Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

sovereignsunkown

Rank #32312 on Subscribers
sovereignsunkown Avatar Level 175 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Offline
Send mail to sovereignsunkown Block sovereignsunkown Invite sovereignsunkown to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 22
Date Signed Up:6/27/2012
Last Login:2/09/2014
Location:Canada
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 105 total,  122 ,  17
Comment Thumbs: 751 total,  950 ,  199
Content Level Progress: 50% (5/10)
Level 10 Content: New Here → Level 11 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 0% (0/10)
Level 175 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 176 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Subscribers:2
Content Views:14546
Total Comments Made:358
FJ Points:906

latest user's comments

#574 - obama didn't start a war for no reason. obama didn't allow the…  [+] (1 new reply) 09/20/2012 on Brutal Punishment +6
#600 - itsybitsyspiderii (09/20/2012) [-]
Obama EXTENDED the Patriot Act. Obama also signed NDAA behind closed doors that included the Indefinite Detention Clause. Thankfully, that's being fought to be thrown out now. Our debt also tripled beneath him and is expected to get worse. He also was involved in Fast and Furious, and Light Squared. Go look them up.
#547 - >George W. Bush Jr. Exists >call obama the worst pre…  [+] (4 new replies) 09/20/2012 on Brutal Punishment +5
User avatar #555 - poptartsniper (09/20/2012) [-]
at least Bush was never like "oh look we're in dept, SPENd MORE MONEH!!!!!" like our esteemed representative
#594 - pallypal (09/20/2012) [-]
"Oh look the economy is going in the shitter. Better cut spending!"
User avatar #574 - sovereignsunkown (09/20/2012) [-]
obama didn't start a war for no reason. obama didn't allow the existance of blackwater. obama didn't brag about torturing people on public television. obama didn't pass the patriot act. obama didn't cheat his way into office. face it, he didn't do HALF the crazy shit bush did. not to mention, blaming obama is ridiculous considering he inherited a royally FUCKED country, and then had almost every move he made cockblocked by the senate.
#600 - itsybitsyspiderii (09/20/2012) [-]
Obama EXTENDED the Patriot Act. Obama also signed NDAA behind closed doors that included the Indefinite Detention Clause. Thankfully, that's being fought to be thrown out now. Our debt also tripled beneath him and is expected to get worse. He also was involved in Fast and Furious, and Light Squared. Go look them up.
#398 - because not everyone is capable of going to university for 6 y… 09/15/2012 on Romney when he doesn't get... -1
#338 - i'd just like to point out that there are poor people who work…  [+] (2 new replies) 09/15/2012 on Romney when he doesn't get... -1
#366 - themanwhoknocks (09/15/2012) [-]
So why can't these poor people go to college, get a degree, get a better paying job, and make the same amount of money they do now if not substantially more? There is financial aid from the federal government to help these people in the form of grants, loans, tax breaks, and other things to help them. It is not selfish to want to keep what is naturally mine, and on the flip side, I can in turn call what you say as being selfish for those who are less fortunate. What right have they to feel entitled to my money? Why should I have to pay to keep them from suffering when they won't even help themselves? I understand that there are some who cannot help themselves due to extenuating circumstances, but most of those who claim that they are unable to help themselves are simply unwilling. Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
User avatar #398 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
because not everyone is capable of going to university for 6 years to get a medical degree and such. i hate this argument of "they wouldn't be poor if they worked harder", because it's totally unfounded and unrealistic. not to mention some people simply don't want high paying jobs because they're unappealing to that person. is it fair that airline pilots get paid 28k a year and are unable to support themselves because they are doing something they love? it's a skewed system and your argument is inherently flawed. we can't all work high-paying jobs or infrastructure would fall apart, and those on the bottom tier are the most hardworking of all. no amount of money is "naturally yours". that's a stupid thing to say. not to mention the fact that most of these people that you say "aren't helping themselves" are absolutely incapable of doing what you're saying, because 1)post secondary education is exorbitantly expensive and 2) they need all of that time to support themselves. those born into middle class and higher families have a seriously unfair advantage over working class people in the sense that they have the money available for university, whereas if a working class person wants to attend, they either have to totally devote themselves to paying for it, or get a ridiculous amount of scholarships. stop being so ignorant, it's flawed logic like this that keeps the cycle of poverty going.
#330 - nobody deserves that standard of living though. i know america…  [+] (4 new replies) 09/15/2012 on Romney when he doesn't get... -1
#332 - themanwhoknocks (09/15/2012) [-]
If you work hard for something, whatever you get is not "obscene and unecessary," it's what you deserve for the work you've put into it.
User avatar #338 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
i'd just like to point out that there are poor people who work several times harder than any doctor and still barley make it through every year.
that's selfish, incredibly flawed logic. as i said, no one NEEDS that much stuff regardless of how "hard" they worked for it. say you have a family of 3. even if the father and mother both worked hard to be doctors and have a child to support, do they need a 30+ room house with 7 bedrooms and 5 bathrooms, a pool, a personal gym, 15 tvs, 3 x-box 360s, 3 ps3s, 5 cars (all of which were 50k+) and several thousands of dollars worth of other possessions? i understand that doctors work hard to save lives, but nobody needs that kind of money. it's just excessive.
#366 - themanwhoknocks (09/15/2012) [-]
So why can't these poor people go to college, get a degree, get a better paying job, and make the same amount of money they do now if not substantially more? There is financial aid from the federal government to help these people in the form of grants, loans, tax breaks, and other things to help them. It is not selfish to want to keep what is naturally mine, and on the flip side, I can in turn call what you say as being selfish for those who are less fortunate. What right have they to feel entitled to my money? Why should I have to pay to keep them from suffering when they won't even help themselves? I understand that there are some who cannot help themselves due to extenuating circumstances, but most of those who claim that they are unable to help themselves are simply unwilling. Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
User avatar #398 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
because not everyone is capable of going to university for 6 years to get a medical degree and such. i hate this argument of "they wouldn't be poor if they worked harder", because it's totally unfounded and unrealistic. not to mention some people simply don't want high paying jobs because they're unappealing to that person. is it fair that airline pilots get paid 28k a year and are unable to support themselves because they are doing something they love? it's a skewed system and your argument is inherently flawed. we can't all work high-paying jobs or infrastructure would fall apart, and those on the bottom tier are the most hardworking of all. no amount of money is "naturally yours". that's a stupid thing to say. not to mention the fact that most of these people that you say "aren't helping themselves" are absolutely incapable of doing what you're saying, because 1)post secondary education is exorbitantly expensive and 2) they need all of that time to support themselves. those born into middle class and higher families have a seriously unfair advantage over working class people in the sense that they have the money available for university, whereas if a working class person wants to attend, they either have to totally devote themselves to paying for it, or get a ridiculous amount of scholarships. stop being so ignorant, it's flawed logic like this that keeps the cycle of poverty going.
#328 - woah, that was actually a great reply, i'm impressed. thank yo… 09/15/2012 on Romney when he doesn't get... 0
#295 - that's not very good logic, i cite canada, finland, modern ger…  [+] (8 new replies) 09/15/2012 on Romney when he doesn't get... +2
#324 - themanwhoknocks (09/15/2012) [-]
If I work my ass off in Medical School to make 6 figures a year, you best be damn sure I want to keep it, as would any self made man want to. Just because someone only "needs a certain standard of living" doesn't mean they want it. You can't just force someone to pay more taxes simply because they worked harder for their money, it's counter intuitive to working hard and getting paid to do it, because then eventually no one will bother working hard, because most of the money is going to taxes anyways.
User avatar #330 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
nobody deserves that standard of living though. i know american doctors who have 14 flatscreen TVs, 5 cars, a house the size of every house on my street put together, and all i can think is "does anyone deserve this"? the poor work just as hard, if not harder. i think americans need a paradigm shift. my history prof. always tells us he loves paying taxes because he knows it's helping save people's lives in our medical system, fund our courts, and helping those who really need it. he only makes maybe 40k a year. why can't more people be as selfless? it just seems cold and cruel to say "i worked hard for this obscene and unecessary amount of money, so damn straight i want all of it. i need that 16th television."
#332 - themanwhoknocks (09/15/2012) [-]
If you work hard for something, whatever you get is not "obscene and unecessary," it's what you deserve for the work you've put into it.
User avatar #338 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
i'd just like to point out that there are poor people who work several times harder than any doctor and still barley make it through every year.
that's selfish, incredibly flawed logic. as i said, no one NEEDS that much stuff regardless of how "hard" they worked for it. say you have a family of 3. even if the father and mother both worked hard to be doctors and have a child to support, do they need a 30+ room house with 7 bedrooms and 5 bathrooms, a pool, a personal gym, 15 tvs, 3 x-box 360s, 3 ps3s, 5 cars (all of which were 50k+) and several thousands of dollars worth of other possessions? i understand that doctors work hard to save lives, but nobody needs that kind of money. it's just excessive.
#366 - themanwhoknocks (09/15/2012) [-]
So why can't these poor people go to college, get a degree, get a better paying job, and make the same amount of money they do now if not substantially more? There is financial aid from the federal government to help these people in the form of grants, loans, tax breaks, and other things to help them. It is not selfish to want to keep what is naturally mine, and on the flip side, I can in turn call what you say as being selfish for those who are less fortunate. What right have they to feel entitled to my money? Why should I have to pay to keep them from suffering when they won't even help themselves? I understand that there are some who cannot help themselves due to extenuating circumstances, but most of those who claim that they are unable to help themselves are simply unwilling. Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
User avatar #398 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
because not everyone is capable of going to university for 6 years to get a medical degree and such. i hate this argument of "they wouldn't be poor if they worked harder", because it's totally unfounded and unrealistic. not to mention some people simply don't want high paying jobs because they're unappealing to that person. is it fair that airline pilots get paid 28k a year and are unable to support themselves because they are doing something they love? it's a skewed system and your argument is inherently flawed. we can't all work high-paying jobs or infrastructure would fall apart, and those on the bottom tier are the most hardworking of all. no amount of money is "naturally yours". that's a stupid thing to say. not to mention the fact that most of these people that you say "aren't helping themselves" are absolutely incapable of doing what you're saying, because 1)post secondary education is exorbitantly expensive and 2) they need all of that time to support themselves. those born into middle class and higher families have a seriously unfair advantage over working class people in the sense that they have the money available for university, whereas if a working class person wants to attend, they either have to totally devote themselves to paying for it, or get a ridiculous amount of scholarships. stop being so ignorant, it's flawed logic like this that keeps the cycle of poverty going.
User avatar #318 - durkadurka (09/15/2012) [-]
It's been awhile since I looked at the statistics. I was a bit off, but not too much: 46% of households don't pay federal income tax. That number drops to around 40% when the economy is strong.

I fully understand the concept of "If you have a lot you can give more" I just don't agree with it. The current tax code is far to convoluted and it allows corporations like GE to not pay any income taxes.

I think it would be more effective to establish a flat tax, with maybe just 2 or 3 tax brackets. Since all people need a certain amount of money to have a decent standard of living, that amount of every person's income would not be taxed.

Say this "standard of living" cost is determined to be $30,000 (purely hypothetical). If you make $52,000 only $22,000 is taxed (perhaps at a higher rate than current). If you make $130,000, $100,000 is being taxed.

To leave off on a good note, I appreciate people who truly believe in what they support (even if I fully disagree) more than someone who agrees with me but doesn't know why. I can tell that even though we probably have nothing in common politically, you are informed on your beliefs, truly believe in them, and I respect that.
User avatar #328 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
woah, that was actually a great reply, i'm impressed. thank you for your respect, knowledge and education. i agree that the american tax system is in need of MASSIVE reform. i feel like america makes a lot of it's own problems by allowing corporations to have so much power and resisting change. a liberal government would be much more likely to implement those changes, in my opinion. it's all differences of belief, but i'm glad you're able to understand and respect ones you don't necessarily agree with.
#277 - >liberals >bad i'm sorry what? i don't see what'…  [+] (10 new replies) 09/15/2012 on Romney when he doesn't get... +6
User avatar #291 - durkadurka (09/15/2012) [-]
The larger government gets the more freedom we lose. You allow government to control things like healthcare and you grant them more leverage over your life.

49% of the population don't pay taxes. The poor aren't paying taxes, they're receiving welfare. The top 1% are paying somewhere around 50% of taxes (I don't remember the exact percentage).

When you tax the rich, they don't pay those taxes. They raise the prices of their goods or services to cover those costs. The middle class are ultimately paying those taxes.

Besides, there's nothing fair about taking a larger percentage of money from someone simply because they make more. You'll only encourage them to stop making money in the long run.

TL:DR: Being a liberal is bad because it doesn't work.
#295 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
that's not very good logic, i cite canada, finland, modern germany and norway as all examples of regularily liberal-run countries that are successful and functional. as previously stated, canada actually lost 20 years of progress after a conservative group got into power.

if 49% of the population don't pay taxes, than why do i always here lower-middle class or working class people complaining about taxes and tax raises? i feel like americans have a total lack of information regarding the welfare system and how it works.

okay, tax evasion and higher costs because of it. that's a valid point, but the way i see it, we should be restricting corporations a lot more (such as removing their legal entity status, and stronger restrictions on labour and environmental code). the current corporate model is incredibly dangerous if left unchecked, it needs a HUGE overhaul if we're going to make it out of this century alive.

if you make more money, you can give more money. at the risk of sounding like a communist (which is apparently the worst thing ever to americans for some reason, i don't think it's practical but it has many useful ideas that could be implemented into a democracy or small society), everyone only really needs a certain standard of living. if you have all of this extra money, you're better off giving a large portion to the government to support your country and help people who need it, because at the end of the day, chances are you can still live beyond comfortably.

i'm a socialist who lives in a primarily socialist country, so my view on this may be different than an american who's raised on "capitalism and democracy" all their life
which is funny, because america is a republic, not a democracy :3
#324 - themanwhoknocks (09/15/2012) [-]
If I work my ass off in Medical School to make 6 figures a year, you best be damn sure I want to keep it, as would any self made man want to. Just because someone only "needs a certain standard of living" doesn't mean they want it. You can't just force someone to pay more taxes simply because they worked harder for their money, it's counter intuitive to working hard and getting paid to do it, because then eventually no one will bother working hard, because most of the money is going to taxes anyways.
User avatar #330 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
nobody deserves that standard of living though. i know american doctors who have 14 flatscreen TVs, 5 cars, a house the size of every house on my street put together, and all i can think is "does anyone deserve this"? the poor work just as hard, if not harder. i think americans need a paradigm shift. my history prof. always tells us he loves paying taxes because he knows it's helping save people's lives in our medical system, fund our courts, and helping those who really need it. he only makes maybe 40k a year. why can't more people be as selfless? it just seems cold and cruel to say "i worked hard for this obscene and unecessary amount of money, so damn straight i want all of it. i need that 16th television."
#332 - themanwhoknocks (09/15/2012) [-]
If you work hard for something, whatever you get is not "obscene and unecessary," it's what you deserve for the work you've put into it.
User avatar #338 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
i'd just like to point out that there are poor people who work several times harder than any doctor and still barley make it through every year.
that's selfish, incredibly flawed logic. as i said, no one NEEDS that much stuff regardless of how "hard" they worked for it. say you have a family of 3. even if the father and mother both worked hard to be doctors and have a child to support, do they need a 30+ room house with 7 bedrooms and 5 bathrooms, a pool, a personal gym, 15 tvs, 3 x-box 360s, 3 ps3s, 5 cars (all of which were 50k+) and several thousands of dollars worth of other possessions? i understand that doctors work hard to save lives, but nobody needs that kind of money. it's just excessive.
#366 - themanwhoknocks (09/15/2012) [-]
So why can't these poor people go to college, get a degree, get a better paying job, and make the same amount of money they do now if not substantially more? There is financial aid from the federal government to help these people in the form of grants, loans, tax breaks, and other things to help them. It is not selfish to want to keep what is naturally mine, and on the flip side, I can in turn call what you say as being selfish for those who are less fortunate. What right have they to feel entitled to my money? Why should I have to pay to keep them from suffering when they won't even help themselves? I understand that there are some who cannot help themselves due to extenuating circumstances, but most of those who claim that they are unable to help themselves are simply unwilling. Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
User avatar #398 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
because not everyone is capable of going to university for 6 years to get a medical degree and such. i hate this argument of "they wouldn't be poor if they worked harder", because it's totally unfounded and unrealistic. not to mention some people simply don't want high paying jobs because they're unappealing to that person. is it fair that airline pilots get paid 28k a year and are unable to support themselves because they are doing something they love? it's a skewed system and your argument is inherently flawed. we can't all work high-paying jobs or infrastructure would fall apart, and those on the bottom tier are the most hardworking of all. no amount of money is "naturally yours". that's a stupid thing to say. not to mention the fact that most of these people that you say "aren't helping themselves" are absolutely incapable of doing what you're saying, because 1)post secondary education is exorbitantly expensive and 2) they need all of that time to support themselves. those born into middle class and higher families have a seriously unfair advantage over working class people in the sense that they have the money available for university, whereas if a working class person wants to attend, they either have to totally devote themselves to paying for it, or get a ridiculous amount of scholarships. stop being so ignorant, it's flawed logic like this that keeps the cycle of poverty going.
User avatar #318 - durkadurka (09/15/2012) [-]
It's been awhile since I looked at the statistics. I was a bit off, but not too much: 46% of households don't pay federal income tax. That number drops to around 40% when the economy is strong.

I fully understand the concept of "If you have a lot you can give more" I just don't agree with it. The current tax code is far to convoluted and it allows corporations like GE to not pay any income taxes.

I think it would be more effective to establish a flat tax, with maybe just 2 or 3 tax brackets. Since all people need a certain amount of money to have a decent standard of living, that amount of every person's income would not be taxed.

Say this "standard of living" cost is determined to be $30,000 (purely hypothetical). If you make $52,000 only $22,000 is taxed (perhaps at a higher rate than current). If you make $130,000, $100,000 is being taxed.

To leave off on a good note, I appreciate people who truly believe in what they support (even if I fully disagree) more than someone who agrees with me but doesn't know why. I can tell that even though we probably have nothing in common politically, you are informed on your beliefs, truly believe in them, and I respect that.
User avatar #328 - sovereignsunkown (09/15/2012) [-]
woah, that was actually a great reply, i'm impressed. thank you for your respect, knowledge and education. i agree that the american tax system is in need of MASSIVE reform. i feel like america makes a lot of it's own problems by allowing corporations to have so much power and resisting change. a liberal government would be much more likely to implement those changes, in my opinion. it's all differences of belief, but i'm glad you're able to understand and respect ones you don't necessarily agree with.
#640 - fair enough people just give MW so much more credit than t… 09/09/2012 on Metallica 0
#5 - lemmy in a Voivod shirt? this may in fact be the most metal image ever  [+] (1 new reply) 08/30/2012 on The main thing in life! 0
#12 - aldheim (08/31/2012) [-]
#170 - how do you miss rage mode? the roar animation is usually a hug…  [+] (1 new reply) 08/29/2012 on Video Games... 0
#180 - sickpup has deleted their comment.
#166 - monster hunter is also strategy and observation you have t…  [+] (3 new replies) 08/29/2012 on Video Games... 0
#168 - sickpup has deleted their comment.
User avatar #170 - sovereignsunkown (08/29/2012) [-]
how do you miss rage mode? the roar animation is usually a huge tip-off lol
#180 - sickpup has deleted their comment.
#107 - Demon souls was hard as **** also, Play Monst…  [+] (9 new replies) 08/29/2012 on Video Games... 0
#112 - sickpup has deleted their comment.
User avatar #119 - churrundo (08/29/2012) [-]
you should try god of war 3 n chaos mode
#123 - sickpup has deleted their comment.
User avatar #166 - sovereignsunkown (08/29/2012) [-]
monster hunter is also strategy and observation
you have to learn your target's behaviour before you can kill it, no matter how good your gear is (for the most part)
#168 - sickpup has deleted their comment.
User avatar #170 - sovereignsunkown (08/29/2012) [-]
how do you miss rage mode? the roar animation is usually a huge tip-off lol
#180 - sickpup has deleted their comment.
User avatar #124 - churrundo (08/29/2012) [-]
you're right, it boils down to trial and error. but i've been stuck on the SAME FUCKING PART for around 6 months. and i just can't get it right. one fucking hit and there goes 80% of your health. and it's HORDE AFTER FUCKING HORDE
it's impossible
#130 - sickpup has deleted their comment.
#51 - get it in the rain and it has 200+ base speed focus sash t… 08/22/2012 on Youngster Jerry.. +1
#69 - that seems a little far flung, and will probably end badly if …  [+] (1 new reply) 08/19/2012 on Right Wing Radical 0
User avatar #74 - thee (08/19/2012) [-]
Yes, socialism is good when balanced right. I think the only reason we have such an extreme party in Denmark, is due to the financial crisis, with people having no jobs, etc.

Hopefully it's just a phase...
#66 - well, if you want to nitpick, but in terms of an applied and p…  [+] (3 new replies) 08/19/2012 on Right Wing Radical 0
User avatar #68 - thee (08/19/2012) [-]
Well, you are correct there. Though, there are some socialist parties in, for example, Denmark. We have a party, called Enhedslisten(I'm not gonna explain the system for parties). Their official policies are abolition of the police and military, raise the taxes, and give 130,000 kroner(around 20,000 Dollars) each year to a person without a job.
They have several other policies, which I can't remember.

Worst part is, they are gaining more and more voters, and they are talking about "revolution"
User avatar #69 - sovereignsunkown (08/19/2012) [-]
that seems a little far flung, and will probably end badly if they ever end up in power. people aren't ready for anything like that yet. personally, i think a healthy mix of systems with socialist leanings is the best way to go, but that's just me being canadian
User avatar #74 - thee (08/19/2012) [-]
Yes, socialism is good when balanced right. I think the only reason we have such an extreme party in Denmark, is due to the financial crisis, with people having no jobs, etc.

Hopefully it's just a phase...
#35 - i don't see canada or finland agressively campaigning their na… 08/19/2012 on Right Wing Radical +2
#15 - Comment deleted  [+] (1 new reply) 08/19/2012 on Dictator 0
#16 - applescryatnight Comment deleted by sovereignsunkown
#26 - canada is a socialist nation. finland is a socialist nation. a…  [+] (6 new replies) 08/19/2012 on Right Wing Radical +2
User avatar #72 - bobsagget (08/19/2012) [-]
I understand full well the difference, but if you ask the north koreans, they will say they are socialist. Also, while we talk about socialists, americans already think they pay too much in taxes, if you go to a place like finland or the netherlands or any of the socialist european nations, they have to pay something to the tune of 35% for a flat rate tax, americans of the middle class bracket have to pay 12% and it's a fucking crisis. America is not a socialist nation. Nor should we ever be. Socialism exists elsewhere and that's fine. I want no part of it. I like deciding what liberties I want, If I want healthcare, I buy it. I should never be forced to buy anything because the government says so.
User avatar #63 - thee (08/19/2012) [-]
Well, Canada and Finland isn't exactly Socialist nations.
Pure socialism, as communism, relies on a strong government and the loss of personal possession.

You would describe Canada, Finland and the Scandinavian countries as Social Liberalist
User avatar #66 - sovereignsunkown (08/19/2012) [-]
well, if you want to nitpick, but in terms of an applied and practical sense in relation to western culture, that's the most "socialist" anyone would expect from a nation
User avatar #68 - thee (08/19/2012) [-]
Well, you are correct there. Though, there are some socialist parties in, for example, Denmark. We have a party, called Enhedslisten(I'm not gonna explain the system for parties). Their official policies are abolition of the police and military, raise the taxes, and give 130,000 kroner(around 20,000 Dollars) each year to a person without a job.
They have several other policies, which I can't remember.

Worst part is, they are gaining more and more voters, and they are talking about "revolution"
User avatar #69 - sovereignsunkown (08/19/2012) [-]
that seems a little far flung, and will probably end badly if they ever end up in power. people aren't ready for anything like that yet. personally, i think a healthy mix of systems with socialist leanings is the best way to go, but that's just me being canadian
User avatar #74 - thee (08/19/2012) [-]
Yes, socialism is good when balanced right. I think the only reason we have such an extreme party in Denmark, is due to the financial crisis, with people having no jobs, etc.

Hopefully it's just a phase...
#25 - THANK YOU it seems like the majority of americans have no …  [+] (3 new replies) 08/19/2012 on Right Wing Radical +2
User avatar #75 - bobsagget (08/19/2012) [-]
the top 1% of americans wealthy donate 85% of the countries charity funds. how much do you pay for the people who go without?
#34 - anonymous (08/19/2012) [-]
Any country that has a positive net immigration from the US can start lecturing the US on their policies. People vote with their feet.
User avatar #35 - sovereignsunkown (08/19/2012) [-]
i don't see canada or finland agressively campaigning their nation as a great place to live where you can have a new life and the "american dream"
it's all public relations and politics of immigration, not necessarily where the best living conditions are.
#3 - i'd just like to point out that obamacare was meant to be enti… 08/17/2012 on Good Guy Barack +1
#604 - i don't really see how that's relevant to anything i've said a… 08/17/2012 on Metallica 0
#602 - i've seen much crazier. and that's not very ballsy at all, giv… 08/17/2012 on Metallica +1
#600 - that doesn't make sense. if they really didn't care, they'd dr… 08/17/2012 on Metallica +1
#595 - they don't care what people think of them, so they dress like … 08/17/2012 on Metallica 0

Comments(0):

 

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)