In have been rewarded for my labor with my pay check. Your entire argument is defeated.

Calling something ridiculous is not an argument.

A ridiculous statement saying you can't ask for proof for s completely unrelated system isn't an argument either, but you probably thought it was.

It is clearly and demonstrably true. If I claim the Moon is not made of green cheese then that is a truth rendered self-evident by the law of reason.

I was under the impression he meant all of the time.

You still are not supporting anything you say with any argument, but at least you haven't spent 20 minutes calling me names, so your attitude is definitely improving, if not your intellect.

You didn't create this debate. Did you create another fake account?

No video has ever supported your claim before, why would this one be any different?

You did not. You have been an ass clown the entire time you have been on the website, and I am not one.

capitalism was forcefully implemented by a select few,

No, it wasn't.

Why would the many wilfully consent to a system which rewards only the few?

Everyone who works in a capitalist society is rewarded, not the select few.

You might as well demand "proof" that monarchies were forcefully implemented by a select few.

That's ridiculous.

Certain truths are rendered self-evident by the law of reason.

That's clearly not true.

Sorry, I don't believe you know how to find videos that support you.

Forgetting the basics of debating again. It's a shame you are so bad at this.

Yes, why are you on a debate website when you don't defend any of your positions?

Yes, being right and wrong is a yuge difference.

You seem to be under the impression that if the opponent was terrible that the winner can't also be terrible. That's a very stupid thing to think.

You have said countless times that trump is a horrible president.

I agree. It would be excellent if Trump wasn't president.

So, not 10 to 11 years like you said.

All of the republicans on the website seen to think Obama is still president. They won't stop talking about him add if he is currently in charge. Maybe Trump isn't president.

He said Trump wasn't a choice. Pay attention.

Just an FYI, if someone serves as president for more than 2 years of a term they can only be reelected once. Pence would have to serve less than 10 years.

Maybe you should use the personal income statistics for the debate about corporations paying workers instead of the payment statistics the federal government paid out for social security.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal incomeintheUnited_States

You might notice that wages and productivity used to increase together and now productivity goes up, but wages don't.

I live in America and it is not true for America. We cut taxes with Reagan in office and ever since wages have stagnated.

Because when companies have excess, only then do they give bonuses, give raises, hire new people, and not have layoffs. If they have any financial doubt, they do none of the above.

Unfortunately, that's not true. :( I wish it was.

t also makes companies want to stay or come to America rather than Mexico or China, etc.

Fair enough.

Still only addressing why we shouldn't raise taxes though.

The half that he didn't say is the thing you are claiming he said. You aren't claiming he said the other half.

He only said half of that. Do you understand that?

Yes, he never said every working person should be paid the exact same amount. Now you can't read and you can't listen. Congratulations.

Obama didn't say it ?

Correct. Obama never said what you claim he said. You have never once accurately described what Obama has said. He has said some pretty stupid things that are ready to attack, yet you choose to say something incredibly stupid and attribute it to him.

Moonbeam you mean to tell me the Obama Archives are lying ?

No, I already explained this. You are illiterate.

will destroy society

Correction: would have destroyed society

Women aren't second class citizens now. Get with the times.

You are talking about it, not Obama. Read your source. It doesn't say what you claim it says.

It satisfies me greatly. It shows you have no idea what you are talking about.

Well, that's something we can agree on.

Your "Boy King" spewed it

Source?

Instead of telling me the news sources you like one at a time, just give them all to me right now.

"Can I only take as much as I contribute?"

That's what I was talking about.

Equal access doesn't really mean anything. Having access doesn't mean you get to take from it.

Ok, so you trust the N.Y. post and the Washington Times. What's next? Huffpo?

No. That was you. You ignored the model described. The model described said you get what you contribute, not everything equal.

Actually the basis of my argument is what people basically are.

And that's completely different than the debate description. That's the point I was making.

You are probably right with your assessment of communism.

I want you to post from the sources that you trust.

You are the one who disagrees with facts based on the news source. You projecting your hatred of facts on me doesn't change that. I am trying to figure out your news preference. I bring you articles from the Washington Times and you tell me it is fake news, then you bring news from Washington Times and say it is true. If I bring you a Washington Times article will you admit it is true?

So, you don't like the Washington Times unless it fits your narrative. Your idea of fake news involves anything liberal. You just like being misinformed. It's sad really. Being misinformed on a debate website is not the way to go.

That's called a complete failure. You are a complete failure.

So, is it ok to use the Washington Times when disputing you in the future? Is that a news source you trust?

Even in your stupid analogy you admit he failed. You are a failure at showing you're not a failure.

You are on a debate website. You signed up for the class. You claimed everyone else was a moron and you said you had great ideas, so you definitely entered the hall. You can fail exams you don't attempt to take.

I apologize for thinking you had ideas. I will no longer assert that you have ideas if your own.

 but destroying that aspect of the myth will collapse it's whole.

You failed miserably.

When everyone gets the same,

Communism is about giving people based on their needs and abilities. If you work hard that's an increase in ability relative to others. You do not have to be get the same amount for communism. And if we go by the debate description that implies you get as much as you contribute, working harder means more contributing which means you get more. The debate description fundamentally described an unequal system, so your argument needs to be tweaked.

Their increased contribution would be spread around to those who do the minimum or nothing. 

A certain amount from your initial contribution will be distributed, but if you get to keep any additional contribution you put in your argument falls apart.

haven't developed anything

That's funny. In your other debates you very much indicated that you have developed your own ideas.

The time i promised a theory, i had been thinking for a while(several days)

Wow, several days devoted to evolution. You really out did yourself.

. programing, robotics etc i would rather do......

Maybe lower the bar just a tad.

Why would i be thinkingAbout the theory of a moron;

You already said you spent several days thinking about the theory of a moron.

that would make me more moronic than darwin ever was.

That's true and it has.

can only talk about what there already is.

Maybe you shouldn't be bragging about being completely unoriginal.

"if communism could work"

Communism simply cannot work

Right, it can't work, but not because of the equal distribution of wealth that the debate description described.

are you alleging that you wouldn't have to work in a communist society? if nobody works, how would you obtain the bare minimum?

Yes I am. They wouldn't be able to. That's not the argument you made in the debate description. That's what I am trying to tell you.

why would number 3 want to be part of a communist society?

He wouldn't in the same capacity. That was my point. He would just be like 1 and 2 and get by. That's not self evident with your debate description.

and you understand that communism creates an environment that encourages people not to work? 

Yes, but that would only entice people to want communism. I could live in a society where I don't work, it one where I have to work. Why choose the work society if I get the same stuff?

the less you work the more you receive from others. 

No. You receive the bare minimum.

other than that, what is your definition of communism?

You get less if you don't use your abilities. You receive based on your needs and abilities. If you don't use your abilities (work) you only get what you need.

The topic is how communism makes no sense, not whether or not anyone is trying to implement it.

I told you WHY communism doesn't work

Sorry, but saying that only Fox News talks about it didn't explain anything.

You didn't like it, so you respond with a nasty comment.. What else is new?

Oh no I called you out for not discussing the topic. That's so nasty. I can't figure out what word you misuse the most.

Look at you. How is the Bronto tactic of completely ignoring the debate topic working out for you?

There's no selling in communism

False.

everything is already owned by everyone

No, it isn't.

if 3 wanted to give 2 and 1 his produce there'd be no need to initiate communism through a violent revolution because he'd do so himself.

Right, but you aren't person number 3. You are almost guaranteed to be person 1 or 2. Twice as many people benefit in your analogy by switching to communism. When more people would benefit there is a chance it would happen. That's the only reason why it would happen.

Or in other words "There is no reason to risk anything if you can't benefit from the risk." If only I had realized that earlier.

Your argument shows that we can't tax companies out of all of their money. Why cut taxes though?

I already explained myself.

"If there is any profit being made by the company that you work for and you don't receive any of it then you are getting less than you contribute."

Let's say there is a guy who owns a company and he employs 10 engineers. He pays each person $100k and they sell $2 million worth of products. Let's say there is $500k in overhead. That leaves $500k left for the owner. If it were communism the $500k that went to the owner would be distributed to the workers since they are responsible for the work that went into selling that much. In that case communism benefited 10 people and hurt only 1. That's how it is supposed to work at least.

Well, this is just another case of liberals not understanding racism. He was attacking the black cop because he thought the black guy was racist for arresting a white guy. I don't see Shia as racist here, just your typical liberal who doesn't understand racism.

 more taxes

Again, you demonstrate that more taxes are bad. Why do you think taxes need to be reduced?

The only people who would be receiving less under a communist society are the risk takers. There are few risk takers. The overwhelming majority of people would gain on paper. The overwhelming majority of people would benefit if communism could work.

That's the only part of communism that makes sense. Most people get less than they contribute. If there is any profit being made by the company that you work for and you don't receive any of it then you are getting less than you contribute. Communism is supposed to equalize the money for workers. That's where the problem lies. Businesses don't exist without risk. There is no reason to risk anything if you can't benefit from the risk.

That's what your God says. Thank you for finally admitting that following the bible is inhuman.

Your argument shows that we can't tax companies into oblivion. Are you saying that companies like Baldor are being taxed into oblivion?

You are saying that the right is trying to start the civil war while you are the one advocating violence.

In the real world, there WERE Nazis marching in Charlottesville.. Trump DID support them.

The weren't really Nazis, but let's say you are right. You are calling people that weren't with those people Nazis. And Trump condemned those people.

doesn't take a genius to figure out where HIS loyalties are..

Yeah, to peaceful people.

But, look.. We DON'T agree.. We NEVER will..

That's because you are a violent person who blames everyone else for your violence.

That's why it's BEST that we solve this on the battlefield.. I'm READY.. I'll look for YOU, you nasty man.

You can't even figure out that saying we should solve this on the battlefield means you want violence. There us no way you will survive if you get any where near a battlefield.

ROFLOL, for the last time, one of the few things Goverment MUST DO, is protect innocent life.

But, you haven't asked for the government to prevent unwanted pregnancies. So, you don't actually believe that's true.

For you to keep saying pro life people want bigger Government makes you a complete moron!

You aren't pro life. You are pro government regulation. You want bigger government. Only a complete moron would say that only asking for more government isn't asking for more government.

Do you like Government making laws protecting your life? You complete idiot, I guess you are for bigger Government.

You are against the government protecting your life. A complete idiot is someone who says that they are against the government protecting them, then song that's what the government is for.

Get some semblance of a brain!

You keep accusing me of having the stupid positions you have. If you think the strawman arguments you make for me are brainless it's because it is your argument.

As always, no response to supporting abortions for viable unborn special needs bbies.

If God wanted them to live He wouldn't have made them deformed.

You moron. I demonstrated that you have no clue what hypocrisy is.

You have caused so many unwanted pregnancies it's insane. Your abortion rhetoric is destroying the nation. The only shred of humanity that you have is from saying that we need to reduce the size of the inhuman government. You give that up when you demand the government be put in charge of abortion. You have absolutely no humanity.

Speaking of hypocrisy, bragging that you don't talk to people who you think are deceptive, then criticizing someone who stupid talking to you is massively hypocritical. Especially since I proved how you are completely wrong just by reading 2 paragraphs.

I responded to everything you said, too. ;)

You responded to yourself, moron. You can't even figure out how to use this website. There us no way you are going to survive a civil war.

When the military gets deployed they will start shooting at the most violent people and that had proven to be antifa and the left.

Look at you. You abandon the discussion then call me nasty. Did you take a class to be this hypocritical, or is it natural born talent?

Stop calling everybody Nazis and white supremacists and you might stop getting called an idiot.

A) the white supremacists aren't in the government, and you haven't been talking about starting a civil war against Trump.

B) you are the idiot who brought up guns

A) you aren't fighting the government.

B) you having guns and you starting a civil war are massively different things

C) you didn't mention having guns at all

"That's why I think we oughta solve this on the battlefield. I will NEVER buy your crap, and you won't buy mine.. Let the best man win.."

Did someone on the right say that?

Just for your knowledge, shaming people is NOT TELLING THEM HOW TO LIVE! It's trying to educate them to the dangers of immoral irresponsible lives that do so much harm to our children aour nations.

You are too stupid to call anyone else a fool. You don't tell people how to live, you just tell people how not to live. It's the same thing.

I thought you were big on educating people to the irresponsibility of not usng birth control, as do I. I guess it is ok when YOU tell people how to live! HYPOCRITE!

I am not the one complaining that people are mad at for me educating them. You claiming that me educating people is telling people how to live, but you telling people how to live is not is the hypocrisy. Sorry, I am done here. I can't keep reading what you write. You never get anything right. You claim that conservatives want to reduce the government, but the only issue you care about is giving the government power over abortion. You think Soros are bad, but you don't want to prevent pregnancies. It never ends.

I seriously stooped reading the rest of your "argument". For each of the rest of your paragraphs my response is "no, FromWithin. That's the exact opposite of house the world works. Add always you don't understand anything that really happens."

It can't be. Every person in the world believes that.

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ Does GodwantmetoburninHellforever

People like me are instantly ridiculed as some bible thumping lunatic who wants to judge people and tell them how to live.

You come on this website saying that we need to follow the bible and that we need to shame people into living the right way. You are a bible thumping lunatic because you say you thump your bible. You see accused of telling people how to live because you tell people how to live.

You are less honest than CNN. Do you know how bad you have to be to be less honest than CNN?

We once were a nation doing it's best to live up to common sense moral values derived from our Christian heritage. 

That's no where close to accurate.

We now have self consumed people who support killing viable babies for any reason.

I agree. Those damn people who hate condoms and refuse to teach sex education are awful.

Man has no answers because the bigots who hate God will do anything to make sure we never admit how once lifting up traditional Godly moral values actully worked better than todays anything goes self love culture.

The bigots who hate God (you) are the first to make these claims.

Nobody wants moral laws forced on a nation,

LIAR!!!!!!!

But of course, the anti God Progressive movement says NO! We will no longer shame immoral irresponsible behavior no matter how many fatherless children there are.

You are the one who refuses to promote safe sex and sex education.

Simply based on the fact that the left is going out of their way to cause violence I have to believe they want the civil war more.

You always suggest the exact opposite of what is smart.

That's funny. Last time there weren't covering it at all.

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ CNN thinksTrumpbashismoreimportantthanHurricaneHarveyYesorno

You have cleared up nothing.

It seems strange to consider life so sacred that there is absolutely no way we can allow abortion, but also recognize that humans are so bad that they need to be wiped out sometimes.

You aren't very bright. Why do you ask questions that you don't want to hear the answer to?

The special theory of evolution you developed is Aristotle's? What?

Where is that alternative theory you told us you were going to give us?

The wage gap is explained by the fact that women work in fields that pay less.

Your criticism of the use of the word tougher is ridiculous and stupid. It causes you to defend communism.

My argument was that people in different fields should get paid differently. You disagreed. Do you think that people in different fields should be paid different amounts?

Once you commit a capital crime you have proven that you aren't an innocent person worthy of being saved. A fetus hasn't done anything to not be considered innocent. Hope that clears it up.

My argument was that people in different fields should get paid differently. You disagreed. Do you think that people in different fields should be paid different amounts?

You are criticizing me for a typo, but defending another person for using words incorrectly. Why are you such a hypocrite?

was complaining because your arguments make no sense. 

And you were wrong. What's your point?

Read it all again and if you still think I'm defending a 'communist' position, then I'll leave you thinking so.

My argument was that people in different fields should get paid differently. You disagreed. Do you think that people in different fields should be paid different amounts?

don't care what you think they indicated.

Yes, keep avoiding the truth.

She only talked about the tax, and you should not put words in one's mouth.

The pink tax is not about sales tax only. It is about women paying more for things in general. If I said I like to watch sports, then I talked about baseball it is not unreasonable to bring up other sports.

No, I don't think I did. 

That's just because you don't care what I say.

And WHERE did you address what I said?? 

When you talked about the wage gap. Also, I explained the word tougher for you which was tough for you.

Sold' isn't the same as should.

You figured it out though you massive hypocrite.

I didn't understand it until I read it thrice

Oh no. How terrible for you.

first lie: She isn't complaining about the sales tax on tampons.She is complaining about having to pay for tampons in any way. which she did NOT

That's not a lie. The words she used indicated she was complaining about tampons, and not just the sales tax.

second lie: when you say the wages of a McDonald's worker should be the same as the wages of an engineer. a thing I have NEVER said.

Also not a lie. You are complaining that the wages of McDonald's workers are not the same as engineers. Why are you complaining if you aren't saying they should be the same?

Write correctly first.

Hypocrite.

(if you were planning to treat me as you want people to treat you, shouldn't have you answered first then??)

I did answer you on some things. You have gotten information out of me. I am not going to address your distracting topic until you address this wage gap nonsense.

Bottom line is, you don't really bother to check if your text is coherent.

I forgot an h and a u from a single word that you were able to figure out. Sue me.

I proved it to you multiple times already.

No, all you did was prove you are a communist.

. I want to treat you the way I think I should be treated.

Why do you want to be treated so bad?

Either you read what you wrote before publishing, or I'll ignore you.

You want to be ignored if you write typos?

"shouldn't have you answered first then?"

Why should I decipher what you're trying to say? lol

You don't have to decipher anything. Just defend your communist position.

Yes. I believe that is the case. Do you believe that is the case?

I never said what you're implying I have said.

I was not implying you said anything. You implied those things. I inferred those things from what you said. Her statistics compared women and men from every field. The differences in pay seen by those statistics is the same differences seen between McDonald's workers and engineers.

Don't apologize for not addressing anything, since it seems you don't want to read what people write.

You still haven't answered the question. I want to treat you the way I think I should be treated. I don't want you to get the idea that you shouldn't give the answer to my questions simply because I didn't respond to what you wrote. I was planning to address what you wrote when you addressed what I wrote. You still haven't.

You've lied two times already.

No. You haven't demonstrated that I have lied in any way.

Plus, your sentences aren't coherent.

False. You just can't read.

"That's what you are saying should make sense. "

That's

The sentence is referring to what was previously stated.

what you are saying should make sense

You implied that the subject of this sentence should make sense.

The subject of this sentence is what I previously stated. So, what I previously stated must make sense according to you. Was that really that hard for you to understand?

She doesn't speak English well and I was able to understand her, unlike you

That's because I speak English. She used the terms wrong. Why I am a bad guy for using the terms she used correctly? That's stupid.

'm afraid I cannot understand you though

That's because I stated your stupid opinion. So, since your own ideas don't make any sense to yourself, it is time to admit you are wrong.

Still avoiding the actual question. I guess I will try again.

If someone conjures up facts to say black people are superior is that person racist?

Dermot clone disguised.

Why would I ask a reasonable question if I was Dermot?

 am just playing along and am racist?

You are asking me the question I asked you.

Do you see my profile picture? 

Pablo Escobar? What?

Do you know how long it's been there?

What does it matter?

no more replies

The first one was so great.

Look man. You claim that reason you believe black people are superior is based on facts. But, by the definition of racism simply believing you are superior is a racist. Do you think that if your belief is based on undeniable facts that the definition of racism doesn't apply to you?

No. I understood the Occupy movement. I don't get how a group of people that hate another group based on their skin color and cause riots can be considered anything other than racist terrorists. I don't where I foot that idea from.

BLM is a racist terrorist organization. Maybe you shouldn't include them with the NAACP.

No, not making sense is when you say the wages of a McDonald's worker should be the same as the wages of an engineer. That's what you are saying should make sense. Why do you think the McDonald's worker sold get paid the same as an engineer?

I apologize for not addressing the rest of your argument. You aren't able to handle 2 topics at once.

She said: I didn't chose to have a period so why am i pay a tax

She doesn't understand what the pink tax is. That's not my fault. Is an extra 9% on a single product really the basis for being considered a second class citizen? We used to have separate water fountains for second class citizens.

Great, great argument

That want an argument you moron. That was me explaining to you what I meant by tougher because you were too stupid to figure it out on your own.

I'll go ask my pink unicorn Fairy Godmother to work for me from now on.

Well, she does exist more than the wage gap does. ;)

She isn't complaining about the sales tax on tampons. She is complaining about having to pay for tampons in any way.

Men work more jobs that have higher pay because no one else will do them. Sorry if the word tougher was too tough for you to figure out.

Instead of the "bleeping". You need to learn to read. He isn't asking for the censorship. He is asking for the censorship to stop sounding stupid.

He wants to be sweared at you idiot. He doesn't want to be bleeped at.