In your heart, you know the sign is right

In your heart, you know the sign is right.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=_gwKKT3XFJ0
youtube.com/watch?v=goh2x_G0ct4
mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.rhwoZUiMA
forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/15/legal-prostitution-and-sex-trafficking-from-the-annals-of-bad-economic-research/#41c1c4055da5
huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-real-cause-of-addicti_b_6506936.html
huffingtonpost.com/annabelle-buggle/after-40year-fight-illici_b_3623714.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

gee wiz. Feed some lazy nigger or protect our long term international interests..... Hmmmm

Invading Iraq was worth it, was it?

I used to. Then I realized handing things out isn't good for anyone.


However I am rather upset that we can fund wars and not space programs.

The US hasn't paid for a war since Vietnam.

When your great grandkids are born be sure to remind them how much you hate them

MAKES

>all those dead sandpeople

Kind of worth it senpai

YOU

THINK

Not our job to feed the poor. They should have paid attention in school. Serves the dumb fucks right

No one, and I would like to emphasize this, no one in The United States is starving. You have to be a massive retard no to be able to get food. We have food stamps, social security for the crazy people, if you are super hard up and cannot figure out food stamps or social security, you can go to a church or dumpster dive outside supermarkets and restaurants. I have never seen a starving homeless person, but I've seen lots that are fat.

>christian nation
>not our job to feed the poor
ok buddy.

LOL GIB ME DATS CAN STARVE TO DEATH

In Australia we feed the poor already so...

they just don't know how to budget and prioritise their needs

Join the fucking military you scrub, then you wouldn't be poor cause you'd get a wage, and free food and housing.

The sign is 100% correct, we CAN'T feed the poor.

Like other anons have said, if you're so stupid that you starve to death in America you are hopeless.

It's like how we keep throwing food at Africa. All it's doing is artificially inflating their population. They can't support it without more gibs being pumped in, and it inevitably ends in a ton of them killing each other.

DOESN'T

> he thinks everyone in America is Christian

It's almost impossible to starve to death in america, the absolute WORST case scenario a hospital HAS to take you in whether you have health care or not and can't pay the bill.

The military is there to protect the productive members of society from foreign aggression.
The poor can go fuck themselves.
The poor are poor because they choose to be poor.
No amount of financial help can keep them up.
They'll just piss them off to fuel their addiction.
I might protect them from getting hurt by others but I can't keep them from hurting themselves.

>he thinks non christians in america matter.

In your heart, you know Sup Forums is right.

you try and give a sandwhich and not money to a homeless person.

And what of it?

>we're borrowing money from China to go to war
>we can afford to feed the poor
Pick one

It is correct, but what is that strange symbol in the bottom-right corner? It appears to be a question mark, but that makes no sense in-context.

you can do both desu
poor people can join the military = no longer poor
wow its almost like people have an easy way out of poverty but are too lazy to take it

niggers will complain regardless of what you spend money on, as long as that money isn't being spent on gibs me dats

The US people have indeed paid. We paid partly through inflation, as the central bank jews print more money to finance their war.

youtube.com/watch?v=_gwKKT3XFJ0

really makes you think

Well memed faggetti

Christians will feed you regardless, just like the Sikhs

youtube.com/watch?v=goh2x_G0ct4

>yo cracka y u finna go up in space when i cant even feed mah keedz

kek. Saved.

it was worth it to show a dozen islamist dictators what can happen when they misbehave and talk shit

yes, it was worth it and it saved millions of lives

Don't black women have both the highest welfare consumption and obesity rate in the United States?

we cant feed the poor and yet we have money to feed 3rd wirld countries and money to feed and shelter "refugees"?

op btfo

completely btfo!!' i bet you faggot are a hateful liberal berniefag

These poor people can join the military if they don't have any food.

IT

entitlement spending has driven poor people in other countries to try to come to places with a welfare state

discussion over. unless you also dont support mexican illegals/refugees/african migrants we have nothing further to discuss. the money will re-allocated to other things until you learn that its 1 or the other

>cleaning the world of ragheads
>Australia complains

exactly what I'd expect, but it's a thankless job

>feeding the poor
>funding a war

Only one of these powers is given to the government by the constitution.

If the poor went to war they could at least have something to fight for and food.

>implying wars arent meant to keep the poor and the hungry people s numbers in check
If they didnt breed so much maiby they wouldnt be so hungry

>says shes hungry
>fat as fuck
Yeah,neah

No I don't. Honestly, I just don't feel as though feeding the poor is the government's responsibility and I certainly don't want to pay higher taxes to feed them. That said, I'm also not a fan of war (particularly Iraq and Afghanistan, we should just drone terrorists into the ground). I'm also not a fan of authoritarian measures the government has taken like the war on drugs, restrictions on free speech/privacy, restrictions on things like prostitution, gay marriage (finally gone, now), etc.

A healthy people make a healthy nation. Your lolberg ideals do not work in a nation full of shitty people.

Haha. Though, to be honest, poor people are likely to be overweight because the only food they can afford is low quality, unhealthy food like McDonalds.

>it was worth it to show a dozen islamist dictators what can happen when they misbehave and talk shit

so what happens is that after 10 years of fighting, the war highlighted to islamic dictators that the populations of western democracies are inherently antiwar and will do everything they can to stop a war hence rendering any future war effort or war threat to be teethless?

okay.

>yes, it was worth it and saved millions of lives
source

keep in mind we lost only lost well under 10,000 troops and it is clear that 10,000 troops was a far greater price than western populations were willing to pay.

If you are going to shit post, at least be clever about it you absolute mong. Anyone who uniroincally think that the Iraq-Afghanistan war had any positives is absolutely retarded.

The vast majority of the people will be healthy even if the government doesn't feed them.

>put in puppet dictators in a grab for regional control
>kill said dictators because their dick got too big
>massive power vacuum and general instability over several countries
>back to square fucking one

I wish we weren't so fucking dependent on their oil, I want those filthy sandniggers to wipe each other out

I'm talking about legalizing drugs (unless you're just talking about dudeweedlmao) and prostitution, which just leads to more degenerate and useless underclass instead of a semi-productive underclass.

A war has an eventual end, no matter how distant and how futile it may seem. Hungry people do not stop.

Conscript the poor.

They'll get fed and the war will be cheaper.

> christian nation

There's your problem, we're a secular nation. The largest religion may be christianity, but there is no government religion per the 1st amendment.

> I'm talking about legalizing drugs

Oh, then you're really uninformed. Drugs are dangerous because of prohibition. Even hard drugs like heroin would not be dangerous with prohibition. You'd get known purity heroin (so you won't OD), clean needles and (in the cases of heroin clinics) a sterile environment with a professional administering the drug, and cheaper heroin so people won't need to turn to crime to feed their addiction (even though the vast majority of heroin users are not poor, they work white collar jobs and just keep their addiction hidden). Not to mention, without prohibition, we wouldn't be subsidizing organized crime. Without prohibition, almost every drug would be less dangerous than alcohol. The government needs to recognize that intoxication is a basic human drive and no amount of legislature will stop drug use. Because of this, we need to eliminate policies that make drug use more dangerous and feed organized crime.

> which just leads to more degenerate and useless underclass instead of a semi-productive underclass.

False. Legalizing prostitution would not cause more people to do it, it will just make it safer for those that do (plus save a lot of money we are spending to enforce these stupid laws). It's the same way that abortion works.

You may think, things are degenerate, but honestly, what other people do in private is none of your business.

living off of mcdonalds is more expensive than buying bags of rice and beans

t. poorfag

This
Fuck the poor, and fuck the sandniggers too. I want a space elevator.

the poor should feed themselves, stop relying on other people to help you and all you do is make more ugly brown degenerate shitstain children.

I never said they make smart decisions, I'm just telling you how many poor (particularly urban poor) do it.

move to Mexico and get a fucking job...

>the only food they can afford is low quality unhealthy food like mcdonalds

I just corrected you there and I think you agree. It is not that their options are limited, it is that they are stupid. It's better not to pretend that it's for any other reason.

our poor aren't missing any meals.

hobos are obese even.

That was a whole lot of bullshit that I guarantee you have nothing to back up with.

1. You're absolutely insane if you think the legalization of drugs will eliminate a black market from existing, in some cases the black market is made worse because of increased demand due to new people trying the drug and getting hooked on it.

2. Intoxication is not a basic human drive, you are a drug addict and you need to own up to that as a problem. Yes, it does limit your productivity.

3. Legalizing prostitution absolutely WOULD cause more people to do it, and declaring otherwise is insane.

4. What people do in private is none of my business, but that does not mean I don't want a healthy, functional, and productive nation, something that is dependent on the quality of the people in that nation.

Yes

Fair enough.

>. You're absolutely insane if you think the legalization of drugs will eliminate a black market from existing, in some cases the black market is made worse because of increased demand due to new people trying the drug and getting hooked on it.
you mean like that rampant alcohol black market we have?

cheers fellow burger

War costs a lot of money. How are we supposed to help the poor if war is expensive? Should war be cheaper?

What exactly are you asking, OP?

Alcohol is mass produced in factories and sold at the cheapest possible price by international corporations. That may happen with things like heroin, crack, meth, but it will take a long time and result in a lot of useless drugged out retards along the way.

And that guy was massively exaggerating when he said that pure heroine isn't bad. It's still incredibly addictive and completely pacifies its users. Producers of the drug would also have an incentive to make it even more addictive.

> You're absolutely insane if you think the legalization of drugs will eliminate a black market from existing

It didn't exist before prohibition. Not to mention that the illegal sale of these drugs has legal risk meaning they will be more expensive, plus lower quality. Why would anyone buy illegally? Unless the government taxes drugs so high that the black market becomes feasible, this will not happen.

> in some cases the black market is made worse because of increased demand due to new people trying the drug and getting hooked on it.

People who use drugs are self medicating. The kind of person who gets addicted to heroin is the exact kind of person who would seek out, try, and then become addicted to heroin regardless of it's legal status. The meme of someone with no other issues trying heroin and becoming hooked is flat out not true. Not to mention, as I stated before there would be no black market.

> Intoxication is not a basic human drive, you are a drug addict and you need to own up to that as a problem. Yes, it does limit your productivity.

Yes it is. Why would almost every culture (perhaps every culture) use some form of drug socially. Whether alcohol or opium, most everyone does it sometimes. Also, I'm not a drug addict. I'm going to need to get a security clearance at some point, so having not used drugs is a must.

> Legalizing prostitution absolutely WOULD cause more people to do it, and declaring otherwise is insane.

Source?

> but that does not mean I don't want a healthy, functional, and productive nation

You could have that with or without drug use. The fact of the matter is that the people who would regularly use drugs to impair themselves if the drugs were legal are also doing them now. We might as well eliminate policies that are 1) expensive, 2) make drug use dangerous, 3) encroach on civil liberties, and 4) create a less productive society (good luck getting a job after going to prison once for simple possession).

not my problem. they shouldnt be wasting my money on this bullshit.

I bet you that person doesn't go out and help the poor on their own.

Tell that to Obama buddy.

What people do in private is none of my business, but that does not mean I don't want a healthy, functional, and productive nation, something that is dependent on the quality of the people in that nation.

One sec, let me type something up.

America being unable to feed its poor is only a meme
prove me wrong

I forgot to mention, legalizing drugs will result in less people using them. There will be a slight bump in initial use rates, but a long term fall below where the rates are under prohibition. Just look at what happened with Portugal since decriminalizing drugs in 2001. Drug use, addiction, and drug related deaths have all decreased since decriminalization in Portugal. Face it, you're wrong. It may sound unintuitive, but that doesn't make it any less true.

mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.rhwoZUiMA

We can and do feed the poor. We can and do provide anyone who wants one with an education. We can and do provide the needy with healthcare. These things are all mandated by law and the laws are airtight--and the funding far exceeds our military spending.

Anyone who starves in America does so of their own volition.

making this shit illegal isnt helping your cause, it's fucking it up.

When I didn't qualify for food stamps, I could still get food pantry boxes every week for free. Easily 25lbs of cans, pasta and bread. I was eating better than I am now that I buy my own groceries again.

Right back at you bud.

> It's still incredibly addictive and completely pacifies its users.

Which hurts you how? Neither of those are health effects. Should things like SSRIs not be legal because they are also addictive? In heroin clinics the biggest health impact associated with heroin is constipation.

> Producers of the drug would also have an incentive to make it even more addictive.

As someone who studied drug chemistry in college, how exactly would a manufacturer make heroin more addictive? Also, why aren't organized crime groups doing that now?

>What people do in private is none of my business, but that does not mean I don't want a healthy, functional, and productive nation, something that is dependent on the quality of the people in that nation.

Which would be accomplished by legalizing drugs. I've given you a case study in Portugal. By opposing an end of prohibition you are working against your goals and the interest of this country.

>It didn't exist before prohibition
Of course literal black markets don't exist in a scenario where a good is legal to sell. But when for example, we legalize heroin but demand that it be made in the most expensive manner, we create a market for cheaply made heroin to be sold to those that can't afford the good stuff (read: everyone that does heroin).

>people who use drugs are self medicating
And I'd much rather them not have the option of self-medicating with something like heroin. The meme of someone trying an addictive substance and getting addicted is not true? Again, you can not support any of these things you're saying, nobody could possibly make that argument.

>Yes it is
Okay, well here we go delving into philosophical nonsense, because if you want to say that something should not be restricted due to it being a basic human drive, then should we legalize murder as well? People want to kill each other, it's a basic human drive, but we've created consequences make it undesirable because we know that if people are allowed to act on this basic human drive it will lower the productivity of the nation.

>Source?
This is a pretty simple logical concept.
forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/15/legal-prostitution-and-sex-trafficking-from-the-annals-of-bad-economic-research/#41c1c4055da5
>What will be the effect of legalizing prostitution on the demand, supply, and thus equilibrium quantity of prostitution? Starting with the demand effect, some clients will be deterred from consuming commercial sex services if prostitution is illegal and they expect that there is a reasonable probability of being prosecuted, as this raises the costs of engaging in such activities. Legalizing prostitution will therefore almost invariably increase demand for prostitution.

>The fact of the matter is
No, the fact of the matter is that if you significantly stem the amount of heroin in our country by annihilating dealers, there will be less to consume

>we legalize heroin but demand that it be made in the most expensive manner
thats not what would happen faggot. just look at the shit the alcohol industry puts out.

>nobody could possibly make that argument.
so why are there people that dont get addicted to things? i'll wait...

>Which hurts you how?
It hurts the productivity of the nation. And when we have a welfare state that does not demand routine drug tests, yes it actually does affect me directly.

>comparing SSRI addictivity to heroin
Stop being disingenuous.

>how would a manufacturer make heroin more addictive
Okay, you got me, I don't happen to be an expert on the substance of heroin. They will manufacture it to be the most cheaply and dangerously made, that doesn't take away at all from the point I was making. Like I said before, please stop being disingenuous.

>Face it, you're wrong. It may sound unintuitive, but that doesn't make it any less true.
Would you argue that socialism works because Scandinavian socialism has been functional for multiple decades? You are comparing the US to a nation the size of Michigan. And they don't have nearly as many niggers either.

Already explained that to you. You aren't putting effort in like the other guy so I'm gonna stop responding to you now

>why are some people different from other people
Sorry that was too stupidto pass up. You're a retard, lay off the weed.

This

oh what a great answer. way to dodge the question, faggot.

Read the greentext in that post, that is my answer, genius.

>why can some people lift 200 pound boulders but other people can't?

>Already explained that to you.
mmm no you didnt. just because you cant answer something doesnt make you somehow right, moron.

Yeah, it is.

War is pretty baller.

Killing muzrats is always worth it but I agree we shouldn't have gone to the Middle East. We need to exterminate the rats within our walls before we can go and destroy the faraway nest

>sandpeople
>people

I think the correct term is rat user

> Of course literal black markets don't exist in a scenario where a good is legal to sell.

then why would they exist when drugs are legal to sell? What makes you think companies wouldn't also make cheaper heroin like they do with alcohol?

> Again, you can not support any of these things you're saying, nobody could possibly make that argument.

Actually, I do. Google the rat park experiments or read the following link which discusses them. Your fundamental understanding of addiction is wrong.
huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-real-cause-of-addicti_b_6506936.html

Regardless, as I showed before, ending drug prohibition leads to less drug use anyway (not to mention safer use) .

> No, the fact of the matter is that if you significantly stem the amount of heroin in our country by annihilating dealers, there will be less to consume

Which is impossible. That's like saying if I could build a time machine I could meet my great great grandpa. Sure, the statement is true, but it's trivially true because the first statement is impossible. People will continue trafiicing drugs into the country in order to meet the demand. No policies will stop this. Drug prohibition in the US has done nothing to lower drug use rates, in fact they are higher than in 1970 when the controlled substances act passed.

huffingtonpost.com/annabelle-buggle/after-40year-fight-illici_b_3623714.html

Any way you slice it, the war on drugs has been an unmitigated failure. It has been totally ineffective, wasted ~$1 trillion, imprisoned and therefore disenfranchised millions of Americans for no real reason, and led to the growth of the Mexican drug cartels (which by the way, is why illegal immigration is so high right now), and increased drug deaths.

Bring back the draft and kill two birds with one stone.

You can't feed someone who has no head.

Irrelevant as you can't change the past.

I partially did, actually. But here's what will happen, I will respond to you and you will simply disregard it because you will have no logical counterargument.

Alcohol does not need to be made and administered in a significantly more expensive manner for it to be safe for human consumption. There are not massive factories created by international corporations mass producing heroin in the most efficient way possible (something we have for alcohol because we have been brewing it for thousands of years). If we legalized heroin with no regulations, the result would be a ton of cheaply made, shitty heroin. If we regulated it, the result would be expensive legal heroin and a ton of cheap black market heroin. There's no good end result when dealing with a substance like it.

nah fuck you, without a military there's no people to feed in the first place cus opfor would purge all the civies