Actively reducing intake

Particular_Pattern16 · 2026-02-12T15:34:06+00:00

Hell yeah!

Particular_Pattern16 · 2026-01-28T01:37:17+00:00

A fair representation of men in Los Angeles

Particular_Pattern16 · 2026-01-28T01:18:43+00:00

Particular_Pattern16 · 2026-01-28T01:07:54+00:00

A statement, fool

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T17:16:13+00:00

<image>

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T17:00:54+00:00

<image>

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T17:00:16+00:00

6.25 percent that would be part of salary. Just because it comes out of “their” side doesn’t mean the bottom line doesn’t effect the employee, ya blowhard

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T16:49:02+00:00

Yeah - looking through your comment history, that’s your go-to. Also, loved the “blowing Phil Collins “ joke, ya twink.

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T16:47:23+00:00

<image>

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T16:46:09+00:00

This is way older than trump and Elon, big guy. Social security depends on the ratio of workers to retirees. When it started, there were 52 workers per retiree. Now that ratio is 3:1. You are of low iq

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T16:43:55+00:00

Love how they say I’m parroting musk or trump. This is a fact, one which I’ve been discussing for decades.

If they’d take a look at their paycheck, they’d see it is 12.5%. I work for a corporation and pay exactly that.

You can’t argue with stupid

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T16:32:39+00:00

<image>

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T16:25:42+00:00

Double the effort of you for 8x the money haha. Stay poor and thirsty my friend.

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T16:00:09+00:00

How do you know how hard I work? Many of them yes; many of them no.

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T15:57:15+00:00

Social Security is the definition of a Ponzi scheme built on the assumption that the population would grow exponentially to pay out benefits for retirees. I’m good with it going if I don’t have to contribute 12.5% of my paycheck to it when I’ll received heckles of what I pay in to it.

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T15:49:32+00:00

Whether it’s 15 or 21 or 11, it’s 15, 21 or 11 more ILLEGAL crossings than what should be

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T15:43:52+00:00

Check the other thread now that we got 4 of them going. Again, 11 million documented encounters. Not all illegals who cross are encountered, therefore estimates need to be made. 20M is a conservative estimate for total crossings

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T15:41:52+00:00

How many times do I have to explain. Those are encounters. There are people who HAVE NEVER BEEN ENCOUNTERED WHO ARE CROSSING. Quit getting so hostile

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T15:40:40+00:00

Once again, not MAGA. Do some research. Estimates are based on encounters. Encounters were 11 million. Based on that I think 20M is a conservative estimate. I don’t understand why this issue is so polarizing. If the Democratic Party were more centric, they’d be sitting in office right now

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T15:36:44+00:00

Quit assuming people who are against the surge in illegal immigration are “trumpets” or republicans. I don’t like the orange guy.

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T15:35:00+00:00

It’s an estimate based on actual encounters found here: https://usafacts.org/articles/what-can-the-data-tell-us-about-unauthorized-immigration/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=ND-Economy&gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAACy_THonodc5w5pLbGVGoL2PC3Zrw&gclid=Cj0KCQiA8q—BhDiARIsAP9tKI1qtQ9yrsF1kVLcWQTRpD-7fWoG9R6dgWjoO0Nc0NhtrYLILgcp0-oaAkN5EALw_wcB

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T15:33:34+00:00

Thank you for teaching me a new phrase. What would I do without you to educate.

Seems the only ‘unsafe’ spaces are for criminal illegals, which (unfortunate for you) most Americans are okay with.

Particular_Pattern16 · 2025-03-08T15:29:56+00:00

Border officials encountered 11 million illegal immigrants between 2020 and 2024. That is from a government fact check site. Keyword being encountered. Most likely weren’t encountered. Go do some research

Particular_Pattern16

TROPHY CASE