Elliott

I'm sorry if you already explained this, but by all contexts you obviously don't mean outside of this time he spends on this forum, even in his videos he's not like that. We don't know how he is in daily life, you don't believe he could be different outside the forum because of the consistency over ten years? Most people behave differently 1.) Online and 2.) In a role of authority, you don't believe this could be the case because it's been 10 years?

But, this is his forum: if he said these things in a private friend group, I would agree. Most people put on a performative mask in dynamics like this, think of a manager at a job. Could it not just be insecurity of someone in a position of power?

I dont know what will happen in the region. If Israel elects a sensible leader, and Democrats win 2028 in the u.s. and work with Iran, there should be great peace in the region. If Israel keeps electing nazis; Iran will keep funding terrorism. If Israel keeps attacking Lebanon, Iran will keep bombing Israel directly or through proxy. I see no likely scenario where the current Iranian regime is toppled, the only way is through peace and then internal Iranian evolution or, peace for a while and then the West meddles and supports a revolution.

The U.S. now uses more renewable energy than natural gas, you're the one losing. Even China is on the wagon.

Thomas and Alito are almost 80, and have had medical issues: good chance they eventually die. By the end of the next 2 presidential cycles, they'll be almost 90. It wouldn't surprise me if Roberts would retire in that time either, if we keep the harassment up on him; he's 71, 2036 he'll be 81.

Supreme Court Justices Alito and Thomas not planning to retire this year, sources say https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-justices-alito-thomas-not-retiring-sources-say/ https://kalshi.com/markets/controls/senate-winner/controls-2026 Democrats would have the majority in SCOTUS soon(2029?) if we win the Senate this year and Justices don't die.

Think of it through a utopian lens, the original quote is from a fictional novel.

Yes, but I support disproportionate taxes on the wealthy. I support them being possible because some could, and have been relatively good. Many do better than what good would come from a contemporary democratic nation, Bill Gates for example, Yvonne Chouniard, George Soros, Jeff Bezos, the list goes on.

I would be interested in any insights you have toward 'my big ego' if you ever want to interject anywhere, I do actually like your psych comments. Not that I care that I have a big ego or am aggressive....

Most of what you're referring to as charity in the West is helping the mentally ill, they're people incapable of functioning in modern society. The ones that are just down on their luck are helped OUT of poverty by this "charity".

Allowing immigration is also a diplomatic strategy. Immigration goes both ways, immigrants often return to their homeland which builds ties with the country that allowed immigration. In the modern silicon age, diplomacy is the most valuable asset a nation can have, traditional imperialistic military campaigns are not as fruitful as they used to be when trying to obtain needed resources, as seen with Iran, apparently this wasn't learned in Vietnam fighting over their rubber? The countries that allow immigration, no country in the discussion has had open borders, it's all been monitored immigration, no country is ran by all hippies. These countries gain diplomatic stock even from non-emigrating countries through the optics and sentiment, especially when you're discussing Europe and America that now NEED African resources and previously colonized and enslaved Africans.... But we also need middle eastern resources, and despite what your dyke Marie Le Pen tells you, she does not have a big enough dick to manhandle Arabs out of their oil or gas. Imagine the West supporting Israel and being racist toward middle easterners, the West would be third world countries in 20 years and China would be enslaving us in sweat shops. Give critical thinking a try, fellas. It won't hurt, I promise.

You're actually doing what you're accusing wokies of doing, "black and white thinking", you're using dichotomous thinking by generalizing all 'progressives' as the idiot parrots you run across. The idiot parrot wokies are obviously still stage blue or red, think most minorities, but there's actually some intelligent intellectuals that actually understand the dynamics instead of just being emotionally reactive like the idiot wokies(usually the affected minorities, but also some general bandwagonners), Many, probably most wokies are blue or red, I would guess 70%. 'Woke' is absolutely green though and there are absolutely some very intelligent wokies that are green, these are usually the ones that promote the novel concepts through academic institutions, the research papers or treatises in fields like sociology. Bernie Sanders might be blue, i'm not sure though to be honest, i don't care to research him enough to know, his messaging is blue though, that i've heard.

Conservative is generally a submissive position, even for 90% of straight white men. Working class straight white men support rich people or religious leaders dominating them.

Democracy is how the human race evolves though, even through mistakes like Trump people like some conservatives that supported him have learned from this lesson. Having democracy does not solve everything on day one, humans are in an adolescent stage but adolescents learn primarily through experience; good and bad ones. Another point, a dictator would be a dictator out of the "retarded people" still a "retard", retarded democracy versus retarded dictatorships. Dictatorships can have an indirect growth impact when it foments a revolution against the dictatorship, but in general it infantilizes and to stay on point, retards the people. Democracy allows experimentation which promotes real growth for humanity and individuals. But yes, the human race is still retarded.

I agree with the sentiment of your post but disagree with the semantics, it's not authoritarian to arrest murderers or members of murderous gangs just because there's a lot of them. I don't see Bukele as authoritarian, Biden's OSHA vaccine mandate or Europe's and Australia's vaccine mandates were more authoritarian, and I supported the mandates.....

No I didn't, I believe I laid out a very clear, practical, common sense reason: it helps everyone even Musk. I only gave logical considerations, perhaps you didn't read. I didn't say that nor insinuate that, I explicitly said "reallocate means through taxes away from retarded ideas like colonizing Mars and racing China on data mining, reallocatong means through taxes toward feeding starving babies" then I went on to show how relatively little it would cost, then I went on to tell about the knock-on effects that would bring about more prosperity to ALL the people of the world. Apparently you're just here for attention. Goodbye.

You're changing the subject. Your argumentation is like saying we shouldn't have public fire departments or border security, 'you should just carry a bucket of water yourself and just patrol the border around your yard', tHaT's yOuR oPiNiOn. We're talking about the reasons for taxing and you're trying to change the subject because you see that you were being stupid. You yourself, everyone globally, society, would benefit from helping the destitute, as I already laid out how, yet you think you should get a free ride on it and gain all the benefit, but only us wokies pay for it. You're asleep. We already have the resources and we don't do it, nor will ai help in a meaningful way especially when you consider the net effects that will derive from conflict it is already causing through energy and mineral greed to create it. Technological advancement has almost always come with an imperialistic like exploitation and plundering, with AI this is looking like armed conflict in Africa for minerals and obviously the usual foreign meddling and corruption that brings destruction and war. "Conflicts in Africa over critical minerals—including rare earths and essential metals like coltan, cobalt, and lithium—are driven by the global demand for electronics and green energy. The crisis centers on the illicit extraction, smuggling, and weaponization of these resources to finance armed groups, warlords, and regional geopolitical disputes." This drives terrorism, emigration, and the spread of armed conflict. You can't only look at the fairytale positive effects of AI, you have to look at reality.

Those are corporate banks. I'm puting you back on ignore, bye. Cash on hand is cash they own, not your savings. Banks loan out 9/10 dollars they receive, storing only 40-10% of your savings, they loan your money out, they don't make money by storing your money and then paying you interest! You think they're like Pokémon geeks but with benjamins? "No, a bank does not count depositors' accounts as its own "cash on hand." [1, 2] On a bank's balance sheet, customer deposits and cash on hand are separated into two completely different categories. [1] Here is how they are classified: Customer Deposits are Liabilities [1] The Reason: The money in your account belongs to you, not the bank. The Accounting: The bank owes this money back to you upon request. Therefore..." Global "Broad Money (M2/M3): ≈ $100 - $130 trillion (includes all physical cash, checking/savings accounts, and easily liquidated short-term deposits)" You geniuses think school.teachers are sitting on this or something? Like where the fuck do you think this actual money is, Mars? Global population 8.3 billion, that's $15k for every individual on earth, every starving African baby, you think has 15k under their mattress, when it costs 15c a day to feed them yet they're starving. That's 266 years of food for every person on earth. "The U.S. federal government holds approximately $893 billion in operating cash and other monetary assets." "Chinese Central Bank Balance Sheet: The total size of the PBoC's balance sheet represents approx. $6.75 trillion, which includes a mix of government deposits, claims on banks, and foreign assets" (this bank is not on that list I posted, it's a government bank not corporate)

$40 trillion, and that's only the top 10% of corporations. Many of the biggest corporations in the world are private. https://companiesmarketcap.com/companies-with-the-highest-cash-on-hand/ I said for 50 years, at $40 trillion, that's $800 BILLION a year not $100. By your number I OVERESTIMATED how much is needed. We're literally already starting another great depression. That's not just people starving, that's what caused the second world war, and this time 1.)Iran, 2.)Israel, 3.)Korea, 4.)Pakistan, 5.)India, 6.) Russia have nuclear MISSILES, ww2 we only had a bomb you drop from a plane, you saw what Iran just did to the great 'Iron Dome' in Israel right?

The top 10% of corporations alone have 40 trillion dollars in cash sitting in vaults. For context, it alone would house and feed every person on earth currently below the poverty line for the next 50 years not factoring in simple interest on the funds. The gripe is not about taking 10 billion in cash from Musks, the gripe is about reallocating capital through taxation away from retarded projects like colonizing Mars or beating the Chinese in data mining and moving it toward helping starving kids. This is also not a zero sum game, raising everyone out of poverty increases the population that would be active in science and invention and not just by the number in poverty but also by the number that is affected by conflict and crime that results from poverty, a peaceful world would almost certainly give rise to much greater invention and ideas, let alone peace, look at what we spend on defense which is only because there are desperate people needing to do desperate things. The u.s. defense budget alone is 2 trillion, it only costs 50 billion a year to feed everyone in poverty.

Shut up, idiot "Evolution of the Term Misogynistic Subculture: The term has evolved to describe a specific online community that often promotes extreme misogyny, victimhood, and, in some cases, violence against women and sexually active men. "The opposite of excell" Blaming Women: Incels are often characterized by their tendency to blame women for their lack of romantic or sexual success. "A person (typically straight male) who is unable to get a romantic or sexual relationship, and blames the opposite sex for it. Bitter against the opposite sex." https://www.reddit.com/answers/c1303645-61ab-4465-b16d-736e122f2dbb/?q=What+does+incel+mean&source=SERP&upstreamCID=497c688c-c570-4529-a64e-bd212068874a&upstreamIID=2f4aeb78-e566-4bc6-8e4a-56fa104ac1f3&upstreamQ=What+does+incel+mean&upstreamQID=45728714-aaf9-456c-964d-bd57422adb18

You're clueless "Evolution of the Term Misogynistic Subculture: The term has evolved to describe a specific online community that often promotes extreme misogyny, victimhood, and, in some cases, violence against women and sexually active men. "The opposite of excell" Blaming Women: Incels are often characterized by their tendency to blame women for their lack of romantic or sexual success. "A person (typically straight male) who is unable to get a romantic or sexual relationship, and blames the opposite sex for it. Bitter against the opposite sex." https://www.reddit.com/answers/c1303645-61ab-4465-b16d-736e122f2dbb/?q=What+does+incel+mean&source=SERP&upstreamCID=497c688c-c570-4529-a64e-bd212068874a&upstreamIID=2f4aeb78-e566-4bc6-8e4a-56fa104ac1f3&upstreamQ=What+does+incel+mean&upstreamQID=45728714-aaf9-456c-964d-bd57422adb18

So dumb https://www.britannica.com/topic/incel "incel, member of an online subculture of primarily heterosexual men who identify as being unable to have romantic or sexual relationships. This self-described inability to form attachments is often expressed as grievance toward women. Incel subculture has been associated with misogyny, extremism, rape culture, and expressions and acts of violence."

Wikipedia "An incel (/ˈɪnsɛl/ ⓘ IN-sel),[1] also known as the involuntary celibate, is an online subculture of mostly male and heterosexual[2] people who define themselves as unable to find a romantic or sexual partner despite desiring one. They often blame, objectify, and denigrate women as a result.[3][4][5] The term inspired a subculture that rose to prominence during the 2010s, after being influenced by and associated with misogynist terrorists such as Elliot Rodger and Alek Minassian.[6]"

Get a grip, you're wrong, you've been proven wrong.