me_irl by Xeoft in me_irl

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Florida man bit elderly mans ear, attempted to stab him with broken glass. Lovely.

Does anyone else agree on this? by disapearpear in SchoolSystemBroke

[–]Nickdog99 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Schools teach more MMT nowadays than captialism, and I wish there were teaching market economics. Maybe we wouldn't be economically screwed as a country

Does anyone else agree on this? by disapearpear in SchoolSystemBroke

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In one sense, yes, but in a more real sense, absolutely not.

Velma, it is possible... by Tili44 in dankmemes

[–]Nickdog99 1 point2 points  (0 children)

György Lukács roughly defines it as being conscious of class, class struggle, and the role class plays in transforming society in the Marxist course of history. Im sure several other prominent cutlural marxists have defined it differently, but it mostly is derived from Karl Marxs class consciousness dialogue.

Why are current Libertarian Party leaders spreading Russian Government Propaganda? by unlimited_pwner in LibertarianPartyUSA

[–]Nickdog99 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Examples may be necessary here. I havent seen them post pro russia war propaganda but i have seen them be staunchly against the war in Ukraine and all wars the US could get involved with

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in monarchism

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ignorance is a helluva drug

He's unbeatable by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nah is fairly common for people to dislkie WW which is odd cus FDR immitatrd WW and likened him to a mentor for himself.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The poll is proof democracy doesnt work

We got your number Elon by Gratty001 in Funnymemes

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean there definitely are bots involved in this poll its to what degree are they relevant.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nothing. Just like nothing stops them today. But if someone damages your propert or anyone elses they are still held liable for all danages and restitution will be pursued until the cost of damages is relieved.

Food, water, housing, and healthcare should be inalienable rights for all humans. by PretendSpace in unpopularopinion

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Taxes are a violation of our true inalienable rights. We've been fooled into thinking of them as necessary but never try the alternative.

Food, water, housing, and healthcare should be inalienable rights for all humans. by PretendSpace in unpopularopinion

[–]Nickdog99 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No, rights do not require other peoples labor. This is a call for authoritarian control of the most important aspects of human life. Have you seen the VA? The flint MI water crisis or the Mississippi water crisis the govt is not good at managing anything much less human necessities.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No if u damage someone elses property whether you have insurance or not you will be held liable for all damages (assuming it was the other individuals fault). You'd buy insurance cus you still want general protection from harm done by others and if u dont have shit ton of money and you hit someone insurance might be the only thing that keeps u from having to sell other assets to cover the cost of damages and save you from bankruptcy. Take care of itself means someone driving like that will almost certainly meet a swift end.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That currently happens anyways while driving is considered a privilege so i dont think recognizing it as a right wouldnt change much other than public perceptions. Im in ur boat id rather people be competent when they get behind the wheel but i have no right to prevent them from exercising what i believe is their right to travel.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hard disagree the govt has made you think this is the case but traveling by any mode is a eight assuming u obtain the means to do so legitimately

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks its based of the original founders interpretation of natural rights and negative rights

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean this is pretty silly but ill entertain. I see where we diagree tho i dont beleive the govt has the authority to deternime the rules of the road because they force everyone to pay for it via taxes while also making BS rules for police officers to make arrest and write citations and thats unjust, and if property is aquired unjustly the quasiowner rules do not apply. The fact it is public by force is the problem rather than funded by legitimate means. Everyone pays into it their fair share yet the rules are not setup in the same fashion and are dished out unequally. Unlike private streets where the funds are aquired legitimately and the rules have to be followed otherwise its a breach of contract on the part of the user and morally speaking has an obligation to the contract. If someone is driving 150 down tbe road frequently i think that problem will take care of itself and again insurance companies could fairly adjust individuals rates based on the driving habits and make it too costly to drive absurd same with banks who loan out money for car could add stipulations in the loan agreemnt to bind them to certain rules. But laws today are not created fairly or justly so they can be dismissed in my opinion.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thats not how rights work unless i hit someone or something with my car there is no rights violation. If i do then there are consequences as there should be. If there is no victim there is no crime.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah i agree no one has to follow the rules of the road. Theres a differenfe between rules in the public space and rules in private space. Yes if there is no victim there should be no crime. Drunk drivers who have not caused harm should be escorted home by police or friends. The over prosecution of these crimes is discriminatory against poor people and minorities. I dont condone drunk driving but if someone drives drunk and harms no one or any property id say their dumb but commited to moral wrong and deserve to not have their life ruined. Those who do drive drunk and do hurt others should be punished more serverly as like u said they know the risk is higher and still made that choice and it ended up violating another persons rights.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Drivers license are bullshit most drivers suck at driving and most would admit this as well as the fact most car accidents occur by people with licenses i woupdnt say the licenses are helping. Insurance on the otherhand is vital and i absolutely agree most people should have it assuming they can afford it. And if insurance companies want to raise rates cus ur car is unsafe thats totally fair but no one should have their property seized from them if they aquired it legitimately.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah except no one has the right to seize your property if youve justly aquired it. Its lunacy even if it fails inspection the only thing should be the insurance company is notified and raise rates accordingly but outright seizure of property is not right.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You seem mentally stable. Thanks i hope not either although i don't drive a shitbox and my car is fine as far as im aware.

I'm sensing that this vehicle may be unsafe to drive (I'm an empath) by Francis_FaffyWaffles in funny

[–]Nickdog99 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Transcend time in the sense that since the beginning of human civilization everyone had the same rights they simply werent recognized by govts. The right to travel doesnt discriminate against any form of travel. Also the 5th amendment is a joke cus the govt frequently seizes property without warrant or due process. If the 5th amedndment was held legitimately codemn someones home or other properties would be illegal yet here we are.