OK, I’ve never had anyone run up to me and complain that I was generating pollution while I was mowing. I don’t know of anybody else who has either. It’s an unusual situation, like a UFO sighting. All we have is your word and a couple of photographs that verify nothing. Plus, you have a history of liberal paranoia. This is exactly what you wanted to happen, so that you can further justify your liberal paranoia.
Showing skepticism about your story isn’t a liberal thing. It’s a debunker thing. We’re all Snopes readers. If somebody on the opposite end of the political spectrum from you (such as Dertrihs) had a similar story, we’d be questioning and ridiculing that one too.
A leftie and a rightie see some previously unknown person to do something stupid or loathsome that is nothing political.
A leftie thinks that the person is a jerk. A rightie thinks that the person is leftie.
Is it some kind of desperate rightie way to convince themselves that those university schooled elite hippies aren’t really smarter than they are ? ( When they actually are, and they know it… )
Incredible, isn’t it, that so many people seem to so frequently mistake a wonderful guy like yourself for the asshole, eh? How does this obvious error keep happening? It’s a real conundrum.
That is indeed a very little ass. Too little to tell whether it’s even offended, or liberal. (I mean, we can’t even see the “Tax the Rich” bumper sticker.)
Also, nice looking neighbourhood.
Mr. Clothahump, in regard to the debunked “CNN fake heroics” article you referenced, how would you like the liberal-type members of this board to respond when one of their sources in the SRIOTD thread is debunked so easily and in such short order?
Would you honestly be fine with them ignoring it and continuing to beat the same old drum, or would you prefer that they acknowledge that their source was BS?
Or, perhaps you “don’t give a damn”?
He has so little. Virtually every single other thing he’s posted in this thread has crumbled under the slightest scrutiny. Give the man this one tiny, tiny victory over…actually, I don’t know what, since he hasn’t proved anything by the story, but give it to him anyway.
He claims to win the thread and what’s he got? A cockamamie story, a blurry picture of a jogger at least a block away, and a picture of his lawnmower.
I’m not inclined to give that much leeway to the Pope much less humpy.
Holy shit! This rare specimine needs to be put in a glass case.
Current room temperature here is around 300 kelvin.
Your flattery is appreciated but unrealistic.
But to address the problem of your naggy neighbour:
Wow, she sounds like a crazy jerk and all. What on earth could have set her off like that? Definately worthy of a crazy-neighbour-encounter-of-the-day thread. Let’s hope she doesn’t get into politics.
Now, how is your current faith in ConservativeFighters as a news source, considering they have fed you a BS story? What is your assessment of the article you posted?
Seems to me like her tax proposal is part of a larger investigation as to how much automation will cost American jobs. Business owners will largely decide for themselves how much they’ll rely on automation, depending on the circumstances. Barring that, Kim brought it up as a way to impose some kind of limitation to keep workers from becoming unemployed. It doesn’t sound like she’s thinking taxation is the only way to do it. It’s just one idea in a whole list of ideas for feasibility studies. Since “tax” is such a hot button word, it’s the concept that gets the most attention.
By the same token, Trump supports the idea of tariffs for trade imbalances. Is it a stupid liberal idea if Trump favors it?
[Mouth breathing, drooling Republican] It’s a liberal idea. That automatically makes it stupid. [/]Mb,d R]
It’s the whole concept of providing for people who didn’t make the proper job choice 40 years ago, failed to foresee the future of their career and failed to get training in several alternate careers. While also failing to save several million dollars to allow for stock market failure, severe health problems and forecasting inflation and cost of living.
Did we tax manufacturers for implementing assembly lines in the 19th century? Taxing robots in the 21st isn’t any different. That is (or at least should be) self-evident.
I don’t know. Perhaps we did. Whether it is a good idea or not depends on the amount of tax I suppose.
With more fuel efficient (and electric) cars on the road, some states are thinking of adding a per mile tax on vehicles to replace or supplement the gas tax. That seems to make some sense, given the new technology and its impact on government revenue. I can image a robot tax could be justified in the same way.
Let me just start by saying that I understand where you’re coming from, and it’s not necessary incredibly stupid. That already puts it head and shoulders above almost everything you post and literally every post by the OP in this thread, so kudos to that.
That said, self-evident? Seriously? No, it’s not self-evident. Explain why it’s stupid.