CreateDebate


Phuqster's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Phuqster's arguments, looking across every debate.
2 points

Without a doubt: CockJugglingThunderCunt

---------------------------------------------

3 points

"They are not concerned with journalistic integrity"

They are displaying more journalistic integrity by not wanting to show what is effectively propaganda.

0 points

Nah it's not a pride thing, imagine if every state in the US simply called itself the "US"?

1 point

"Pulling your own weight does not mean providing for the lazy asses of society." No it doesn't, but you appear to want to stop paying for those that do need providing for because of those that abuse the system, rather than fix the problem.

"People think that their needs constitute a right." Who are these people? I've never met someone who didn't genuinely deserve help who thought they had a right to benefits. Those benefit frauds I have known are all scum suckers who would rather keep their heads down and carry on abusing the system than risk rocking the boat.

1 point

"pull their own weight" you mean like actually helping society in general? Like paying taxes which in turn is distributed to help those less fortunate; like those that need it?

1 point

Have you ever thought that the people are willing to pay extra for it? And like I said, if you stopped funding the military you'd be able to pay for it and get money back.

1 point

Sorry who claims it's a free society? Your idea of a free society wouldn't actually be a society would it?

1 point

Pointless war, un-winnable. But we shouldn't begin pulling out until the country has at least stabilised, it would only make things worse upsetting the balance of power so suddenly, especially after upsetting it so much going in there in the first place.

1 point

Destroyed was the wrong word, when this universe returns to its theoretical "at" big bang state.

1 point

Excellent posts btw, but, and I fear I may be wrong on this, if the universe and time are destroyed then we will not only not exist we will also have never existed. So once we reach the stage that the universe never existed there's no reason to think that it would exist again.

4 points

I was not aware of a beforelife so there's no reason to think I'll be aware of an afterlife.

1 point

The agnosts and atheists must be sensitive to the perspective of the believers. Believers honestly feel it is WRONG to refer to the singular deity with an uncapitalized title in much the same way as it is insulting to write "president Bush."

In order to be "sensitive to the perspective of the believers" would surely require no preference for no, one or many gods; otherwise you're acknowledging a preference of one belief over another?

Imagine the example of ex-president Bush, if the title had been in dispute (which it was), in order to remain unbiased (and to avoid insult) in whether he was the president out of the thousands that also claimed to share the title - and for those who believed no-one was entitled to it - using "President Bush" shows bias, and is both wrong and insulting.

1 point

H'mm I'm not sure it's "disgusting the way it is now", when the US was butchering native Americans, that was pretty much more disgusting than it is now (Is Custer and national hero out there or is he reviled as I hope he is?) Slavery? Witch hunters? I think it's got better in the grand scheme of things no? Soon you'll even have public healthcare and you'll be almost as good as the rest of the world. Can't be all that bad?

1 point

Sorry how is this wanting to become like the UK? You want a monarchy, an unelected second house, no flag waving, bad weather? I don't see how the debate suggests the US would end up like the UK.

And btw my country's "systems" are better than your country's systems :P

1 point

Technically your nationality is British if you live in any of the countries listed (this includes England by the way and excludes Ireland, only Northern Ireland is British - that would piss the Irish off), you can't help that; lots of upper class toffs fought each other (with and without other people's lives) to make it this way, for good or bad, it is what it is.

Some people resent "Britishness" for whatever reasons, (anti-English sentiments or feel that they're somehow still being oppressed) others feel that their national character is more say Welsh than British. I can't tell the difference usually. It's interesting that in Britain people either refer to themselves as British or English/Welsh/Scottish/Irish or that they are both, but generally never run them together like they do in the US like "African-American".

Almost universal though is the hatred of being called English when they're not English (e.g. the Welsh are either British or Welsh, but certainly not English) and when sport commentators refer to English athletes as such, but other British nationalities as British, which is technically still correct but shows lack or respect/equality.

I personally don't care. It's all got too many faux-patriotic connotations when people start caring about it, like somehow what some stupid king of X did 1000yrs ago means that X is better or worse than Y.

2 points

They should have to make their own way there, laziness that's all it is.

1 point

Not sure about it being done through property tax, but I guess it ends up the same, as "tax". I think educational museums should be publicly funded and admission made free (or as close to as can be borne).

1 point

No they shouldn't be banned. They should in fact be extended to the rest of the UK. Every Sunday should be made "national motorbike race day", the roads should be closed to anyone not racing.

Seriously though, no they are awesome to watch. I don't mind the additional safety measures they make sense as bike technology makes its way to becoming supersonic.

1 point

I doubt anyone on "benies" would vote themselves extras at the cost of reducing the overall standard of living. Maybe they'd vote to stop the military spending (in the US) which is destroying the standard of living of others rather than worry about taking more from the already honest hard working tax dodgers.

1 point

Not exactly complaining is it, just explaining your situation? Kukla also states that she's not taking money from anyone else (or sounds like she feels she's owed it).

And, by the way, it's not wrong to want better for yourself, it's not greedy it's generally what everyone wants, it's the fuggin "American Dream" is isn't it?

2 points

"The "needy" claim that the able bodies are a bunch of greedy SOBs and that's why they have a "right" to the able bodies' wages. "

Says who. Lots of "claims" going on with little in the way of proof. I put it to you that the benefits offered to the "needy" were more likely put forward by "able" people who actually just give a shit about others.

"But there's no evidence to support this. "

Oh, OK so make a wild statement, then quietly add that it's unprovable.

"It's a deplorable system that punishes the able bodies for being able."

WHAT? No. How is helping out people who need it deplorable? Quite the opposite, it is admirable that society helps those who need it. I don't feel like I'm being punished, especially as I'm paying the same small contribution as everyone else.

1 point

It may remind you of what you believe but is it fair for those who don't believe what you do?

1 point

No, I get a feeling of awe when I think that in a weird (and long winded) way I'm related to every single person, and likely every single life form as well. But no, no "need" for spirituality.

3 points

The guy is blinded by his hatred of the Democrats so much that he's clearly lost any rational, constructive or even consistent ability. When he was criticising the existing HC system it was news-worthy. What a schmuck.


1 of 4 Pages: Next >>

Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]