm against that.

>As for the distrubtion of wealth, I fail to see how that matters at all. There are people in this world who will give their last penny to a stranger in need. There are other people who you can give a handout to, and instead of humbly saying thank you, they demand MORE.
It's not being rich or poor that matters, but the ability to gain wealth when it is sought in an equitable way. As it is, owning a business gives you special rights and special tax breaks. You can pay your employees miserable waged by outsourcing them to a nasty country if you have the money to finance that, and you see no issue with this. When it hits home and undocumented workers are left crawling over the boarder because Monsanto and NAFTA raped them, people like you seem to think 'tough shit'. Now they're here, and they offer work for a cheaper wage because they have no rights. Meanwhile right to work states bust up unions and the corporations controlling them assure that workman’s comp claims never go over $250,000 in some cases as a matter of law. It gets to the point where governors are in bed with lobbyist groups exploiting the worst of these corporations who spread inequality world wide.

>Pic related. In the welfare line, flashing $400 sunglasses and a $500 cell phone.....do you think this guy is poor becasue the man keeps him down, or do you think he needs to rethink his priorities, and maybe consider that he could buy his own food if he didn't have that fancy phone?
Who knows; I don't know how he got either of them. Did Glen Beck show you this picture on Faux Snuze? Did his prime time ragefest make you think that one picture showing one poor person with expensive items actually substitutes for real evidence? Do you actually think poor people generally have the education to know what healthy spending habits are?

>Don't steal my wealth and spread it around.
Spread around my work ethic instead.
The exploited families want your share of the products you bought that they were exploited to make. How about we just take that back since you stole it from them, and you can compare your work ethic to theirs?

>>2456591
I agree; the pretentious drivel is annoying. I wish we could do without it. Still, it takes a squeaking wheel of a retard to repeat this shit enough that people actually look at it. The average person won't accept 100% accurate information it seems; that scares them. 50% bullshit is required to make them feel like they 'found the truth'. Otherwise you fuck with their world too fast, and cognitive dissonance kicks in or they feel like they're being dominated by someone and reject it for the sake of their egos. Sad shit, I know, but that's how people seem to work.

>>2456597

>>My problem is that this country is largely filled with unethical individuals who don't care if a child is forced to work an 80 hour week for less than a dollar per day in some shit hole on the other side of the world. You don't seem to have a problem with this either.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

Notice how in all my posts I talk about FREE choice and free will.

If you are describing a scenario where a child is FORCED to work...blah..blah... then of course I am 100% against that. Forced labor is called slavery, and it is illegal not only in the US, but elsewhere in the world as well. On the other hand, I do not have a problem if that child CHOOSES to work that job. Please get that straight, as it is dreadfully important.

>>2456626

Oh I get it. The child CHOOSES it, because there is NO OTHER KIND OF WORK AVAILABLE FOR THEM.

0/10

Also:

Pic VERY related.

>>2456626
Oh no, they have 'choice'. What happens is their government ignores building infrastructure and taking care of their own people. From there a large American business offers to do a small part of this while offering shit wages, which is better than nothing. The locals take the jobs, and the corporation makes their society dependent on their existence. No free will was violated, but some people sure got raped because later the company has the ability to suppress equality through abusing their monopoly. Take a look at what's happening right now in this country; it's not too different.

>>2456603

I have no idea who Glen Beck is. I don't watch the news becasue I don't want someone else forming my opinions for me. I found that pic using a google image search after I read about it on Reddit.

As for spreading around the work ethic, you seem to be accusing me of stealing. Tell me, what did I steal, exactly? Previously I thought we were having a reasonable discussion, and now it seems clear that you're just name-calling and bitching about something you clearly have a strong opinion about, but know little of the details about. Since you seem to be clarivoyant, why don't you simply pick the winning lottery numbers and use all that money to reimburse all the "expoloited people" in the word.

>>2456643
>>I don't want someone else forming my opinions for me
>>I read about it on Reddit

Pro trolling there, son.

Pic REALLY REALLY REEEEALLY RELATED

>>2456643
0/10
like seriously

>>2456639

I realize their situation sucks, don't get me wrong--but a job is better than no job and no food.

I agree it would be fantastic if we all lived in a rainbow utopia with no poverty and no crime, but sadly that's not the way the world works.

If you have a solution to the problem then lets hear it.

>>2456651

I know that you probably won't listen given that this is 4chan after all, but I honestly don't know who Glen Beck is. I don't watch TV. I guess I'll have to go google him.

I'm horrible with actors too, I just don't care about that stuff.

>>2456658

Fuck, now I'm pissed that you seem to think that I would agree with some kind of fundie Christian windbag.

>>2456652

I'm not the one you quoted, but I came here just to vent.

Yeah, we're ALL screwed. The war was lost thousands of years before we were born. We can't win, I get that.

Do you know why? Because of people like you, who go around saying how privileged we are, because a thousand years ago, we walked around in shit. Yeah, WE KNOW. This world isn't about compassion or ethics, it's about survival of the fittest getting ahead at all costs.

However, there are some people here who aren't going to go the whole "Oh I accept it as good, because I can't fight it" route.

>>2456643
The picture you used and the exact argument you used have been pushed by Fox and Friends for weeks now. The fact that you accepted it illustrates that you don't understand the nature of poverty or its relationship with education. You're also kinda shot on what the words 'representative sampling' mean.

>As for spreading around the work ethic, you seem to be accusing me of stealing. Tell me, what did I steal, exactly?
You stole the fruit of hours of working in stifling sweatshops by buying from companies who use this method to aquire wealth. Sure, all of us do it, the difference is that you don't have a problem with it. These exploited individuals already work harder than you, and they get shafted for it. The same goes for the migrant worker; they work all day, but the guy in the suit gets 10x their wage because daddy or a bank handed them the money to do it. Consent can be coerced, and not all wealth is earned honestly.

>Previously I thought we were having a reasonable discussion, and now it seems clear that you're just name-calling and bitching about something you clearly have a strong opinion about,
You dishonest little fucktard! Whether I call you a cumguzzling gutter whore or not doesn't change the rest of what I said, as saying that you were conceived by weak seed when your mother squatted in hobo semen is not something that any arguments depend on.

>but know little of the details about.
Have you attended UN-NGO conventions on global poverty and talked with people trying to identify the causes and solutions? Ever strung up the head of UNESCO by exposing the essential dishonesty of the organization? I sure have. Been to any orphanages in Mexico? Have a disabled little bro adopted out of sleeping in his own shit? I sure do. Shut your whore mouth; I willingly live only a little above the poverty line to fight for this cause.

>Since you seem to be clarivoyant, why don't you simply pick the winning lottery numbers and use all that money to reimburse all the "expoloited people" in the word.
WTFBBQ? Again, stop huffing glue; I never made any claims of clairvoyance. If I'm being irrational in the structure of my arguments, point it out. Otherwise I'm just going to mock you until you address something that matters, dummy.

>>2456668
>>education and poverty

>>2456674

Give up man, he's never gonna put on the glasses.

>>2456665
I am willing to lose my life fighting for a cause that I can't win. I've already given up many of my standards of living for it, and dedicated piles of my time. I know what a hopeless situation looks like, but that doesn't mean I won't try anyhow.

>>2456680

Good luck man.

>>2456677
Nice suit he's wearing there... he's well groomed too. He may be dirt poor or wealthy and making a statement; individual pictures never have great context.

>>2456679
They need to be given the opportunity first. I spend a whole lot of time trying to get people to realize what's going on. Once they've had the chance, they have no excuse if it becomes necessary to get them out of the way later.

>>2456692

I understand that. However I am telling you right now: There are those that find out the truth and then they will desperately find another excuse to deny it furiously and call it "spoiled rich white kid emo shit". Ironically enough, I am not rich.

I know this one guy, he knew the truth. Then he went all, "Oh our lives are only bad, because we are whining about it. If we stop whining about it, it will go away."

Frankly, I gave up on them a long time ago. If these shits like being oppressed so much, then let them be. If they wanted freedom so bad, then they wouldn't be kissing the asses of the elite and kicking the critics in the ribs. If they want freedom so bad, then they can fight for it themselves. Frankly, they were bred for this, they're not even worth it.

I would like to apologize in advance for offending you too, as you still seem to be in the "I want to help humanity" mode.

>>2456692
>>2456680
>>2456679
>>2456677
>>2456674
>>2456668
>>2456665
>>2456663
>>2456658
>>2456652
>>2456651
>>2456650
>>2456643
>>2456639
>>2456635
>>2456631
>>2456626
>>2456603
>>2456600
>>2456597
>>2456576
>>2456553
>>2456531
>>2456502
>>2456492
Take it to /new/ faggots. This is a thread on a food board not an ideological politics pissing contest.

>>2456668

So I used a photo that's also been on the news. So what? That doesn't mean I agree with what the news media says.

>>If I'm being irrational in the structure of my arguments, point it out

You have no idea what products I own or what I do with my time, as I haven't stated it. However despite this, you ASSUME that I buy things made in sweatshops and that I'm some kind of a lazy bum.

...so either you're making shit up, or you think you have some kind of magical powers.


To be honest, I dress like a bum. Most of my wardrobe is old clothing, much of it family hand-me-downs. I simply am not into the whole "consumerism" thing. I don't give a shit if my clothing is "in style" or not. I have never owned a pair of sunglasses (why? what's the point?) I am neither rich nor privaledged, but I made things work for myself. I put myself through college working as a waiter becasue my parents could not afford it. I currently work two jobs, one normal one, and a side business of my own that I started with $500 out of my college apartment, and now does about $1mil/year in gross receipts. I have never taken a paycheck from that business (yet), but I do have 4 employees, all of which are right here in the USA. So please, before you label me as yet another "child of the consumer age" you might ask me before assuming that I am part of the problem. I provide 4 jobs, right here in the USA, and my products are 100% made in the USA. You see why I'm mad when you assume through your magial clarivoyant powers that I'm a "sweatshop abuser"

I agree with you that employment abuse is a problem the world over. However, my claim is that trusting to "ethics" to fix the problem is a pipe dream. Ethics has been around since the beginning of time, and while it sounds great on paper it simply doesn't work. You can be as altruistic as you like but there will always be someone there to abuse the system.

Don't give a man a fish, teach him how to fish.

>>2456720

But...you ARE agreeing with their message. That photo IS their message.

You're just like a conservative who pretends to be libertarian, because the conservatives have a bad rap.

>>2456728

What message do you think I am agreeing with exactly?

>>2456716
I've been in this mode since it was a major source of depression even when I was a child. I rage on people mostly for the reaction; people kiss ass to get themselves ahead and out from under the boot crushing them. Their wealth is their validation, and they don't think much of those left behind. It takes calling them horrible people to get them out of that rut. Sometimes it takes months of breaking them so they can admit that you were right when you're not around anymore. I see it happen often enough when I turn around. Anyhow, the point is that the pissy side of me that you see is largely for that purpse. That and a steaming cup of rage feels good sometimes :)

I don't blame you for where you sit. I have those days when living in society is bad enough that I just wake up with a glass of cheap whiskey and don't stop until I pass out. It's not that we can all fight all the time, but at least people like you seem willing to stand up if it ever seemed like we had a chance. We're all so disenfranchised in North America. Some of us cope by making ourselves what we hate and kissing the ass of those who's boot we're under in the hope that we can get out. Others of us are silently resentful and can't sit down to a family diner anymore because we can't stand the flavor of taint hair anymore. Some of us are very silently subversive, and we're looking for a way to get the rest of us out. I just hope with the later has some success, the other two will follow in a chain.

>>2456739

>>I rage on people mostly for the reaction;

Oh, so you're a troll. I should have seen that coming, but you got me good.

8/10

>>2456734

SOMUCHFAIL.JPG

The message that welfare bums are buying expensive products with money that is supposed to help the get back on their feet temporarily. The message that welfare is subsidizing laziness.

THAT is what they are saying. You ARE agreeing with the message, doesn't matter what shiny wrapper or hard metal casing it comes in.

Stop trying to be all "ooh look at me I'm soooo non-conformist even though I share the same ideas as the people I supposedly don't agree with". It's so 1995.

>>2456739

"Viva la revolucion!~", said this poster sarcasticly, bitter at the truth.

>>2456720
>So I used a photo that's also been on the news. So what? That doesn't mean I agree with what the news media says.

But you're whoring the sound bite that goes with it. "This poor guy has a cell phone and expensive sunglasses near the first lady, poor people deserve to be poor and the guberment is trying to stop that!"

I deconstructed that view, and why coming to any significant point from that photo is BS. You've chosen to ignore the parts where I address this and focus on my comment as to where the source came from, which is the very minor part of what I'm saying. That's what cognitive dissonance looks like when it kicks in; remember the experience for later m'kay?

>You have no idea what products I own or what I do with my time, as I haven't stated it. However >despite this, you ASSUME that I buy things made in sweatshops and that I'm some kind of a lazy bum.
>...so either you're making shit up, or you think you have some kind of magical powers.

So rather than asking me how I know, you come to your own conclusions and say that I'm either psychic or crazy? You must not get scientific methodology very well; inquisitive observation and experimentation work a lot better than fact fitting based on current knowledge. You can never find out that you don't know what's going on if you just patch in answers from what you already know. In my case I know that the vast majority of consumer goods come from countries with extremely poor labor standards that keep their workers in poverty. I am well aware of Wal*Mart's pattern of turning down contracts from manufacturers that can't promise a cheaper product every single year, with China being the best that they import from. I am aware that that you shop at Wal*Mart. I'd be willing to wager both of my testes against one of your pubic hairs that you have a lot of things made in very bad places by very poor people.

>>2456744

>>welfare bums are buying expensive products with money that is supposed to help the get back on their feet temporarily. The message that welfare is subsidizing laziness.

Ok, now we're getting somewhere.

I do agree in that statement, with the caveat that it only happens in SOME cases, not all. I realize that not everyone on welfare abuses the system. However, it happens often enough that it is a problem.

That photo is a great example of it, but there are many, many, more of them. The all-too-common food stamp thread here on /ck/ is another excellent example. Pic is related as well, though not in the US this time.

Anyway, I fail to see what is so offensive about that claim? I did not advocate eliminating welfare, I was simply pointing out that handing out money does not solve the problem. It's going to take a lot more than "wealth sharing" to fix the problem. Education is only the tip of the iceberg.

>>2456743
Thanks. It's a method I've been honing, and it draws people in to discussions. I'm a troll, but it's for a cause other than just, 'the lulz'

>>2456720
You've got a large paragraph or two I'm still working on the reply for; I'll deconstruct those over a series of posts as I write them.

>>2456759
>>2456757

Hahahaha oh you two.

The problem isn't even welfare, the need for welfare, the abusers, etc.

The problem is even older than the system itself. It goes beyond politics and human welfare.

I'll let you guys figure it out. I'll give you a hint: Has something to do with existentialism and the earliest civilizations.

is this about raw milk or something? I consider the act of consuming raw milk a form of modern natural selection. Those who partake in it are more likely to get sick and die and thus I approve!

>>2456766

Actually, that would only happen if the raw milk was from a factory. Y'know, they need pasteurization for long term storage and stuff.

Or if the cow was living under factory farm conditions/poorly managed farm of any kind.

>>2456769

69 get!

Also, I meant to add that as long as you raise the cow under sanitary conditions and actually care for the cow, etc. then you should be fine? Europe is doing fine, so...

Yeah the whole pasteurization issue is because Big Agri needs it.