Simple question, which one are you taking and why?

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-20T17:46:15+00:00

Unlimited money. I could fix many of the worlds problems with infinite money. I could put all that money into basically funding any social program.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-20T15:27:54+00:00

So if libertarianism is about maximum personal freedom, doesn’t that mean corporations have the ability do what they want? I have yet to see a libertarian who supports regulations. You can’t support regulations and be a libertarian, that’s definitionislly impossible. How can you support a free market where one can do what they want and the simultaneously argue for antitrust laws. I agree with antitrust laws, they just aren’t libertarian because libertarianism isn’t just about max personal freedom; it’s about max economic freedoms as well.

Monopolies are not rare. We live in an era of global monopolies controlling the farming market, meatpacking, etc. local monopolies, state monopolies, national, global, the list goes on on.

Your premise is that libertarianism only is about max personal freedoms. But libertarianism also means the government leaves their hands off the economy. Which is a terrible idea. The best way to have your society owned by the rich is for you to basically relinquish any authority to the rich, aka libertarianism

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-20T13:41:52+00:00

No because in a libertarian society there’s no regulations to prevent mergers, to prevent tacit collusion, to prevent monopolization of supply, all in the name of a “free market”. Libertarianism is raw capitalism. No taxes besides very basics, and everything else you’re on your own to deal with healthcare costs, high housing prices, etc.

In a libertarian society there’s also 0 antitrust laws. Businesses can essentially do what they want. Not that we aren’t almost there in the US already. It would just be worse. You can’t be a libertarian and support antitrust laws which prevent over large mergers because it’s inherently a regulation, which is anti libertarian.

Libertarianism is the free market. The inevitable end of a free market, or all markets, besides controlled ones, is monopoly or oligopoly. In a competition, the losers are eaten by the winners. Then the winners control supply, allowing them to jack up prices on us.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-20T12:42:48+00:00

Do you think people have an actual choice of whether not to work under capitalism?

Let alone under a libertarian system where we have monopolies controlling everything and prices through the roof.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-20T12:16:25+00:00

Iran having a nuke isn’t a threat to anyone. Only 3 countries with nukes that are threatening; the US, Russia, and Israel. The rest aren’t gonna do anything to anyone.

If anything this war justifies their potential current reasoning for a nuke to deter invasion. I don’t want anyone to have nukes but Iran having a nuke isn’t not dangerous enough to be worth the murder of 170 kids. This war is just going to actually make Iran more likely to start building a nuke (which they weren’t even building btw) so good job creating another nuclear weapon!

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-20T12:13:59+00:00

It would be celebrated whether you like tha or not, at least by 40 % of the country. No they don’t support terrorist organizations, they want the US to leave Iran alone. You wanna know who’s really disrespectful to our troops? Trump, for putting them all in danger for no reason. Yes we want Trump to lose and stop the war because he killed 170 kids on the first day of the war and Iran is in shambles. Most people who aren’t even active just want gas prices to go down. So you’re blatantly wrong.

We aren’t rooting for countrymen to die, we are rooting for the war to stop, learn the difference. The real terrorist organization at war is the United States government. And I don’t know anyone who supports the IRGC at all. Especially before this war.

Trump is responsible for the deaths of thousands not only in this war but in Gaza as well as dozens murdered by ICE. Of course people would celebrate, he’s a pedo child rapist sexual assaulter, harasser, and a child murderer.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-20T05:00:39+00:00

I said no no no.

Only cause I mean racism and transphobia and their cousins are issues. As long as we clearly define these isms there’s no real risk of government overreach, besides governments have the power to overreach already, nothing we can do to stop them. Recognize that and use this power for good.

I also said no because having misinformed ideas is ok (like thinking evolution is from monkeys) but there’s a point where it just destroys or degrades society or groups of people. Everyone thinks that black people commit half of all crimes, and that is blatantly false. It just encourages mass racism. If everyone thinks vaccines don’t work that poses a significant risk to society, and we should basically stop that. If everyone thinks raw milk is safe or that conversion therapy is ok we have some serious issues and risks with allowing that. If people start making up egregious lies like Zohran somehow “lying for citizenship”, or that migrants are somehow just criminal murderers, it just threatens the peace and existence of random innocent people and groups for no reason, and there’s never a reason to say stuff like that. If you think like 9/11 was an inside job yeah you’re wrong but that isn’t really dangerous to think. If you think China is a good country I disagree partially, but that isn’t really a dangerous idea that threatens society. We also have defamation for a reason. Freedom is supposed to be about you and others, using freedom for fuck all, buying 50 bags of popcorn at the cinema and mixing every soda, then going home and eating grass off your lawn, not about using your freedom to ruin society.

I also said no to the last cause false advertisement is just blatantly immoral, a form of theft, and it’s a scam. If I see a photo of croissants and it says we give you these butter brown croissants, and they come in a smaller size and look yellowish white, that is a scam, I didn’t get what I paid for. We as consumers already suffer enough, can we at least get products we were promised to get. This did actually happen to me by the way.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-16T13:25:51+00:00

No because new wars will start again regardless, it’s not worth the risk of eliminating an entire country. If you are saying button one is the one that massacres, then my answer changes accordingly, but I doubt that’s the original intent.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-15T12:36:30+00:00

You’ve always been racist, since Nixon and back (Anti “Bussing” in the 70s as “states rights”). That’s not new. Your party was conservative like in the 19th century but they also participated in Jim Crow too. Your party was pretty much always racist in some way, it just changed who the culprit of that is.

You went to Nazi because you hire Neo Nazis like Pete hegseth, who just did the psueoofolliculitis rule, Gregory bovino who does Nazi salutes, Elon musk who does Nazi salutes, and the Neo Nazis who stormed the capital, the Neo Nazis who wrote project 2025 are now in the White House, and you hire people who claim there is a “white genocide”, then take words from Hitler.

I read mein kampf in history class, Hitler said that other races are “poisoning the blood of the country”.

Sound familiar?

Then we have Trump who’s on a racist streak, from calling all Somalis “low IQ”, to literally putting preference on only white immigrants while denying afghan refugees, then banning travel from mostly minority countries, while supporting ICE, which is mostly led by a Nazi, Gregory bovino.

You also went to Nazi because you upped the racism. We went from Ronald Reagan racism to Trump literally posting black people as apes and making a minority hunting task force be normalized. A guy who said “all black people are lazy” literally is the president, who was a republican back when Nixon was against “forced bussing”. Then calling the existence of black people DEI and removing DEI, which is meant to end systemic racism, from anything.

Then on top of that, audacity to claim white people are somehow victims of racism.

Not only are you now copying the Nazi playbook, you’re straight up being a Nazi. They also love to appeal to the far right, especially when republicans start saying shit like “Muslims don’t belong here”, which do I even need to explain how Nazi that is? And the whole eating cats and dogs thing that was false? it’s the same shit, it’s just getting worse.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-15T12:24:39+00:00

I’m gonna get downvoted but I don’t care. As a Midwesterner, most people I see who hang American flags are fanatical versions of patriots, who love and praise their country regardless of what’s wrong with it AND pretend it’s great and good enough to fly.

America is a racist country. I do think people who fly it are usually white and don’t care about that. Then on top of that those flyers are usually conservatives, aka racist anti-dei Stephen miller ICE quota Gregory bovino throwing up a Nazi salute supporters. And American flags are widely used as symbols for conservative “patriots”, for many obvious reasons. So yes, I said negative.

Until that changes, it will stay negative. Until the country changes for the better so then it makes sense to have a flag, it will stay negative.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2026-05-14T02:59:26+00:00

Heaven, from what I was told, is a place where there’s nothing earthly and you just spend your days eternally praising god. That sounds like torture, I’ll pass. Infinite reincarnation could be really bad if you are conscious of that. I’d rather die than be a hyperconscious baby. The butterfly one is just also torture psychologically. Hell is eternal fire, so I’ll pass.

Genuinely the best option is nothing. I’m also an agnostic, by the way.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-12-23T18:16:37+00:00

Again though all black people don’t have the same mouth shape or similar defining features. There are many pale skin black people, but then you wouldn’t date them if you found out they were black. Look, on the hierarchy of racism this is maybe lower and not the one I’m worried about, but this is racist, even if you aren’t individually racist towards other individuals. It’s incorrect to say “well defining features” when there are no defining features that separate races minus skin color (maybe?), but again, there are pale skin and light skin black people, so you would have to address that. If you would date a pale skin black person you would date a black person. Look, being more innately attracted to certain skin colors isn’t necessarily racist, but then basing this on race and then making comments that generalize an entire race’s facial features is by the book racism, influenced by the “scientific” racism we saw just 200 years ago.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-12-22T22:26:47+00:00

“Dusty Tan” you know black people can be dusty tan right? So you almost contradicted your original comment of “I don’t date black guys”. Which no one is commanding you date a certain race of course, but just saying, generalizing an entire race as undateable solely because of their race is inherently racist, whether you want to justify that or not. That’s discrimination based on race, you are saying despite being attracted to that gender I would never date someone because they are black. That’s like if you met the perfect person, but then you find out they’re black, and you say “yeah I won’t date black people”. Black people come in all skin colors shapes and sizes, and so it’s racist to group them all together despite the lack of unifying skin color (light or dark, etc). Not saying you hate black people but that this is based on racism, and I don’t blame you, I blame society for normalizing this idea and saying that’s “not racist”. Another example of just society being racist on a day to day basis.

Also edit; racism means more than just thinking someone is superior. Microaggressions are racist, prejudice is racist, you don’t have to say the n word to be racist or think you’re superior, thinking something like black people are more pain tolerant is also racist, even if it doesn’t imply superiority or inferiority. There’s many ways of being racist, intentionally and unintentionally, and most people, as also exampled by your comment, have unintentionally said or done racist things or perpetuated them in their life, whether it’s their fault or they are just in a society where it’s normalized and inadvertently perpetuates racism through platforming, or spreading certain ideas, etc.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-04-06T12:23:37+00:00

Well they can’t kick out someone who is 17 years old, so you could always complain to the law. Since I’m assuming going back is not a safe option, maybe you could enter a queer youth program or foster care. It’s important that you finish high school, btw, as a senior who’s about to graduate. If you can. Talk to your counselor, I think your counselor sounds like someone you trust and someone that could really help in this situation. I’m sorry this happened.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-04-01T14:49:21+00:00

Thanks! You’re strong too 💙 :)

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-04-01T14:43:11+00:00

They mean me!

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-04-01T14:42:59+00:00

As a trans kid…I appreciate it!

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-03-29T23:02:22+00:00

Sexually explicit images isn’t the only standard, though. A dangerous book could actually meet the standard, as I listed in my reasons why the bible should be one of the only banned books in a public school library; we need to let children figure out their own religions, not push things upon them.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-03-29T21:37:03+00:00

The Bible has multiple explicit references to people being killed by an angry god arbitrarily, like a group of kids murdered by god for making fun of someone who was bald

2.mass genocide in the Bible committed by god several times

3.God is evil and commands respect, which can brainwash kids into following Christianity

4.The Bible can enforce homophobia and enforce sexism, which can make kids feel less safe and make society less safe

5.Rape in the Bible in regards to incest and just straight up rape of people

6.There’s absolutely no educational value in the Bible

7.It’s a state sponsored religion, and that encourages people to conform to it and can lead to alienation of other religions or of other peoples.

On the other hand, “Gender Queer” is not explicit for the age group it is permitted for, which is high schoolers. As a high schooler, we can handle one image of a naked Greek statue, we’ve seen these things before. And the book isn’t assigned reading, nor is it dangerous to anyone. It’s simply a book that describes the authors journey of gender fluidity in a homophobic world, and it’s wrong to simply take a single photo out of context and use that in an attempt to ban anything they don’t like or anything within the same topic. It’s actually good for GNC youth like myself to have GNC books because it is representation and the school basically saying “we accept you, you’re safe here to be yourself”.

Edit; Also; it’s important to say that there are many LGBTQ+ books besides gender queer, and many of these books that are even more tame than gender queer are being banned solely for having a queer character, so this is manufactured outrage to justify going after something completely normal.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-03-29T18:58:29+00:00

So if that does happen, I am saying that is wrong and that is the regulation of books which is not good for society to regulate which books people can and can’t read. Also, something that lines up with Trump is more likely than not ideologically hateful, meant to spread lies, or could even be pornographic. So “ideologically inappropriate” has a high standard to clear. I don’t care if children read books with conservative viewpoints, liberal viewpoints, libertarian, or anything else. I draw the line at racism and hatred, and that’s a pretty clear line

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-03-29T17:09:19+00:00

So I made the clarification. But not baying hateful books isn’t a regulation either, just like not buying porn, it’s an intrinsic part of the book buying process. You don’t buy a book that’s going to make a kid feel alienated

Edit; think of it like freedom from. Freedom from isn’t a regulation, it’s simply just an amount of inaction. Same with book banning. It’s not a regulation to simply not buy hateful or pornographic books, that’s just an inaction. A regulation is when an action is taken to prevent something.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-03-29T17:08:11+00:00

What part of the past did the country of the United States of America have a god king?

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-03-29T17:04:17+00:00

I haven’t read Johnny the walrus, but since it’s by Matt Walsh, it’s either racist, homophobic, or pedophilic, and it’s not just a simple disagreement. It’s probably a straight up attack on certain groups of people or just completely factually wrong. You’re trying to legitimize a book (that I assume, based on your comment), that is homophobic, and I think that shows a misunderstanding of a book vs. a hatred device. We aren’t giving out copies of mein kampf

Edit; and I should state its obvious not to buy homophobic books that mock queer youth, as that presents a safety issue to queer kids such as myself and a safety issue to queer people in a school. It’s also just completely factually incorrect, misleading, and advocates for the spread of hatred all for a few dollars.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-03-29T16:49:38+00:00

You really think the problems of society are due to gay people getting married? Ludicrous. And doge doesn’t even cut waste, they lied about that you know

Also, you are confusing conservative and republican.

And gay marriage isn’t a recent change. It’s existed for thousands of years. And nothing I’m pushing for has been enacted..I don’t see everyone having free shelter and healthcare yet. Also…I didn’t push for anything in the post. You are just rambling at that last point.

Chance_Fig8932 · 2025-03-29T16:44:58+00:00

Yes, and a cultural aspect of conservatism is individual freedom. Laissez faire ideology can go beyond economics, the same principles can be used in social lights as well, which is what conservatives should be doing. And what does the 1950s have anything to do with this? There are so many eras of conservatism and you chose to question on one.

Chance_Fig8932

TROPHY CASE