Upload
Login or register

saturated

Last status update:
-
Gender: male
Age: 21
Date Signed Up:2/09/2013
Last Login:11/30/2016
Stats
Comment Ranking:#9723
Highest Content Rank:#2530
Highest Comment Rank:#2337
Content Thumbs: 2036 total,  2209 ,  173
Comment Thumbs: 2882 total,  3282 ,  400
Content Level Progress: 36% (36/100)
Level 120 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 121 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry
Comment Level Progress: 75% (75/100)
Level 226 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 227 Comments: Mind Blower
Subscribers:0
Content Views:88088
Times Content Favorited:105 times
Total Comments Made:1417
FJ Points:426

latest user's comments

#11 - Picture 11/12/2016 on Pro Trump title +3
#7 - Picture 11/10/2016 on dumb cunt 0
#12 - I'm not huge into politics but a lot of people I know say thin…  [+] (35 replies) 10/27/2016 on trump v hillary +15
User avatar
#67 - opusfreiling (10/27/2016) [-]
Actually for a really fun time, watch the Ken Burns PBS documentary on Frank Lloyd Wright And All Shall Be Made Clear!!!

(norly pay attention to the stuff about his personality)
(damned jewtube removed their longer version, had to find it on another site)
picamov.com/play.php?movie=tt0144937

www.pbs.org/show/frank-lloyd-wright/
www.pbs.org/video/2184181445/
www.pbs.org/video/2184181447/
(darn they don't have the one about his spending habits, but pretty similar too, lol)
anyway, my torrent link is dead so you'll need to find a new one for further exploration.
User avatar
#13 - ganisphel (10/27/2016) [-]
The best advice to get information on these things with no bias is to look it up yourself so then you know the info is not from someone who is biased themselves. I myself think that we are choosing between two bowls of shit and while you might hear me argue against Trump more here that is only because the opposition group on FJ is so up Trumps ass.

However here are a few things that are facts of things that he said/done that are bad (who knows if I am lying or wrong/misinformed)

1. We need to go after terrorists families (I am pretty sure that is almost exactly what he said)
2. This one is too long to list but the amount of audio evidence where he flip flops but denies saying it even when its very recent is astounding (even when compared to other candidates) either very stupid or out of his mind or not clever enough to weasel out of the bad effect any other way.
3. Not for gay marriage sorry but at this stage its a cunt move because the world did not end when it was made legal. Nothing bad happened and now there is a possibility of it going away.
4. Lot of classlessness in his jokes, which I am fine with to a degree but it goes too far and too public where you wonder if he would have any tact whatsoever. I don't mind being non pc but I need to know you have tact
5. His way of handling people who disagree with him has no class. Twittering about mccain "I like people who werent captured" and the list goes on.

Most of this list is not even policy related which is where Trump really kills me but you seemed to wander more about why he is a cunt and while his policies are quite bad for a lot of issues in my opinion. Most do not make him a cunt as much as wrong. I also did not source any of that for you because I do not have the time but if you look it up be careful for biased site (liberal or conservative) or at least make sure to cross reference them.

I made myself sad thinking of this.
#77 - suikadon (10/27/2016) [-]
I too agree that it is essential to not trap yourself into an eco chamber (such as Trump = good, Hillary = bad).

I have been looking more into his actual policies to try and better understand how a Trump administration could look like, and even though I've come to prefer him over Hillary overall, I am very interested in actual criticism of the man and his proposals.

Could you share some of your opinions abut his policies? I've read some of the stuff you discussed with ryujiizumi, but if you're willing I'd ask you to talk about those and other criticisms.
User avatar
#230 - ganisphel (10/28/2016) [-]
Sure I can. To avoid repeating what you have heard how about you tell me the policies that I mentioned and ask any clarifying questions about those. Then if there are any specific policies I have not mentioned then let me know which ones you want to hear my thoughts about.

If you just want me to go over the ones I have the biggest problems with I can but there might be some repeat in what I say.

The interest in actual discussion is quite refreshing actually.
#232 - suikadon (10/28/2016) [-]
I think it would be a nice way to start if you could go over the ones you disagree the most, if I may ask that you begin there. No problem with possible repetition, I'm interested in criticism of Trump irregardless.
User avatar
#242 - ganisphel (10/28/2016) [-]
To save typing post #47 on this page does that in at least light detail. Take a look at that I will elaborate on any of those ones that you are interested in. Would not mind hearing your thoughts as well.
#248 - suikadon (10/28/2016) [-]
Awesome, thanks for taking the time to discuss this.

Enviroment - Indeed there is overwhelming evidence to support climate change and its human causes. I think it's important to remain open to criticism concerning the impacts of climate change, but he has been reckless in that regard (like the whole tweet about "climate change being a hoax by the chinese", which he later said was a joke). Not sure if he's pandering to some voter base there.
Trump defends the use of coal and natural gas, and it seems there is new technology to reduce the impacts of these fossil fuels in what concerns to global warming.
Personally, I remain skeptical of the commitment to reduce carbon emission, as we have seen such commitment by governments fail several times. And it also bothers me that the whole effort seems to be to limit the impact, not stop it. I don't see fossil fuels losing space any time soon, so if we could improve the way they are obtained and processed to reduce their impact (again that concept of limiting), that might be more feasible.
Oh, and on that note, Trump has signaled he'd like NASA to focus on space exploration, which I think on the long, loooong run should be the way for humanity to go. Between the environmental problems and overpopulation, I don't really expect Earth to be suitable indefinitely.

The wall - I'm all for border and immigration control. Whether or not that is manifested by an actual wall, I guess we'll have to see. I don't think he has much way of backing out of building it though, the way it has been hyped and promised. Also, I'm not sure how much of illegal immigration and drug trafficking takes the underground tunnel route, so that's another potential problem.
Do you have any information regarding the costs and enviromental impacts of the wall?

Taxes and legislation I'm going to conflate this two because I think they are linked (please point out if I'm wrong, I'm certainly no economist). From what I gathered, his proposal seems to reduce taxes overall (is that what you mean by "penny tax", btw?). Now, this would mean more money on people's hands, but also means less revenue to the government, obviously. This is offset by cuting goverment spending, such as getting rid of some regulations (which are costly to enforce), reducing the size of the government (reviewing the roles of agencies), reducing the spending with NATO, etc.
Again, I'm no economist so I can't say with any degree of certainty if this plan would work. I have been looking for criticisms of his tax plan, but I found myself with and interesting problem... This election has destroyed any trust I might have had in the media. As a result, I find myself naturally skeptical of anything the media says, specially regarding Trump. So far I haven't been able to wrap my head arround criticisms of his tax and economic plans, and my lack of knowledge in that area doesn't help the situation.

Anyway, those are my thoughts regarding the points you raised on that comment. Again, thanks for discussing this stuff.
User avatar
#254 - ganisphel (10/31/2016) [-]
Sorry to keep you waiting I have been busy

1. Environment- You are right that we should always keep open to criticism but there is only so far that should go. For an extreme example there are people who still believe the world is flat and we can probably disregard them. New evidence should be observed critically but most of the time when climate change deniers come forward it is the same crap as always and should be ignored after you notice that.

As far as you saying why do they say "reduce" instead of "stop" that is much more simple. If you have many countries to convince to stop global emissions what do you think is easier to do? The idea is you get them to reduce and work your way to stopping. If you just tell them to stop now they will tell you to fuck off.

As far as certain methods being better than the past when it comes to coal and gas it is true that they are better (not even close to good enough) but more research is needed to ensure that we find something that is even better.

I applaud the continual research in space travel but the time to get us to a point where we can leave earth is FAAAAR off so we need the earth to last as long as it can.

2. The Wall- As far as costs I believe if memory serves it was like 25 billion to make the wall (not including upkeep costs which were pretty extensive every year). The thing is that assumes that it works. If it does not work the number gets so much higher I can only imagine. There are also hidden costs such as dealing with owned lands that you have to pay to put the wall on etc etc.

As far as the environment it relates to the issue of animals that congregate in the areas where the walls are built. This is already seen currently with the fence which is causing animals (some endangered) trouble. Honestly on a personal level I do not care much for animals but on an intellectual level respect the need to not destroy their habitats.

3. Taxes and legislation - The tax plan is to reduce government spending by 1% per year on every thing except for military (will cover), medicaid, medicare, and social security. First off this can hit jobs heavily as many jobs are created from this spending as well as important research. Now I will pause to say that some of it is definitely wasteful and should be optimized but it is not by doing blind cuts but by going into each field and seeing where the fat should be trimmed.

Remember when FJ posted tons of posts about the F-35 jet? If not look it up as it was a huge waste of money and it was not even good. I find it strange that this same site now worships a man who has no interest in cutting military expenditures. I have no problem with having a fantastic military (even the best) but ours is the most wasteful around. The last time we had no deficit was due to big military cuts if I remember correctly during Bills time in office.

My point is that we should cut waste where it is due but not all programs have such waste and should be cut and if I understand this program correctly this is a blind cut.

Would love to hear disagreements if you have any because I love a good debate!
#255 - suikadon (11/01/2016) [-]
No problemo, dude.

I definitely agree with you that we work first with reducing emissions and then towards stoping. My problem with that is I don't see it happening realistically. How many environmental agreements have benn made and then not met? Given that perspective (which might be wrong, of course), maybe working to improve our use of fossil fuels as much as possible could be more feasible. But I do agree with you, we need to do things in a more sustainable way if we wish to ever leave Earth one day in the distant future.

Regarding the wall, I'm kinda on the fence (comedy gold, I know). Again, I'm not sure he has much way of backing out of it, but as to how it is manifested (actually running along the whole border, actually as high as he claims it would be, hell, actually completed by him)... I don't know, I'm kinda skeptic... I'll see if I can find some info on the actual impacts of illegal immigration in the US and if getting rid of those costs would offset the costs of the wall.
Also, I agree with you on the subject of animals, and that's coming from a biologist (never been the "muh animals" kinda biologist, though). I can't see that kind of impact being very significant overall. It would be a shame, certainly, but if the impacts off illegal immigration on human lives are greater (again, I'll have to get more info on that), I would chose the same.

About the spending cut, I agree ideally it should be analyzed case by case. If a cut would produce negative impacts on the long run (impacting jobs and economic growth), it probably shouldn't take place. However, maybe a general cut on government spendig would mean the prioritization of such important programs, due to a decrease in available resources (less money overall, thus creating the need to spend it better). Once again, I have very little economic knowledge, but that seems to make sense in my head.

Also, with Hillary's warmongering record and her pushing for a war with Russia, I think the US would see a whole lot more military spending with her in office. The matter of a potential war is pretty much the major reason I prefer Trump over her.

No rush on responses, there really isn't a problem. Funnyjunk's handy alerts will make sure I don't forget about you (no homo).
#257 - ganisphel (11/02/2016) [-]
Well let me know if you get into any numbers that would disturb my current opinion.

When it comes to Hillary I agree about the spending thing but I was just keeping it to Trump in general. I have no problem talking about Hillary but when we include her into the point when considering policy it no longer is objectively looking at whether a policy is good or bad as much as it becomes a game of "it's better than what she would do". That may help in voting but is a bad way to build good policy.

Again my main point is that we can hate Hillary while at the same time be critical of Trump which is lacking on this site and no longer feels like a joke. Any criticism of the man and or their followers (see picture) is met with insane worship that would make Muslim extremists proud. If FJ supported Hillary to the same extent I would post more on her but that is not the case so here we are.
#258 - suikadon (11/02/2016) [-]
Absolutely, I agree with you there. The whole "God emperor Trump" thing is fun meme-wise and all, but it would be incredibly naive to assume the man could or would single-handedly solve all the problems. It's ironic when someone on FJ gets mad about "echo chambers" and other such buzzwords when they could be applied to some Trump supporters as well.

I think this election has been so polarizing that comparisons between the two come about naturally. But I agree, the best way to discuss policy (which should be the focus) is to judge each policy on its own merits. Sorry if I kinda slipped in that regard.
User avatar
#261 - ganisphel (11/03/2016) [-]
I thought the "God Emperor Trump" thing was really funny at first but what killed it for me was when it started to feel like people stopped joking.

No apologies necessary at all it is natural to utilize comparison for these kind of things. It takes a lot of effort even on my part to avoid that way of judging because it is natural/easy to choose the best option from a preset selection. The bad thing is when there are other possibilities being ignored.

On a side note that is another reason I dislike Trumps "drop two pieces of legislation for every one added" legislation. It is no longer judging the idea on its own merits but forces you to not only consider tons of other legislation to drop but you have to then compare which is more important to have. Along with that I believe it would freeze up congress very badly for any decision making which is sometimes too slow as it is plus a few other problems I might have mentioned earlier.

As I mentioned there is nothing wrong with comparing the two when deciding who to vote for as that is completely reasonable.

The idea is we should analyze which policies are likely bad and which policies are likely good from Trump so if he gets elected we are prepared. It would be nice if these sites used some of that power that they are using on this election to sway the public opinion away from the bad policies or to influence edits of the ok polices but as it is there is not much of an interest in being objective from what I have seen (except for a choice few where you are included).

Maybe it will happen after election when people "sober up" from the fanaticism but I feel it would have been better to start immediately instead of waiting till later.

This is great! Any other policies or thoughts you wanna discuss? Anything thoughts of mine you think are wrong to challenge me with? I love it when I get a differing opinion. If not that is cool as well as I have probably talked your ear off.
#263 - suikadon (11/04/2016) [-]
Sorry man, that was my turn to get a little busy and not reply.

I guess we covered we covered some main points here regarding his policies. I do like this kind of discussion as well, appreciate you taking the time to talk about this stuff.

If I do find some more tangible info on this topic, I'll be sure to let you know so we can talk again.

Take care man, for better of for worse, the ride that is this election is almost over.

User avatar
#264 - ganisphel (11/05/2016) [-]
You too and thanks.

Take care.
User avatar
#78 - ryujiizumi (10/27/2016) [-]
Holy shit dude, this is the first time this account has gotten mentioned, don't scare me like that
#259 - ganisphel has deleted their comment.
User avatar
#260 - ryujiizumi (11/03/2016) [-]
wut
User avatar
#262 - ganisphel (11/03/2016) [-]
Wrong person my bad.
#79 - suikadon (10/27/2016) [-]
AOl You Got Mail Didn't expect that, huh?
User avatar
#80 - ryujiizumi (10/27/2016) [-]
I did not, but yea this guy is pretty well versed and do have some great points so he's great to talk to.
10/10 would talk with again
#231 - ganisphel (10/28/2016) [-]
Who would have thought that when I made this account to try out trolling for the first time ever I would actually end up using it for intelligent discussion.
User avatar
#234 - ryujiizumi (10/28/2016) [-]
Shiet man, there may be people on both sides who just want to scream and shout and not listen to other people but there's also people on both sides who want to listen and engage in discussions
User avatar
#237 - ganisphel (10/28/2016) [-]
Yeah I figured there was but I was seeing none or very little of it at least.
User avatar
#238 - ryujiizumi (10/28/2016) [-]
Well this is the internet nigga, don't expect people to be people on here, I'm not myself on the internet half the time either
User avatar
#241 - ganisphel (10/28/2016) [-]
Agreed but normally you could detect humorous undertones to the Trump worship when it first started. My problem was that either it attracted true worshippers or the jokers started to drink the kool-aid and I started to see that a majority of the posts I was seeing were no longer ironic and lacked any criticism.
User avatar
#68 - opusfreiling (10/27/2016) [-]
Kind of a boneheaded move, yeah. There's much BETTER reasons to shit all over McCain.

Also it's funny that McCain complains about him being "vulgar" when he calls everyone dicks and cunts and assholes and threatens to hit them (and even did so a couple times!)

I think McCain hates him because it reminds him of himself, just with less scummy acts (No downvoating VA funding bills here!)

Also his foreign policies have changed considerably since late June. Before then....
lewrockwell.com/2016/06/john-v-walsh/antiwar-left-likes-trumps-foreign-policy/ williamblum.org/aer/read/144
blackagendareport.com/trump_anti-empire What changed? Well... When the RNC threatened to not bankroll him Cheney joined.
Threw out all the old FPAs and replaced them with blackwater boys. Hopefully that and the Pence pick will be the extent of his interference.
That's really what people should have been paying attention to. Sneaky rat bastard climbing aboard when the waters were choppy.
Still, Cheney's less reckless than his competition. 2:7 ratio on wars here. May go to 9 if she gets in.
User avatar
#14 - thematthew (10/27/2016) [-]
i think he was saying that we shouldn't let terrorist hide behind their families, and that if say people are purposefully getting in the way of us stopping terrorists, we shouldn't pussy foot around them.

could be wrong though.
User avatar
#15 - ganisphel (10/27/2016) [-]
He was saying that we need to take out their families because they care about them and that is how you hit them hard.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1eXRXL0nkk
User avatar
#87 - herrdoktah (10/27/2016) [-]
Are you saying that if their families are involved they shouldn't suffer consequences?
User avatar
#233 - ganisphel (10/28/2016) [-]
Yes they should if they are involved but it depends on the level of involvement. If they are fighting alongside him with violence then yes violence may be reasonable but there are lots of other cases to consider.

Besides he states that they care about their families so you need to take them out. To me this implies taking them out regardless of their actions to demotivate them. To be fair it could have just been said poorly.
User avatar
#236 - herrdoktah (10/28/2016) [-]
Probably. I interpreted it as being aware of the families of terrorists and dealing with them as well. This was after a string of shootings where somebody in the family of the terrorist knew what he was doing and didn't try to stop him or let anybody know, or they actively praised him. I forgot which.
User avatar
#16 - thematthew (10/27/2016) [-]
he could be talking about the families caring about the terrorists to the point of acting as shields, which makes more sense to me in the context of him talking about the terrorist using human shields.
User avatar
#17 - ganisphel (10/27/2016) [-]
Well he said "the other thing is" so that would make me say it is a separate point.
User avatar
#18 - thematthew (10/27/2016) [-]
maybe so
User avatar
#19 - ganisphel (10/27/2016) [-]
I mean if you really stretch it in my mind maybe but other videos seem to make it see like he wanted that still. He admitted he cannot break the Geneva convention but stated that they need to be expanded on so we can fight on their level.
#14 - Nobody forced him to have 23 kids so why should other people's…  [+] (1 reply) 10/27/2016 on $390,000 a Year in Benefits +15
#29 - attifyon (10/27/2016) [-]
The kids didn't choose to be born into a family with 22 other kids either.
Though 360k/year is an absurd amount no matter how you look at it.

user's friends