unbillievable

The answer to your question is that Person B would not exist at all because we have programmed him to feed his kids and not want an Xbox. GB808's proposals start with a great end result. What he wants is a perfect world. We all do. A perfect outcome revolving around perfect people with noble intentions working towards selflessly improving the community. Where you run into problems is how we get there; Problem: greed is evil (makes sense) Solution: remove profit as a motivation (noble) Method: re-education camps (WTF?) It's textbook leftist reasoning; presenting an ideal world that everyone can agree on, then hits you with an idiotic methodology to force the result. There is a reason why Utopian civilizations are only found in sci-fi/fantasy books and are creepy as hell; we know that something is wrong with the way people are behaving. The above statement in particular is disturbing: "...bettering your security within the society". Your desire for personal gain is to be replaced with acceptance by the society; A subjective mob evaluation of your worth over concrete financial reward. How loyal are you to the political party? Did you thank dear leader today?

I'm only guessing, but he did state that people are tested for their best job. So we must create a quiz that can determine who will become what... including dear leader. I think I saw this movie.

To sum up: Your entire economic model is based on the assumption that capitalism provides a good foundation for production, but wastes it's resources on unnecessary luxuries, that needs to be re-allocated by an arbitrary government assigning jobs based on common community needs, through personalty and intelligence based job placement, and hoping to accomplish this peacefully by socially re-engineering individual motivation. No more luxuries. Bread and Water is equal. Baconator, and the Cronut are unnecessary wastes. Supply is determined by the state. We obviously need more plows than cell-phones. Demand is determined by the state. You have to buy volts, not mustangs. It's better for everyone. Prices are determined by the state. Profit must be eliminated. Re-education camps for all. Mandatory skills and intelligence testing to determine your entire life path. State supervision to make sure you're working as hard as you can. Pretending to do less is an attack against your fellow man. Anyone using more than they need is robbing the community. The state determines what you need. Innovation and efficiency will occur by state mandate. It will happen because they said so. Kim Jong wants a hoverboard. make it happen, or else! So how do you decide who's going to be in charge, and do we call him "dear leader"?

Staci Keanan Shania Twain

People wanted Transparency. They have it with Trump.... and we don't like it. Is it really a surprise that the government is run by idiots?

I don't think that guy has seen the movie. If he did, he understood very little of it. I had to stop watching the video because it was frustrating to see him bring up problems with the movie that were addressed. -It explains why there are no older women. We know how and why Diana got her powers. The circumstances of the island are explained. Did he only see the trailer?

Even Star Trek doesn't believe in UBI, and they have replicators and holographic slaves.

So you're saying that I will get my robot's salary?

Saw wonder woman: It's the best DCEU movie to date, but not by much. It's an entertaining movie, and they seem to have thrown in more humor, but it still suffers from bad writing. (especially in the third act). It's obvious "girl power" message doesn't beat you over the head, but it makes a dent. I think everyone wants this movie to succeed for many reasons, and it's best accomplishment is that it's not bad. It will probably push Gal Gadot into the DCEU feature role that Robert Downey Jr enjoys at Marvel.

Doesn't the economy of increasing scale force more efficiency as the population grows? Ratios in production get better as numbers grow because only real workers increase after the initial startup. (while management numbers stay low- 1 boss, 1 employee vs 1 boss 50 employees, etc.) Not to mention the contribution of improving technologies and automation. I only took basic business, so I'm not sure about the numbers, but it makes sense.

You don't know what you're asking. Observation is just the first step in the process. It's more important trying to figure out what's causing it and by how much. The only thing the climatologists have proven is that they don't know how any of it works; and they don't even want to find out. So why waste so much money on a random guess?

Dracula was supposed to be the start, but it flopped. So they're rebooting the reboot with a bigger name. The Studio is trying to force a franchise.

That's not how science works. Especially when they want us to believe it's "settled." They need to show that they can predict and reproduce results. Right now it's all just guesses. It would be the same if someone got a fever and a shaman told people it's because he's possessed by a demon and we must all pay him 10% of our income to burn incense. What could it hurt? Think of the children!

HB 3897 was originally introduced to also give the Department of Labor the ability to establish fees for initial registration or renewal of registration of trampoline courts and deposit those fees in a “Trampoline Court Safety Fund.” It's easy to figure out what the Democrats really want. It's just another way to hide a tax hike.

My college professor told me that the entire Southwest would run out of water by the year 2010 and be completely evacuated by 2015. He had this "fact" on his final exam. The only people still fooled by Climate Change are the ones too young to remember more than one doomsday prediction.

Unfortunately, you have to throw out the reviews for all these SJW backed movies. Rotton Tomatos gave Ghostbusters a 100% rating the first few days before the real critics weighed in. The audience rating will be interesting.

Prometheus was on network tv today and a group of us watched it. Didn't realize the crew were a bunch of idiots. Who sees an alien snake thing and tries to pet it?

Typical. Would rather break in than earn it out in the wild.

So you don't even understand your own map? That explains a lot. Liberals ARE disproportionately dependent on welfare, and you must have missed the whole CalExit debacle if you don't think Liberals are whining that they aren't getting their "fair share" of federal funds. (but I will apologize since you didn't personally whine about it, even if you did use the same manipulated data). I guess i wasn't being simple enough with my math. California has a budget of $1000 and gets 10$ in federal funds for 1% of their budget Mississippi has a budget of $100 and gets 8$ in federal funds for 8% of their budget. Now that I changed it so the states get different amounts of money, do you understand the concept? If you have some other way to explain your viewpoint, please let us know. You're entire argument is basically; "if you don't know then I won't tell you!" What does that map say to you?

By your response, you seem to believe that an Obama phone should cost the same as a country road... ...also, you are trying to dodge your original argument that blue states spend less on welfare than red states. Because.. that map.

So you understood nothing I wrote. I'll try to simplify. California has a state budget of $1 thousand per person (high cost of living). Mississippi has a state budget of $1 hundred per person (low cost of living) The government gives them both $10 dollars. That map would show that California only gets 1% while Mississippi gets 10% of their budget from federal funds; even though they get the exact same amount of money. Then Liberals complain that they don't get their fair share. get it now?

Since Apple products don't check for viruses, how would you even know you were infected?

Like the "wage gap" myth, the "federal funding" myth is a favorite among liberals (that has already been debunked), but continues to pop up now and then. It's statistical manipulation by taking the broad approach and ignoring the obvious. Why use total "total federal funding" instead of "welfare" or "food stamps"? Also note that it clarifies the cost as a % of the state budget instead of per capita.(and federal infrastructure funding is based on population, not cost of living, which is astronomical in blue states). Why so much statistical manipulation? Now look up the cost of WELFARE per capita for states. The top 10 are all Blue states with the exception of Alaska. Thus proving common sense; that the ones who like entitlements will vote for entitlements. It's not surprising that this information is so difficult to find, yet the federal funding map is spread like a virus. So the people in blue states are getting a lot more welfare money (sometimes 4X more), but the federal government's share of it still feels low. Why? A unintended consequence of higher minimum wages in these blue states, is that it raises costs of living so high, that it disqualifies them from federal aid, while keeping them (relatively) poor; which forces these states to cover a higher % of their population's welfare payments.

I like it. Hope it catches on. Seriously, what guy actually wants to go school dances? Now boys have an excuse to skip it and go straight to the after-party. The best thing about feminism is finally being able to skip all the crap girls have forced guys to do for centuries.

Linux users have the luxury of having no one to blame when hacked, and Apple has the policy of denying any problem exists at all. I would like to point out that the reason we got "the Fappening 2.0" in 2017 is because of celebrities continuing to believe the lies of Apple's safety. There is no such thing as safe computing. The only defense is to hope to blend in with the billions, or be a hermit.