'Murica! (769 Viewers)

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
Apr 14, 2005
71,035
I was going to say, I thought it was Carter who had soaring inflation and unemployment.
Reagan did inherit high inflation, but it was on the way down throughout his presidency. Also we both know this shit is way higher than 7.5%, dems better get slaughtered in the midterms, otherwise, and i am not being hyperbolic, this country is truly fucked.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,850
:lol:

Sounds about right..


- - - Updated - - -

Reagan did inherit high inflation, but it was on the way down throughout his presidency. Also we both know this shit is way higher than 7.5%, dems better get slaughtered in the midterms, otherwise, and i am not being hyperbolic, this country is truly fucked.
It is definitely way higher. They are in trouble because inflation is impossible to hide, and if the Fed raises rates stawks are going to crater, so they are screwed either way. We need a 2008-like reset.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for the reminder.

 
Last edited:

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,913
Reagan was the sitting president 40 years ago though, even if it was partly Carter's damage (and technically going back to Ford and the gas crisis.)

:lol:

Sounds about right..


- - - Updated - - -



It is definitely way higher. They are in trouble because inflation is impossible to hide, and if the Fed raises rates stawks are going to crater, so they are screwed either way. We need a 2008-like reset.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for the reminder.

The weird thing about the crack pipe meme is that I even read an article on Daily Wire where the body of the article refuted their headline. But we are living in a leadup to midterms where everyone is trying to weaponize outrage and stupidity.

This one is going 'round lefty circles, for example.
gazpacho-police.jpeg
 

s4tch

Senior Member
Mar 23, 2015
34,577
I hope he dies a painful death.
my first thought was does this pos even deserve a fair trial? do we really expect him to become a useful member of society, ever? do people wanna feed him on taxpayers' money? will anyone ever miss him? this is a case when you simply know at first sight that just sinking him down the toilet would be the most effective and deserved solution.

i know that's wrong and goes against the foundations of modern legal systems, but i can't feel any sympathy for violent sociopaths/psychopats. they will never change.
 

Post Ironic

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2013
42,253
my first thought was does this pos even deserve a fair trial? do we really expect him to become a useful member of society, ever? do people wanna feed him on taxpayers' money? will anyone ever miss him? this is a case when you simply know at first sight that just sinking him down the toilet would be the most effective and deserved solution.

i know that's wrong and goes against the foundations of modern legal systems, but i can't feel any sympathy for violent sociopaths/psychopats. they will never change.
:agree:

What I will never understand from the abolitionist arguments that “death penalty is not a deterrent” is that everyone knows it’s not a deterrent for violent sociopaths/psychopaths like serial killers and mass murderers. Those people are irredeemable. So what’s the idea. We keep them incarcerated for decades on tax payers dime just for shits and giggles? They deserve to die. If anything it’s the humane thing to do.
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,913

Elvin

Senior Member
Nov 25, 2005
36,922
:agree:

What I will never understand from the abolitionist arguments that “death penalty is not a deterrent” is that everyone knows it’s not a deterrent for violent sociopaths/psychopaths like serial killers and mass murderers. Those people are irredeemable. So what’s the idea. We keep them incarcerated for decades on tax payers dime just for shits and giggles? They deserve to die. If anything it’s the humane thing to do.
I guess their argument is that every now and then an innocent could get convicted and killed, which would be too tragic/inhumane.
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,913
:agree:

What I will never understand from the abolitionist arguments that “death penalty is not a deterrent” is that everyone knows it’s not a deterrent for violent sociopaths/psychopaths like serial killers and mass murderers. Those people are irredeemable. So what’s the idea. We keep them incarcerated for decades on tax payers dime just for shits and giggles? They deserve to die. If anything it’s the humane thing to do.
Mentally handicapped and autistic people too :tup:
 

Enron

Tickle Me
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005
75,695
:agree:

What I will never understand from the abolitionist arguments that “death penalty is not a deterrent” is that everyone knows it’s not a deterrent for violent sociopaths/psychopaths like serial killers and mass murderers. Those people are irredeemable. So what’s the idea. We keep them incarcerated for decades on tax payers dime just for shits and giggles? They deserve to die. If anything it’s the humane thing to do.
it’s definitely more of a financial savings than it is a deterrent of crime. most people who would do things that could be punished by the death penalty would do them regardless. so it’s more of a societal reset than it is anything else.
 

X Æ A-12

Senior Member
Contributor
Sep 4, 2006
88,192
Pretty sure i heard that the death penalty actually costs significantly more than life in prison due to costs accumulated through all of the court appeals they get

Also, the idea the death penalty is no deterrent seems a bit odd considering how hard the condemned try to fight against it
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 11, Guests: 735)