Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #106269

Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 04 May 2017 20:45:39 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> On 5/4/17, 12:38 PM, in article op.yzqbii15js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 04 May 2017 20:19:26 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/4/17, 12:01 PM, in article op.yzp9s7dhjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
>>> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 04 May 2017 19:22:28 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/4/17, 11:10 AM, in article op.yzp7e8ozjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
>>>>> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> I thought it was the same the world over.  Right wing is capitalist,
>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>> favour business, rich folk, etc.  Left wing is communist, they steal
>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>> money and spend it on people who don't work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the US both parties are paid for and beholden to the wealthy. The
>>>>>>> Democrats give more lip service and actual do work to support the people
>>>>>>> more, but in the end both support massive wealth redistribution to very
>>>>>>> rich. This can be shown by their voting records and the ever-growing
>>>>>>> income
>>>>>>> inequality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you have right wing and more right wing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Basically, yes.
>>>>
>>>> Good for you.  The UK is more like Russia.
>>>>
>>>>>>> So those who can't work or whatever do get some crumbs, but most of the
>>>>>>> money taken from us goes to the wealthiest one tenth of one percent. The
>>>>>>> wealth redistribution is absolutely insane.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is also why so many in the US deny basic climate science... it is just
>>>>>>> another (and huge) way to provide socialism to the rich.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or maybe they're clever enough to realise we are not affecting the
>>>>>> climate.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not see denial of evidence, data, and science as being "clever" in any
>>>>> way... other than as a clever way to push even more socialism for the rich.
>>>>> And in the US it works... something like half our Senators deny basic
>>>>> science for the sake of helping the wealthy.
>>>>
>>>> bELIVING IN SHITE LIKE CLIMATE CHANGE IS AS BAD AS BEING RELIGIOUS.
>>>>
>>>> Shit, caps lock, can't be bothered rewriting.
>>>
>>> I accept science and the data / evidence that backs it and deny the
>>> anti-science nonsense people use to promote socialism for the rich. I did
>>> not know you were one of the ones pushing such socialism. For me it is fine
>>> that people disagree on if we should socialize the costs of using ancient
>>> stores of carbon, but I wish those who pushed for us to do so would be
>>> direct and admit that is what they are pushing for. The fact they use
>>> science denial to get to that goal shows they cannot really support the
>>> socialism they are backing.
>>
>> It's nothing to do with socialism.
>
> Socializing the costs of using ancient stores of carbon clearly has a LOT to
> do with socialism... though it is for the rich.

Who said they were socialized?  Carbon credits hit COMPANIES.

>> In fact it's the capitalists who "deny" climate change.  It's the left wing
>> greenie treehuggers who think we have the power to change the climate more
>> than that huge nuclear reaction in the sky.
>
> Who do you think said man-made global climate change has a bigger impact
> than the sun?

The greenie morons, like I just said.  Please learn to read basic English.

> Comes down to you will go to science denial to back socialism for the rich.

I prefer common sense over what anyone says.  The FACT is that the climate has ALWAYS changed NATURALLY in the past.  I see no evidence mankind has altered that.

> That is pretty much 100% predictable in such conversations. Could be you do
> not even know you are doing this... some are actually naïve enough to
> believe the oil industry and the like who push such nonsense.

I believe what makes sense.

-- 
What's black and white and rolls down the Boardwalk?
A nigger and a seagull fighting over a French Fry.

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 17:42 +0100
  Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 10:39 -0700
    Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 19:10 +0100
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 11:22 -0700
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 20:01 +0100
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 12:19 -0700
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 20:38 +0100
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 12:45 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 21:48 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 14:34 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-05-04 17:40 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 22:52 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 16:10 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 15:25 -0700

csiph-web