The wealthy win again!
[views:9607][posts:73]________________________________________
[Aug 1,2011 1:00am - ridahsofdizoom ""]
the "job creators" get away with the financial meltdown, not a single revenue increase, nothing but cuts for the budget.
and we wonder why all the jobs are going to India and Brazil...
Economists, even conservative ones, are saying this is going to throw us back into recession, as if it ever ended for most of us...
can haz revolushun?
[Aug 1,2011 1:08am - ridahsofdizoom ""]
[img]
[Aug 1,2011 1:09am - ridahsofdizoom ""]
[img]
[Aug 1,2011 8:23am - ShadowSD ""]
This is pretty easy to solve though: don't vote for politicians who protect only the rich from taxes unless you are rich.
Sounds easy, but if people voted common sense like that and just voted their own economic interests, this wouldn't happen.
As long as people keep voting for members of Congress who are up front about protecting the wealthy above all, why should anyone be surprised if nothing changes? There are lots of people for instance who voted for Brown because he was "cooler" than that awkward uptight Coakley lady, well if you vote on personality over policy be prepared to bend over and take it up the ass. Don't worry though, it'll be from someone cool!
[Aug 1,2011 9:30am - hauptpflucker ""]
ridahsofdizoom said:
can haz revulshun?
[Aug 1,2011 9:59am - SLAAAAGG NLI ""]
Revolution will never happen as long as the middle class continues to have a comfortable standard of living. Things are headed the wrong direction but are really not bad here (for the middle and upper lower class). People won't throw away that comfort for a few ideals. We can sit and talk about it all we want. Never mind a revolution for a minute, I do believe that with our current cultural and politcal climate, we, as a nation, are not being bred for a revolution, but a civil war.
[Aug 1,2011 10:11am - Mutis ""]
SLAAAAGG%20NLI said:Revolution will never happen as long as the middle class continues to have a comfortable standard of living. Things are headed the wrong direction but are really not bad here (for the middle and upper lower class). People won't throw away that comfort for a few ideals. We can sit and talk about it all we want. Never mind a revolution for a minute, I do believe that with our current cultural and politcal climate, we, as a nation, are not being bred for a revolution, but a civil war.
There won't be a middle class if things keep on the track they are. I agree with you on the civil war bit though.
Only redneck guerrillas are real.
[Aug 1,2011 10:13am - arktouros ""]
A+
There's a housing crisis in Israel and huge protests over costs of living. It's 100 times worse over there, it's also 100 times smaller and their government exacerbates the problem with apartheid policies and extreme conservatism. Here, it's not at all the same.
In the next 20 years, you will see increased American tribalism, among classes and among states, among communities and families. You will see more states looking inward for revenue and policy enforcement, and receiving less in federal aid. It will be like Rome, without barbarians, without popes, but with state's rights.
[Aug 1,2011 10:20am - arktouros ""]
Also, you can look at all the graphs about where wealth is going, how from 1960-2010 the middle class standard of living has gone down while the upper class has gone up (that's economics with little regulation) but really, the definition of "American middle class" will change. They may even start growing their own food and not commuting an hour to a major city to work.
[Aug 1,2011 10:33am - Yeti ""]
nothing is going to happen. we are going to continue living on a razor's edge, political activism will continue to be bumper stickers and "like" buttons on Facebook, people will continue to bitch but never do anything, politicians will continue to be corrupt, and time will continue to move. nothing is going to change. the American public will never unite, they will never riot and protest unless they can't get into a party, total economic collapse is the next step. i for one welcome it, and hope half of the population dies within a week of it.
[Aug 1,2011 11:05am - arktouros ""]
ridahsofdizoom said:not a single revenue increase, nothing but cuts for the budget.
there is actually a little bit of sense in here, somewhere
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2011/08/2011815169437290.html
President Barack Obama has announced a deal with congressional leaders to raise the legal level of US debt
and avoid a potentially catastrophic default.
Here are details of the plan, which was worked out late on Sunday but still requires approval of the US congress where a number of politicians have voiced concerns:
THE DEBT CEILING - The deal would authorise an increase in the debt limit by at least $2.1tn. A senior administration official said that the level was enough to last until 2013, meaning it will not require action in 2012 - a presidential election year.
FIRST ROUND OF SPENDING CUTS - Immediately authorises spending cuts of more than $900bn to take place over the next decade. A White House official said the figure would be between $900bn and $1tn, while House Speaker John Boehner's office gave the figure of $917bn.
The White House said the cuts would be in the form of caps on discretionary spending - funding that is authorised at will by congress - and not from entitlements such as Social Security and the Medicare health programme for the elderly.
SECOND ROUND OF SPENDING CUTS - The package sets up a special committee in congress - to be evenly divided between members of Obama's Democratic Party and Boehner's Republican Party - that would find $1.5tn in further cuts from all areas.
The committee is required to come up with proposals by November 23. If congress does not enact the cuts, then automatic cuts of the same amount will come into force divided between military and non-military spending but not touching Medicare and Social Security, according to the White House.
DEFENCE SPENDING - The package would cut $350bn in defence spending over the next 10 years as part of the first batch of cuts. A White House official said that Obama in principle wanted half of savings to come from defence spending but that he was not formally proposing so for the second round of cuts.
The US military budget last year was around $700bn, by far the largest in the world, but the figure is certain to come down as the US winds down commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan.
TAXES - Boehner highlighted that the package would not include any tax hikes. Republican legislators have been firm on the issue, while some Democrats argue that the United States also needs to increase revenue in such a large deal.
The White House said that Obama could still fight to restore tax rates on wealthy Americans - bringing in nearly $1 trillion in revenue. Obama's Republican predecessor, George Bush, lowered the taxes on the wealthy but the cuts are set to expire at the end of 2012.
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT - The package calls for congress to vote by the end of the year on an amendment to the US constitution that requires a balanced budget, a longstanding proposal of conservative Republicans who say the country must keep its finances in order.
If congress approves the amendment, Obama would be authorised to seek another $1.5tn increase in the debt ceiling.
[Aug 1,2011 1:07pm - Yeti ""]
how many of those are going to be completely negated because of some sort of large scale military operation within the next year?
[Aug 2,2011 1:04am - bobnomaamrooney ""]
ONLY BERNIE SANDERS IS REAL
bennyhillifier
[Aug 2,2011 7:17am - demondave ""]
makes me want to move to VT
[Aug 2,2011 9:38am - ShadowSD ""]
Sanders is right as usual, 72% of Americans want higher taxes on the rich; if we would all across the country vote for Congresspeople who reflected that viewpoint, 72% of Congress would hold that position, and this stuff couldn't happen. Hell if we could get it to 51% in the House and 60% in the Senate, that would be enough right there.
[Aug 2,2011 11:13am - hauptpflucker ""]
The problem is that we are too lazy, fickle, spoiled, and shallow to actually pay any attention to who we vote for or what they stand for. We listen to the advertisments or make decisions based on what "party" we identify with. Many of us have no clue who represents us in congress, and they are the ones who represent us most directly. If outrage would finally lead to holding people accountable maybe the system in place could help create a government more representative of society.
[Aug 2,2011 1:08pm - Yeti ""]
not to mention how much of the country vote based on religious standpoint.
[Aug 2,2011 1:09pm - Yeti ""]
Michelle Bachmann should be boiled in her own pudding with a stake of holly through her heart, not a potential for president.
[Aug 2,2011 1:16pm - Lamp ""]
At least Donald Trump isn't running anymore. Fuck that guy. He should be serving a thousand consecutive life sentences.
[Aug 2,2011 1:24pm - goatcatalyst ""]
Good. Fuck the plebians.
[Aug 3,2011 10:13am - arkquimanthorn ""]
bennyhillifier
[Aug 3,2011 10:33am - DestroyYouAlot ""]
[img]
[Aug 3,2011 11:01am - FuckIsMySignature ""]
arkquimanthorn said:
bennyhillifier
THIS.
[Aug 3,2011 11:47am - Mutis ""]
Cool pump-up bro.
[Aug 3,2011 11:47am - FuckIsMySignature ""]
[img]
http://www.theonion.com/articles/drunken-b...ells-everyone-at-neighborhoo,21059/
[Aug 3,2011 3:25pm - the_reverend ""]
http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-deb...l-required-tough-concessions,21067/
[Aug 3,2011 10:13pm - douchebag_patrol ""]
[img]
[Aug 3,2011 10:24pm - ridahsofdizoom ""]
I read in a good piece of classic Anarchist literature "the conquest of bread" a manifesto for getting rid of government and oppressive concepts, written over a hundred years ago.
Part of it talks about a huge economic meltdown in Europe and of Rothschild admitting he caused the crisis and that he pretty much stole money from his workers by paying them so little, he then said if every european wanted their money back it would work out to 14 pounds, so he went around Europe for a week walking and sure enough a few people asked for their money back.
Why not just fix the problem the whole way, fuck the rich, they steal from us, let's appropriate the means of production and make them work for us, not for the few, there are those who argue that we are too dumb, or there are greedy people amongst us who will just bring the exploitation back in new forms like the USSR did, but we might as well try?
in case any CIA agents be reading, this is totally theoretical, not calling for a rebellion
[Aug 4,2011 1:06am - FuckIsMySignature ""]
watch from 1:00 on
bennyhillifier
priceless.
[Aug 4,2011 1:29am - ridahsofdizick ""]
i am starting the revolution, one rttp post at a time!!!
[Aug 4,2011 1:49am - ridahsofdizoom ""]
Psh I know all yall 'TTPERS be too busy eating cheesy poofs to revolt, I'll wait for all the Chinese making your toasters and the Hondurans making your pants to start it
only trolling the Gman is real
[Aug 4,2011 8:36am - arktouros ""]
lol @ bolshevik revolution fantasy. i'd rather revolt to get a working democracy back.
[Aug 4,2011 8:49am - arilliusbm ""]
Fuck typing long responses on a cell phon...er PDA.
The ONLY possible way for a revolution with society's current standards would be if we were overly oppressed and put into FEMA camps.
[Aug 4,2011 9:49am - Boozegood ""]
Fucking cry babies whining about the 'rich' make me want to neck punch everything. Be more specific or fuck off.
[Aug 4,2011 3:57pm - Gregd-blessedoffal ""]
Your revolution is over, Mr. Lebowski. Condolences. The bums lost. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?
[Aug 5,2011 9:13am - ridahsofdizoom ""]
Boozegood said:Fucking cry babies whining about the 'rich' make me want to neck punch everything. Be more specific or fuck off.
the idlers, the banksters, the maifoso, the middlemen, anyone who doesn't do real work that isn't tied to the production of food, clothes, shelter, entertainment, or art
Those who sit on wealth and use it as an excuse to have power over others
[Aug 5,2011 9:25am - largefreakatzero ""]
ridahsofdizoom said:
Boozegood said:Fucking cry babies whining about the 'rich' make me want to neck punch everything. Be more specific or fuck off.
the idlers, the banksters, the maifoso, the middlemen, anyone who doesn't do real work that isn't tied to the production of food, clothes, shelter, entertainment, or art
Those who sit on wealth and use it as an excuse to have power over others
So let's say some long-lost relative died and left you $5,000,000. What wonderful contribution to society would you make?
[Aug 5,2011 9:34am - arktouros ""]
dizoom, check out this course.
http://oyc.yale.edu/political-science/capitalism-success-crisis-and-reform
you can download them all, i suggest you do this. you will sound less like a 1917 russian peasant.
[Aug 5,2011 9:41am - arktouros ""]
ridahsofdizoom said:classic Anarchist literature lol
[Aug 5,2011 9:54am - Boozegood ""]
[QUOTE="ridahsofdizoom:1227190"
the idlers, the banksters, the maifoso, the middlemen, anyone who doesn't do real work that isn't tied to the production of food, clothes, shelter, entertainment, or art
Those who sit on wealth and use it as an excuse to have power over others
So, assholes who happen to have a lot of money, not 'the rich'?
[Aug 5,2011 10:55am - Boozegood ""]
Can someone at least explain it too me? The top percentage of earners already pay nearly 100% percent of the taxes. I'm not good/knowledgeable at/on this.
Why do you want people that already pay bazillions of dollars in taxes too have to pay more? Wouldn't it make sense to just have the bottom-rung who skip out on taxes, use up resources, and complain about everything actually contribute something?
[Aug 5,2011 11:30am - arktouros ""]
Boozegood said:The top percentage of earners already pay nearly 100% percent of the taxes.
Why do you want people that already pay bazillions of dollars in taxes too have to pay more?
I'll take a quick shot here. I'm not going to go and grab some numbers right now, but the first sentence isn't correct. Everything from tax cuts, to laundering, foreign investment, tax loopholes and credits, etc--people make careers out of helping corporations and wealthy people avoid paying taxes. Not to say they all do that and not to paint "the rich" as public enemy; "even the world's most privileged suffer from a cultural and class myopia that limits perspective and distorts self-understanding." So, there's this belief among the venerated American orthodoxy that taxing the rich kills jobs. In the science of economics, that's sort of an elementary school cop-out.
The healthiest economies have strong and mobile middle classes, a small, distributed upper class, and a small and upwardly-mobile lower class. To sustain a strong economy, laborers of middle and lower classes are educated, healthy, long-living, and have small families. Some would say that as owners of production, the rich have a "duty" to society to ensure that infrastructure stays intact. By using publicly-funded infrastructure (not only roads and water, but public education) to expand their wealth and service their own goals, I personally agree that they owe a debt to that public infrastructure.
Now from the perspective of a CEO, a corporation is a virus that is only interested in expanding wealth. Which is fine, and there is nothing wrong in staying afloat in a market economy to do that, but when unregulated, it begins to become exploitative, dominant, and above law. It is in their short-term interest to cut every corner possible. But lets say they stay at a low tax-rate for 30 years, and the lower classes have been picking up the tax bill. Soon when they want to recruit new workers, or use bridges to ship their goods, they'll find out that the labor pool is dumb as fuck and dies at 40, and the bridge falls out from underneath them. Which is sort of what is happening now.
tl;dr - Second lesson of history: wealth inequality creates unrest.
[Aug 5,2011 11:33am - Boozegood ""]
So just to be clear here once more, you are talking about corporations and the money holders behind them? Or are you talking about everyone in the top 90%, top 60%, or what?
Good post, just asking for reference.
[Aug 5,2011 11:45am - slar you morbid? ""]
Boozegood said: The top percentage of earners already pay nearly 100% percent of the taxes.
huh? which percentage would that be?
BE MOAR SPECIFIC OR...
also your not taking into account the difference between statutory and effective tax rates, i.e. what people/corporate entities are supposed to pay vs. what they actually pay after all the loopholes, deductions, etc.
[Aug 5,2011 11:47am - Alx_Casket ""]
What we need is another war! *slurps custard*
[Aug 5,2011 11:50am - arktouros ""]
I can't talk numbers, but I'm talking about large shareholders, that may or may not be involved in the activities of a corporation. If this corporation lobbies congress to increase military spending so they grab a contract for a new amphibious tank (which indirectly cuts funding for a public school) or, more directly, lobbies for de-regulation of an environmental law so they can dump their waste in a local river, they are actively increasing their wealth at the expense of population. It's sort of the global malady of unregulated capitalism. The shareholders can put their hands up and say "I didn't do it".
So to grab recent examples, look at the BP oil spill. BP and the government regulatory body that were both responsible for the safety of that equipment had their hands in each other's pockets and essentially deregulated themselves while no one else was watching, and when the pipe broke, their shares plummeted. Whether or not they will pay their fines has yet to be seen (Exxon still hasn't from 20+ years ago, last time I checked) their company brand is tarnished. Or the News Corp phone hacking scandal -- not only killed their shares but made David Cameron look like a joke. These have real effects on shares and real effects on public opinion. I guess my point is deregulation can both help and hurt a corporation, where the only thing that protects them from government and public scrutiny is walls of gold, and maybe their monopoly on a service that should be publically-owned and regulated.
[Aug 5,2011 12:04pm - FuckIsMySignature ""]
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/05/business...ecession-may-be-returning.html?_r=2
[Aug 5,2011 12:18pm - Boozegood ""]
slar%20you%20morbid? said:
Boozegood said: The top percentage of earners already pay nearly 100% percent of the taxes.
huh? which percentage would that be?
BE MOAR SPECIFIC OR...
also your not taking into account the difference between statutory and effective tax rates, i.e. what people/corporate entities are supposed to pay vs. what they actually pay after all the loopholes, deductions, etc.
The top earners being the top 50% instead of the bottom 50%, 'almost 100%' being a fluctuating percentage in the 90's. I understand people are sneaky snakes when it comes to paying taxes, but I'm not sure how increasing the amount of taxes they have to pay would fix that?
[Aug 5,2011 12:20pm - DestroyYouAlot ""]
I mean, it's sort of common knowledge that the very rich pay literally no taxes whatsoever. Most of'em are pretty boldfaced about it. Same goes for the largest corporations.
[Aug 5,2011 12:20pm - DestroyYouAlot ""]
Getting them to pay "any amount of dollars" would be a great start.
[Aug 5,2011 12:21pm - Alx_Casket ""]
Because saying that the wealthiest should be taxed at a higher rate is easier for laymen to perceive than "tax code reform"
[Aug 5,2011 12:21pm - Boozegood ""]
arktouros said:I can't talk numbers, but I'm talking about large shareholders, that may or may not be involved in the activities of a corporation. If this corporation lobbies congress to increase military spending so they grab a contract for a new amphibious tank (which indirectly cuts funding for a public school) or, more directly, lobbies for de-regulation of an environmental law so they can dump their waste in a local river, they are actively increasing their wealth at the expense of population. It's sort of the global malady of unregulated capitalism. The shareholders can put their hands up and say "I didn't do it".
So to grab recent examples, look at the BP oil spill. BP and the government regulatory body that were both responsible for the safety of that equipment had their hands in each other's pockets and essentially deregulated themselves while no one else was watching, and when the pipe broke, their shares plummeted. Whether or not they will pay their fines has yet to be seen (Exxon still hasn't from 20+ years ago, last time I checked) their company brand is tarnished. Or the News Corp phone hacking scandal -- not only killed their shares but made David Cameron look like a joke. These have real effects on shares and real effects on public opinion. I guess my point is deregulation can both help and hurt a corporation, where the only thing that protects them from government and public scrutiny is walls of gold, and maybe their monopoly on a service that should be publically-owned and regulated.
Good post. Corporations are the definite 'touchy subject' of capitalism, due too the general populace thinking of them as businesses when the laws that pertain to businesses and corporations are very different.
[Aug 5,2011 12:27pm - Boozegood ""]
Serious question, just looking for an answer, not implying anything: Is there any information on how much money is being lost too people in the lower income bracket/welfare/illegal residents skipping out on taxes ?
[Aug 5,2011 12:28pm - largefreakatzero ""]
Applicable to this subject:
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-29/tech/ap...-jobs-apple-cash-balance?_s=PM:TECH
[Aug 5,2011 12:30pm - Boozegood ""]
largefreakatzero said:Applicable to this subject:
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-29/tech/ap...-jobs-apple-cash-balance?_s=PM:TECH
"Maybe the cash-strapped U.S. government should start selling iPads."
The irony of that is that the government really SHOULD do more to earn money outside of taking it from the earnings of their citizens.
[Aug 5,2011 12:32pm - DestroyYouAlot ""]
Boozegood said:
largefreakatzero said:Applicable to this subject:
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-29/tech/ap...-jobs-apple-cash-balance?_s=PM:TECH
"Maybe the cash-strapped U.S. government should start selling iPads."
The irony of that is that the government really SHOULD do more to earn money outside of taking it from the earnings of their citizens.
I can totally get down with this - or, at least, there should be some correlation between what government requires from its citizens, and what it does for them.
'Course, I'm of the mind that there should be some correlation between what is required to be ELIGIBLE for citizenship, and what's granted by said status, soooo...
[Aug 5,2011 12:33pm - largefreakatzero ""]
Boozegood said:
largefreakatzero said:Applicable to this subject:
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-29/tech/ap...-jobs-apple-cash-balance?_s=PM:TECH
"Maybe the cash-strapped U.S. government should start selling iPads."
Or iPads filled with...weeeeeeeed...
[Aug 5,2011 12:36pm - arktouros ""]
Boozegood said:Serious question, just looking for an answer, not implying anything: Is there any information on how much money is being lost too people in the lower income bracket/welfare/illegal residents skipping out on taxes ?
without taking into account the rediculously unique and bloated american prison and justice system, the money lost on them is probably a lot. however, without welfare and alien safety nets, would the cost of persecution, high crime, and gestapoing them to death be more? i don't know, but maybe someday we'll find out.
[Aug 5,2011 12:44pm - Boozegood ""]
Well, at least this thread went from stupid pseudo-Anarchist/Commie bullshit, to an intelligent discussion. AM I REALLY ON RTTP?!
[Aug 5,2011 12:47pm - arktouros ""]
Boozegood said:
The irony of that is that the government really SHOULD do more to earn money outside of taking it from the earnings of their citizens.
relevant, obama has been trying to do this against the behest of a broken government.
http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2010/09/an-in...rivate-investment-for-public-works/
[Aug 5,2011 1:06pm - arktouros ""]
Boozegood said:how much money is being lost too people in the lower income bracket
also, it might be good to look that in the way of investment, which many people don't for some reason -- knowing a lot of people who've collected unemployment/assistance, used that to get the hell out of their unfortunate situation, get an education, work toward providing for themselves, in ways they could not have done without that assistance. collecting assistance doesn't mean you're a lazy asshole, a lazy asshole is a lazy asshole either way. lazy asshole
[Aug 5,2011 1:10pm - Boozegood ""]
arktouros said:
Boozegood said:how much money is being lost too people in the lower income bracket
also, it might be good to look that in the way of investment, which many people don't for some reason -- knowing a lot of people who've collected unemployment/assistance, used that to get the hell out of their unfortunate situation, get an education, work toward providing for themselves, in ways they could not have done without that assistance. collecting assistance doesn't mean you're a lazy asshole, a lazy asshole is a lazy asshole either way. lazy asshole
I fully agree, I have collected unemployment for a bit when I got out of the Corps. I just meant the people that do no pay taxes, from that area of life. I never hear anything about that, just the opposite end of the spectrum.
[Aug 6,2011 11:10pm - ridahsofdizoom ""]
yeah, protect the state man, pay the people starvation wages and make sure the public education system never works mannnnn
[Aug 7,2011 3:48pm - longdeadgod ""]
the public eductation system fails mostly because of the lack of a sense of personal responsibility in america, wether it be the parents of or the students. as soon as a kid fails its the teachers fault, not the fact that the kid never spent one minute studying.
[Aug 7,2011 5:02pm - bobnomaamrooney nli ""]
I'd pin most of our issues re:education on fortune 500 companies' influence on setting education policy. Business had been the driving force behind our shift toward standards based education (read increased reliance on high stakes standardized testing) over the past two decades despite innumerable complaints from the educators who actually teach kids.
And while there are a multitude of factors behind our nation's decline I'd put the majority of it at the feet of an educational model that discourages innovative and creative thinking in favor of drilling and rote memorization.
[Aug 7,2011 9:41pm - ShadowSD ""]
Nailed it.
I've been saying this for years, sums up my philosophy as a guitar/theory teacher in throwing off those chains; all teachers should.
[Aug 8,2011 2:47am - ridahsofdizoom ""]
bobnomaamrooney%20nli said:I'd pin most of our issues re:education on fortune 500 companies' influence on setting education policy. Business had been the driving force behind our shift toward standards based education (read increased reliance on high stakes standardized testing) over the past two decades despite innumerable complaints from the educators who actually teach kids.
And while there are a multitude of factors behind our nation's decline I'd put the majority of it at the feet of an educational model that discourages innovative and creative thinking in favor of drilling and rote memorization.
This
The whole system of education seems to create people uninterested in learning once they get out of the public school system...sometimes I wonder if it is intentional, whatever Thomas Jefferson said about a nation and a need for well educated, freethinkers etc.
[Aug 8,2011 10:55am - poopshit ""]
Boozegood said:Well, at least this thread went from stupid pseudo-Anarchist/Commie bullshit, to an intelligent discussion. AM I REALLY ON RTTP?!
this post is an example of one of the most annoying and non-productive aspects to the national dialog about the economy: the fact that you can't talk about regulation or corporate responsibility or paying higher taxes without some dick, whose brain can't handle nuance, automatically start tossing around "COMMIE" (or marxist, or anarchist, or anti-freedom, etc.)....
not saying you're one of those dicks, but really.... commies??? isn't that just the easiest shortcut accusation to make?
[Aug 8,2011 11:12am - ridahsofdizoom ""]
bennyhillifier
[Aug 8,2011 11:51am - ridahsofdizoom ""]
[img]
Lowell in 10 years...or Lynn...or JP...or any working class city that the rich have stuck their tentacles into because of how cool urban landscapes are now to the Yuppy culture
[Aug 8,2011 12:57pm - FuckIsMySignature ""]
where is that ^
[Aug 8,2011 12:59pm - ark ""]
Mexico city
[Aug 8,2011 1:05pm - FuckIsMySignature ""]
ah.
[Aug 8,2011 1:13pm - Stickydrippintitz ""]
FuckIsMySignature said:watch from 1:00 on
bennyhillifier
priceless.
I'm voting for this mofo!!!!!!! His taglines will be "Spade the Bitches." and
"FUCK YOUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!!"