Remember me
▼ Content

My Idea



Page 2 of 4<1234>
26-02-2020 20:15
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
And i'm also sorry other countries WERE TOO STUPID to get themselves a Constitution to protect themselves, that's for you to solve on your own land.
26-02-2020 20:26
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
We should recognize the sacrifice of those who have swum to the bottom of the shithole so that we can enjoy the freedoms of remaining outside the shithole.


One thing I know all too well, and do recognize it.
26-02-2020 20:35
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
This here "idea", would be down the line, not here and now. Doesn't change anything, hence the status quo. More importantly, thus defending us. Anyway, we're off topic again and complicating what i did say to begin with
26-02-2020 20:38
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
I did warn you guys this idea was probably stupid anyways
26-02-2020 20:43
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(6270)
mistytimes40 wrote: I did warn you guys this idea was probably stupid anyways

... or it is brilliant. It all comes down to what you do with the shithole really.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
26-02-2020 20:54
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
IBdaMann wrote:
mistytimes40 wrote: I did warn you guys this idea was probably stupid anyways

... or it is brilliant. It all comes down to what you do with the shithole really.


.


These things have to be vented sometimes, no other way but a simple forum.

Stupid is stupid, but smart / stupid learn simply, see
26-02-2020 20:57
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
I am right about that not breeding when you shouldn't be though (shithole abound)
Edited on 26-02-2020 21:00
26-02-2020 21:02
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
Man, guess i'm just not cut out to be parent. Well, ya'll can thank me later.

MistyTimes40 out
Edited on 26-02-2020 21:03
26-02-2020 21:05
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
Or, and this just a thought, when the wife goes and breeds with another guy? How does that "unshitted hole" sound. Man, you guys aint as smart as you like to portray yourselves
26-02-2020 21:15
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
But, we're off topic again, and my apologies. (Oh shit, that's right, we're on a debate forum), Let's go... next?
26-02-2020 21:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11793)
mistytimes40 wrote:
Can we at least all agree, we shouldn't be breeding if we can't financially afford it? I mean, come on give me that much!


Nope. Not even that much. YOU don't get to decide what people can afford.


The Parrot Killer
26-02-2020 21:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11793)
mistytimes40 wrote:
This idea that somehow passing on a gene (one of the whatever how many number), and we just continue to be stupid. The Earth itself isn't what we're saving, because make no mistake, the Earth will shake us off like fleas. NO ONE is living through this, but it's a matter of how we want to live. What in the Hell is wrong with you people, grow up kiddos


Earth doesn't shake people off like fleas. Gravity stops that from happening!



The Parrot Killer
27-02-2020 01:46
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
Into the Night wrote:
mistytimes40 wrote:
Can we at least all agree, we shouldn't be breeding if we can't financially afford it? I mean, come on give me that much!


Nope. Not even that much. YOU don't get to decide what people can afford.


I get to decide what I want to decide when I want to decide it parrot, such as, calling of you out on your bullshit, because i feel anyone with a brain can't be this stupid, but i've played into your hand. And hey, maybe you are this stupid, but i can at least not tear down your words with "word for word" wordplay and weasel around in a debate forum for years on climate change. Cry about that
27-02-2020 02:17
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
Anyway, we getting off topic again. Simple a little less breeding is good for everything.
27-02-2020 02:18
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
Unless i'm motorboating some huge tits,

-MistyTime40 out
27-02-2020 04:45
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
Unless you bastards wanna continue an unending debate?
27-02-2020 04:48
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
Which i clearly won already

Edited on 27-02-2020 04:49
27-02-2020 04:53
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(6270)
mistytimes40 wrote:Which i clearly won already

Please allow me to be the first to congratulate you on a well deserved victory. That was a smashing performance. Well done.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
27-02-2020 04:56
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
IBdaMann wrote:
mistytimes40 wrote:Which i clearly won already

Please allow me to be the first to congratulate you on a well deserved victory. That was a smashing performance. Well done.


.


My idea wasnt even dismantled even slightly, so i still won

Edited on 27-02-2020 05:03
27-02-2020 05:04
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
Winning a debate online is like winning a push-up contest, we all come out losers really if ya think bout it, but i'll enjoy this honor of DESTROYING the arguments of my foes!
Edited on 27-02-2020 05:07
27-02-2020 12:26
Xadoman
★★☆☆☆
(160)
misty, I have better idea. For those who do not breed( who have voluntarily let themselves sterilized) the goverment should pay universal basic income. Those who want to breed - they should manage on their own. In the future robots will do most of the work. So my idea looks into the future. Also, all of it is voluntary not forced.
Edited on 27-02-2020 12:28
27-02-2020 16:23
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1775)
Xadoman wrote:
misty, I have better idea. For those who do not breed( who have voluntarily let themselves sterilized) the goverment should pay universal basic income. Those who want to breed - they should manage on their own. In the future robots will do most of the work. So my idea looks into the future. Also, all of it is voluntary not forced.


Why pay homosexuals and masterbaters a universal basic income, since they are non-breeders anyway?

Why sterilize men? Women are where the babies come from. If they want more than two children, could they continue to shop around, until the find a male, who isn't shooting blanks?

What happens to orphaned children, if all their relatives already have two children in the household? Would the relatives be penalized for taking them in? Or would the be awarded to some pervert, non-breeder, homosexual couple?

Would single parents, with two kids, be limited to marrying non-breeders, or others with no kids of their own?

I don't know about vasectomies these days, but they were once reversible, and occasionally reversed on their own, wasn't 100% permanent. What would be the deal, if a man becomes a non-breeder, after his two kids, for the 'free money', and later loses one or both kids to illness or accident? Can he get reversed, to replace the lost kids, and still keep the 'free money'?

Since non-breeding, progressive democrats are pushing all this, who is going to produce children for homosexual couples, to corrupt and exploit? I mean adopt and raise as their own, since babies don't come out the back-side.
27-02-2020 16:25
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
i just can't imagine why any moron wants a whining, pooping, time burden, financial drain, woman tethering, emotional drain ect. kid around. To play "daddy role" or what? I don't get it. I'll pass and stick with a dog (and that's more than enough)

and even if i did want to be "dada", it wouldnt be in this world. To each their own i guess. i live my life, you live yours. Be a good dad if you already burdened by such a problem, but i'll pass and spare the world another

if things weren't such an overly complicated mess (which it could always be worse as was pointed out earlier by what's his name), MAYBE, and that's a big maybe. World aint never gonna be perfect, so in my heroic deed to myself and to "my potential future offspring", I'M NOT BREEDING,

GOT THAT LADIES!?

Edited on 27-02-2020 16:25
27-02-2020 16:39
mistytimes40
★☆☆☆☆
(76)
And this stupid argument about "passing genes on" Wouldn't that be better for your genes if everyone else didn't breed? This whole thread has gone to stupid town..
27-02-2020 17:03
gfm7175Profile picture★★★☆☆
(438)
mistytimes40 wrote:
Which i clearly won already

OBVIOUSLY!!! After all, 97% of all climate-debate.com forum users agree that mistytimes40 is the clear winner of this debate. Always gonna have some Deniers out there, right?
27-02-2020 17:05
gfm7175Profile picture★★★☆☆
(438)
mistytimes40 wrote:
Winning a debate online is like winning a push-up contest, we all come out losers really if ya think bout it, but i'll enjoy this honor of DESTROYING the arguments of my foes!

You are the master of destruction!!!

MISTY! MISTY! MISTY! MISTY! MISTY!
27-02-2020 17:07
Xadoman
★★☆☆☆
(160)
Why pay homosexuals and masterbaters a universal basic income, since they are non-breeders anyway?


Because in the future where most of the work is done by robots most people would not survive without some basic income. It would be humane thing to pay this income. The trouble is - people would breed like crazy like they do in Africa. But if there is a condition that you have to let yourself sterilized voluntarily to get this basic income then those people can not breed and raise the population anymore. Those who want to breed and are able to find work are most probably genetically gifted individuals so that for them money is not a problem anyway. Let those rich and beautiful breed as much as they want.

Why sterilize men? Women are where the babies come from. If they want more than two children, could they continue to shop around, until the find a male, who isn't shooting
blanks


Very easy procedure with men. Also 80% of men are genetic crap anyway who can not find work in the future because robots will take low skilled jobs from them. It would be a good deal for them instead of begging on the streets for food. If a woman could find a guy who is not shooting blanks then most probably this guy is genetically gifted individual who has enough money to provide for the child.

What happens to orphaned children, if all their relatives already have two children in the household? Would the relatives be penalized for taking them in? Or would the be awarded to some pervert, non-breeder, homosexual couple?


You can have as much children as you want if you could rise them. So there is no penalty for taking an orphan to the houshould.

I don't know about vasectomies these days, but they were once reversible, and occasionally reversed on their own, wasn't 100% permanent. What would be the deal, if a man becomes a non-breeder, after his two kids, for the 'free money', and later loses one or both kids to illness or accident? Can he get reversed, to replace the lost kids, and still keep the 'free money'?


If he wants to start breeding and reverses vasectomy then ofcourse they should stop paying him basic income.

Since non-breeding, progressive democrats are pushing all this, who is going to produce children for homosexual couples, to corrupt and exploit? I mean adopt and raise as their own, since babies don't come out the back-side.



They would lose their basic income if they want to adopt. They need to be able to rise the children on their own and without money from goverment.
27-02-2020 17:56
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1775)
So, the rich people can do whatever they want. Poor people a discriminated against, de-mascilated, and basically kept as pets of the wealthy. Wealth doesn't indicate genetic superiority. There are quite a few scumbags, with loads of cash. Stealing is how a lot of them got started on the road to wealth and success. Wealthy people screw each other over on deals, to get richer. Most don't brag, or complain too loudly, as it would reduce their chances of getting richer, if people look to closely at the sleazy deals going on. Wealth, isn't everyone's main goal in life. Most of mankind's greatest accomplishments, weren't made by wealthy people.

What you've described, is socialism, to the extreme, where the wealthy elite, get to do as they please, at the expense of the majority of the population. Socialism, is a pipe dream, and doesn't work in practice. A small group, get to live the dream, while the vast majority are struggling, suffering, in poverty.

Having kids, is just about genetics. That's part of it, of course. But raising them is even more important. You teach them skills, pass on beliefs and values, moral judgement.
27-02-2020 18:09
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(6270)
mistytimes40 wrote: i just can't imagine why any moron wants a whining, pooping, time burden, financial drain, woman tethering, emotional drain ect. kid around.

There's no reward quite like watching one's financially-draining time burden win at a state athletic competition, or just get that first job at McDonald's, or bring home a straight-A report card, or build a gaming computer, or any of a host of other accomplishments, regardless of how seemingly minor.

mistytimes40 wrote:To play "daddy role" or what? I don't get it. I'll pass and stick with a dog (and that's more than enough)

... which tells me that you haven't had the pleasure yet.

The days that my kids were born were the happiest days of my life.

mistytimes40 wrote: and even if i did want to be "dada", it wouldnt be in this world.

There weren't many options the last time I checked.

mistytimes40 wrote: To each their own i guess. i live my life, you live yours. Be a good dad if you already burdened by such a problem, but i'll pass and spare the world another

Fair enough.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
27-02-2020 19:01
Xadoman
★★☆☆☆
(160)
What you've described, is socialism, to the extreme, where the wealthy elite, get to do as they please, at the expense of the majority of the population.


No , it is capitalism. Wealthy elite who own factories full of robots that produce everything needed simply have money to rise offspring. There probably will be some low skill jobs that need human intervention in the future but for most people( my guess for 80-90% of population) there will be no job in the future. What to do with those people? To give them simply money would not work because they would breed like rabbits ( comparable example is Africa).
27-02-2020 23:18
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11793)
mistytimes40 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
mistytimes40 wrote:
Can we at least all agree, we shouldn't be breeding if we can't financially afford it? I mean, come on give me that much!


Nope. Not even that much. YOU don't get to decide what people can afford.


I get to decide what I want to decide when I want to decide it parrot,
...deleted Mantras 5...1...24...1...22...7...


Nope. You don't get to decide for anyone else but you. You are not a dictator. You are not the king. You are not the elite.


The Parrot Killer
27-02-2020 23:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11793)
mistytimes40 wrote:
Anyway, we getting off topic again. Simple a little less breeding is good for everything.


YOU don't get to dictate who can breed.


The Parrot Killer
27-02-2020 23:20
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11793)
mistytimes40 wrote:
Which i clearly won already


Mantra 7.


The Parrot Killer
27-02-2020 23:21
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11793)
Xadoman wrote:
misty, I have better idea. For those who do not breed( who have voluntarily let themselves sterilized) the goverment should pay universal basic income. Those who want to breed - they should manage on their own. In the future robots will do most of the work. So my idea looks into the future. Also, all of it is voluntary not forced.


So who builds and maintains the robots? Why should I pay for someone else's decision to be sterilized?


The Parrot Killer
27-02-2020 23:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11793)
mistytimes40 wrote:
i just can't imagine why any moron wants a whining, pooping, time burden, financial drain, woman tethering, emotional drain ect. kid around. To play "daddy role" or what? I don't get it. I'll pass and stick with a dog (and that's more than enough)

and even if i did want to be "dada", it wouldnt be in this world. To each their own i guess. i live my life, you live yours. Be a good dad if you already burdened by such a problem, but i'll pass and spare the world another

if things weren't such an overly complicated mess (which it could always be worse as was pointed out earlier by what's his name), MAYBE, and that's a big maybe. World aint never gonna be perfect, so in my heroic deed to myself and to "my potential future offspring", I'M NOT BREEDING,

GOT THAT LADIES!?


YOU don't get to decide who is allowed to have a family. You only get to decide for yourself.


The Parrot Killer
27-02-2020 23:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11793)
mistytimes40 wrote:
And this stupid argument about "passing genes on" Wouldn't that be better for your genes if everyone else didn't breed? This whole thread has gone to stupid town..

You took it there.


The Parrot Killer
27-02-2020 23:28
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11793)
Xadoman wrote:
What you've described, is socialism, to the extreme, where the wealthy elite, get to do as they please, at the expense of the majority of the population.


No , it is capitalism. Wealthy elite

There is no elite in capitalism.
Xadoman wrote:
who own factories full of robots that produce everything needed

Who builds and maintains the robots?
Xadoman wrote:
simply have money to rise offspring.

YOU don't get to decide what people can afford.
Xadoman wrote:
There probably will be some low skill jobs that need human intervention in the future but for most people( my guess for 80-90% of population) there will be no job in the future.

Who designs, builds, programs, and maintains the robots? Who designs, builds, programs, and maintain the robots that replace the ones currently working in a factory? Who designs and programs what the robots will build?
Xadoman wrote:
What to do with those people?

Teach 'em the technology. There is lots of opportunity there!
Xadoman wrote:
To give them simply money would not work because they would breed like rabbits ( comparable example is Africa).

African rabbits breed faster than American rabbits??


The Parrot Killer
28-02-2020 04:30
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1775)
What makes you think the socialist elite would stop at sterilization? Why not euthanasia, as well? You've already decided the vast majority of the population are useless breeders, producing more useless breeders, like rabbits. When the 'humane' society, gets too many animals, the kill them, humanely, of course. They do sterilize, each and everyone, before they are 'adopted' as well.
28-02-2020 04:46
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(6270)
Into the Night wrote:African rabbits breed faster than American rabbits??

You thought only bees can be Africanized? You should see the elephants!


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
28-02-2020 11:56
Xadoman
★★☆☆☆
(160)
HarveyH55 wrote:
What makes you think the socialist elite would stop at sterilization? Why not euthanasia, as well? You've already decided the vast majority of the population are useless breeders, producing more useless breeders, like rabbits. When the 'humane' society, gets too many animals, the kill them, humanely, of course. They do sterilize, each and everyone, before they are 'adopted' as well.


I have not decided anything. 80% of population has no job in the future. I want to belive that the elite 20% people are humane and let others to live and pay them basic income( if they let themshelves volutarily sterilize).The population will then quickly reduce to a level that is optimal. Money is the answer to all the problems. I think to make sterilization more appealing there should also be an initial award that is 3 times the amount of basic income in a month. This should give a little push to those who can not decide wherther to sterilize or not.
As you can see my solution is very humane compared to others that use force. I would take this deal in a heartbeat. Instead of begging for food on the street I could live my life comfortably to the end.
Page 2 of 4<1234>





Join the debate My Idea:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Poll:Good idea or bad idea?8510-03-2020 17:57
My Idea325-02-2020 20:26
Trump blasts the idea that people can cause climate change713-03-2019 04:10
Is this idea of climate change really Man's need for enemy?221-02-2019 22:57
Is Obama's 10 bucks per barrel oil tax a good idea?3508-02-2017 03:03
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact