• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Opinions on Jill Stein?

tessaesque said:
You realize as a whole it would take less than a week for the govt. to spend $50 billion flat out, right? And $50 billion doesn't justify the several trillion it would cost to implement all of Stein's platform.
Click to expand...

Verax said:
I've never understood this argument, "we spend lots of money so who cares", that's just sticking your head in the ground, its apathy.
Click to expand...

I don't think that that's the argument that Tessaesque was making. The point, as I see it, is that you cannot cut a few billion in spending in one place, increase spending somewhere else by several trillions, and claim that that is saving money.

Ms. Stein's whole platform is based on utter, unimaginable ignorance about basic math. She proposes programs that would cost many trillions of dollars, and which, in and of themselves, would seriously suppress the economy, and she proposes to pay for these scams with cuts that would come nowhere close to doing so.
 
Verax said:
Your only argument is to attack a mistake I made and already fixed because you cannot argue anything else, weak.
Click to expand...

It sure didn't look to me like an honest mistake. It looked to me like a deliberate lie, that you somehow imagined you would not be called out on.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
It sure didn't look to me like an honest mistake. It looked to me like a deliberate lie, that you somehow imagined you would not be called out on.
Click to expand...

Yes, I meant to say that the U.S. spends 750 BILLION dollars a year on fossil fuel subsidies and I didn't think anyone would notice. :roll:
 
Bob Blaylock said:
I don't think that that's the argument that Tessaesque was making. The point, as I see it, is that you cannot cut a few billion in spending in one place, increase spending somewhere else by several trillions, and claim that that is saving money.

Ms. Stein's whole platform is based on utter, unimaginable ignorance about basic math. She proposes programs that would cost many trillions of dollars, and which, in and of themselves, would seriously suppress the economy, and she proposes to pay for these scams with cuts that would come nowhere close to doing so.
Click to expand...

We spend trillions on defense to take over countries and secure oil. We spend almost a trillion in oil subsidies over a decade. We are wholly dependent on fossil fuels that are becoming more expensive every year and will continue to do so at a much higher rate in the near future. Fossil fuels are a dead end from an economic standpoint as well as environmentally.

This is a big problem that needs fixed, do you understand?

Peak oil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The sooner we begin to transition away from this the better, we are already extremely late.
 
Verax said:
We spend trillions on defense to take over countries and secure oil. We spend almost a trillion in oil subsidies over a decade. We are wholly dependent on fossil fuels that are becoming more expensive every year and will continue to do so at a much higher rate in the near future. Fossil fuels are a dead end from an economic standpoint as well as environmentally.

This is a big problem that needs fixed, do you understand?

Peak oil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The sooner we begin to transition away from this the better, we are already extremely late.
Click to expand...

Which countries have we taken over?
 
Verax said:
We spend trillions on defense to take over countries and secure oil. We spend almost a trillion in oil subsidies over a decade. We are wholly dependent on fossil fuels that are becoming more expensive every year and will continue to do so at a much higher rate in the near future. Fossil fuels are a dead end from an economic standpoint as well as environmentally.

This is a big problem that needs fixed, do you understand?
Click to expand...

Whether it is or not, you're never going to fix it with bad math. To attempt the “solutions” that have been proposed by Ms. Stein and yourself, would certainly cause much more harm than the problems that they are supposed to address.
 
Verax said:
We spend trillions on defense to take over countries and secure oil. We spend almost a trillion in oil subsidies over a decade. We are wholly dependent on fossil fuels that are becoming more expensive every year and will continue to do so at a much higher rate in the near future. Fossil fuels are a dead end from an economic standpoint as well as environmentally.

This is a big problem that needs fixed, do you understand?

Peak oil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The sooner we begin to transition away from this the better, we are already extremely late.
Click to expand...

Round up some investors, start green energy compamy and put the oil companies out of business. If it's such a great idea, what are you waiting on?
 
In general, I support Stein. While I may be an anti-capitalist, Stein seems to be in the right place with her views. It doesn't matter wither peak oil is a reality or not(Though I whole wholly believe it is, just look at gas prices and the new lengths oil companies have to go in order to find fuels.), as long as there's any chance it is and our economy may suddenly collapse, we need something to fall back on.
 
tessaesque said:
Which countries have we taken over?
Click to expand...

Are you joking? Afghanistan, Iraq.

We meddle with Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Bahrain, Syria, Yemen, Algeria, Oman, Egypt, Qatar, Kuwait.
 
Verax said:
Are you joking? Afghanistan, Iraq.

We meddle with Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Bahrain, Syria, Yemen, Algeria, Oman, Egypt, Qatar, Kuwait.
Click to expand...

We run Afghanistan and Iraq now?

Did you know that it was India and China who ended up with the lucrative deal with Iraq's government regarding oil sales...after we (the U.S.) spent our own money to rebuild and modernize their dilapidated pipe lines?

As for the rest of your list, the majority of the world has meddled in the middle east lately. Why? Because the middle east is trying to tear itself apart. Uprisings and instability tend to expand beyond country borders and we're a global economy. It's must more complex than "Holy jeebus! They gots da oil!".
 
Last edited:
tessaesque said:
We run Afghanistan and Iraq now?

Did you know that it was India and China who ended up with the lucrative deal with Iraq's government regarding oil sales...after we (the U.S.) spent our own money to rebuild and modernize their dilapidated pipe lines?
Click to expand...

Good point, I guess we should stop throwing away money in that region and transition away from it.
 
Lol I feel like I'm teaching a Kindergarten class, do you guys know anything?
 
Verax said:
Lol I feel like I'm teaching a Kindergarten class, do you guys know anything?
Click to expand...

This is the most ironic post you've included in this thread thus far.
 
tessaesque said:
This is the most ironic post you've included in this thread thus far.
Click to expand...

I have refuted every single point you guys have made with facts. I have refreshed your memory about Afghanistan and Iraq. I have given you a list of countries that we influence through various means with goal of securing oil. I have given you sources to all this information.

You have brought nothing to this argument, so what exactly do you think is going on here?
 
Verax said:
I have refuted every single point you guys have made with facts. I have refreshed your memory about Afghanistan and Iraq. I have given you a list of countries that we influence through various means with goal of securing oil. I have given you sources to all this information.

You have brought nothing to this argument, so what exactly do you think is going on here?
Click to expand...

No you haven't. You've posted links to Wikipedia and made statements you've continually had to re-quantify. I don't know what definition of "fact" you're using, but the one I've got doesn't match what you're presenting.
 
tessaesque said:
No you haven't. You've posted links to Wikipedia and made statements you've continually had to re-quantify. I don't know what definition of "fact" you're using, but the one I've got doesn't match what you're presenting.
Click to expand...

I made a single wrong statement that I fixed, you could not have found a smaller hook to hang your hat on. Links to Wikipedia contain links to the actual original research. I am not your paid tutor who's job it is to walk you through every step of basic research. If you don't know how to do these things you probably shouldn't be making arguments in forums.
 
Verax said:
I made a single wrong statement that I fixed, you could not have found a smaller hook to hang your hat on. Links to Wikipedia contain links to the actual original research. I am not your paid tutor who's job it is to walk you through every step of basic research. If you don't know how to do these things you probably shouldn't be making arguments in forums.
Click to expand...

I don't post opinions and call them facts.

When I do, you can lecture me about making arguments on forums.
 
tessaesque said:
I don't post opinions and call them facts.

When I do, you can lecture me about making arguments on forums.
Click to expand...

You got destroyed, next time just stop posting rather than trying to re-frame it through bull****.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom