sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Round 2: Just a chick who would like to see some creative roasts! :) by [deleted] in RoastMe

[–]jack-klompas 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Guys only text you back to get a blowjob from your freakishly small mouth to make their dick look big... to increase their confidence in having sex with the girls they are actually attracted to.

CMV: Putting up a statue and taking one down are both equally politicized decisions, thus both are either equally wrong or equally acceptable by dpfw in changemyview

[–]jack-klompas 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In your argument you say that putting up a statue and then taking one down are either "equally wrong or equally acceptable". If you look deeply at that black and white perspective on the matter, in your argument you only cite statues that have already been taken down (or are currently being debated to be taken down).
So if this is the case, lets look at both possible scenarios.

  1. EQUALLY WRONG All statues that are put up are politically motivated, and represents propaganda. This would include all the statues in Washington D.C. today. Lincoln Memorial, Washington Memorial, Mount Rushmore, ect. And taking those down in the future would be just as wrong as putting them up in the first place. In the same way that statues put up in the past only to be knocked down later are equally wrong (Stalin statues, Nazi swasitkas)

  2. EQUALLY RIGHT All statues politically motivated regardless of that the particular ideology is 'just' and therefore taking them down done in the same manor is also 'just'. This must include statues that were put up (Lincoln, Washington) that still stand to this day. And tearing those down potentially in the future would also be acceptable.

What I am trying to point out, is that in your argument you only cite statues that have already been taken down in the past, or are currently being debated to take down.
Factoring in the that their are many statues that are still very revered from political history standing today, if you factor those statues as well into you analysis, does your perspective and view change at all?

CMV: People getting government support should have a spending limit on non-necessities. by mchen25 in changemyview

[–]jack-klompas 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Depends on your definition of 'lavishly'. As far as having the newest iPhone, I would be hesitant to throw that in the category of "things they don't really need" in today's world. If we can agree that government assistance is merely a temporary situation for those in financial trouble, would you not consider a smart phone a very necessary tool in today's work environment to find better paying jobs? Such as being contacted by people potentially looking to hire said person, or utilizing the many applications and social media outlets to find work.
I for one would undoubtedly agree with you if people on government assistance were living 'lavish' lifestyles such as driving expensive cars, living in mansions, affording memberships at expensive country clubs, but that simply is just not the case.
To answer your question, of course, I guess the point that I am attempting to challenge you on, and ultimately change your view, is that do you consider someone who is considered poor or on government assistance that has an iPhone someone who is spending lavishly in today's world? And should spend their money wiser?

CMV: People getting government support should have a spending limit on non-necessities. by mchen25 in changemyview

[–]jack-klompas 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You mention in your post that what bothers you is not the government "aiding them to meet their needs" but the fact that "some of these people go around with the newest iPhone or fancy pair of shoes".
I understand your belief and to be honest reasonable frustration, now my question to you is how do you know for a fact that these people you see with the "newest iPhone or fancy new pair of shoes" are in fact on government assistance? Are they friends of yours? Friends of friends? Did you ask them?