Running for President

[Dr. Robotnik the Subbotnik]

Why do people say Obama has gutted our military?

Hasn't he made it weak?

[Dr. Robotnik the Subbotnik]

Thats why you combine them when available, not one or the other. Example: Many homes in Canada use solar and geothermal, they produce more electricity than they use and send it back into the grid, imagine every home doing that and the number of stations you need can drop to zero. It's very feasible.

yusss

I just gained a new voter (well you are Canadian, but)

you can give me moral support.

also Europe and Canada are very green AFAIK and their life expectancies are higher than ours, and their economies are fine..this is just another point I wanted to add.

[Newman]

The only female I'd vote for is Lauren Southern.

The hot blond from rebel media?

[Dr. Robotnik the Subbotnik]

I would say you are just like the old right of the 70-80's in Europe. Today they are less liberal, more socialist and very nationalist obviously (more like Trump). So yea they look like basic national socialists but because the conditions have changed due to a ruleless mondialization and some are not poor just because they don't work enough but because this globalized economy is basically producing in the third world to sell stuff to unemployed people in the first, since they aren't competitive anymore to produce anything, unless your people are ready to work for a bowl of rice, only some level of protectionism will prevent this to continue to happen. When not possible to delocalize you simply bring more available third world, at home.

Interesting..I guess I like the old European right then more than the new European right. More economically liberal, more socially liberal as well, and perhaps not as quite Nationalistic but still opposed to mass immigration in general (lowering amount of legal immigration, introducing severe punishment for people caught immigrating illegally).

[Ülev]

the only right solution



the world is sick and we are the doctors

[Dr. Robotnik the Subbotnik]

BeerBaron and Petalpusher, do you want to be my advisors?

I need official advisors - both of you have offered good insight.

I will need more than just two of course

by the way I am thinking about the need for a Social Safety Net. But I can not stress enough the importance of making it non-leechable. We have to come up with a smart solution - where we know if a poor person is truly looking for a job, they can receive the basic things to live. But we have to make sure we know they are getting a job. I frankly don't care much about the Poor but they could be useful for our Economy if we can just get them off their asses and into the workforce.

[Petalpusher]

Interesting..I guess I like the old European right then more than the new European right. More economically liberal, more socially liberal as well, and perhaps not as quite Nationalistic but still opposed to mass immigration in general (lowering amount of legal immigration, introducing severe punishment for people caught immigrating illegally).

It's alright but you are only tackling one consequence of a system, most of the immigration has an economic goal one way or another, Merkel admitted it for example, they needed fresh cheap workers, like you always do in America, well ..with the current politics. You can argue some push it for other purposes and that's certainly the case, but they are all playing the game of those interested to further fluidify their way of doing business. Even if it condemns in the end the social integrity and homogeneity of a country. Not a problem at all, the least culture, roots, family and gender structures, the better consumer you ll become anyway.

It doesn't mean to tax people more or confiscate their wealth, it's only giving rules to the game, as to how you can do business on a territory, in the interest of this territory as a whole. The wealth of a few may decrease but it will increase globally as it gets redistributed inside the country. In America you still have a thin layer of protectionism, with Clinton it will be gone definetly, like it is in Europe since the union. But you can also accept to put the whole planet in a competition of poverty, this is basically what is going on today, the third world put to work by your economical liberalism against your country fellows, a case in which the only actual way to compete would be to also become the third world at home, let in more immigrants so you can keep the main social structure and wage as low as possible, or fly stuff all over the planet just because it's cheaper to produce even 10 000 km away (very ecological).
.

[Dr. Robotnik the Subbotnik]

It's alright but you are only tackling one consequence of a system, most of the immigration has an economic goal one way or another, Merkel admitted it for example, they needed fresh cheap workers, like you always do in America, well ..with the current politics. You can argue some push it for other purposes and that's certainly the case, but they are all playing the game of those interested to further fluidify their way of doing business. Even if it condemns in the end the social integrity and homogeneity of a country. Not a problem at all, the least culture, roots, family and gender structures, the better consumer you ll become anyway.

It doesn't mean to tax people more or confiscate their wealth, it's only giving rules to the game, as to how you can do business on a territory, in the interest of this territory as a whole. The wealth of a few may decrease but it will increase globally as it gets redistributed inside the country. In America you still have a thin layer of protectionism, with Clinton it will be gone definetly, like it is in Europe since the union. But you can also accept to put the whole planet in a competition of poverty, this is basically what is going on today, the third world put to work by your economical liberalism against your country fellows, a case in which the only actual way to compete would be to also become the third world at home, let in more immigrants so you can keep the main social structure and wage as low as possible, or fly stuff all over the planet just because it's cheaper to produce even 10 000 km away (very ecological).
.

Um

explain it to me like I'm 5 years old

seriously this is confusing. What are you actually getting at?

We should probably have some legal immigration to help the economy. But there is really no need for mass immigration unless you just want to kill off the White race.

[Profileid]

Hasn't he made it weak?

no.not even close. not even a fraction of being close

[Spyy]