I’m rapidly coming to the conclusion that people who cannot be bothered to vote shouldn’t really count.

Well that would be a lot more fun while being just as effective as the Democratic party, so why not?

Trump has refused to say what he’ll do because threatening Social Security during an election would cost him a lot of votes from seniors. On the other hand, now that he has won, Republicans have started freely admitting that Project 2025 is the plan for this administration. Project 2025 has this to say about Social Security.

Project 2025’s 900-page Mandate for Leadership fails to propose any solutions for Social Security and says, on page 710, that its proposals for the program could not be “covered here in depth.” Notably, that line was co-authored by economist Stephen Moore, who has advocated to slash and privatize Social Security, once calling it a “Ponzi scheme” and encouraging students to burn their Social Security cards. Kevin Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation, has also gone on record to say the Mandate for Leadership manifesto is just the basis of their plan and “there are parts of the plan that we will not share with the left.” Last month, his organization called for raising the retirement age, and the author of that analysis, Rachel Greszler, is listed as a Project 2025 contributor.

I would hazard to guess that the incoming administration will, at the very least, try to raise the Full Retirement Age to 69. I will be pleasantly shocked if they don’t try to privatize it as well.

You better watch your mouth or he’ll send Seal Team 6 to delete your ass. It’ll be an official act so it won’t be illegal for him to do so.

Collagen, huh? Frankly I’m tired of knowing how cold the water in the toilet bowl is.

Put another way, with proper crowd management people will not be dying in the first place and so there will be no trigger to start a panic.

Have you considered listening to the pretty extensive explanations they’ve given in this comments section as to why?

I was just entertaining a notion as I lack the skills to do an analysis like you did.

As for reading the other comments here, I have read them now, and they are interesting, but when I first commented, there were no other comments here and the post stood at -3.

The same people who are downvoting you, I guess. I’m not really sure what the objection is but they are very consistent. I’ve actually wondered if someone set up some bots to downvote all the MBFC bot posts for some reason.

deleted by creator

Just your quote, that says such people who give up some liberty don’t deserve any. I suppose you didn’t mean it that way but it seemed harsh.

Fair. Old Ben meant it harshly, I’m sure.

As for the internet being a public space where privacy shouldn’t be assumed, I have to disagree. There is far too much activity on the net that would never be conducted in a place where there is no assumption of privacy. Clearly things like banking matters need to be private and secure, but I include in this things like romantic matters. If any government can access any data on the internet that they want they any oppressive government will do so. In addition, any opening for government will be exploited sooner or later by criminals as well.

Essential in the sense of privacy being central to our nature. We all deserve, and indeed, need our privacy. In the USA, the 4th Amendment guarantees “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…” without sufficient evidence of wrongdoing. Any reasonable modern interpretation of that amendment should include electronic documents and communication.

I’m not sure why you would think that I believe tick-tockers should not have privacy protection. Any app that invades the users 'privacy should be banned for the same reason that end-to-end encryption should not be banned. If Tick-Tock refuses to respect the privacy of people’s non-Tick Tock communication then the app should be banned.

Benjamin Franklin once said: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

This still applies.

Atheism: yes, I know religion is stupid; but you know what else is stupid, trying to force feed your opinion; I mean, we can’t even joke about church wifi name here

Sure you can. Look again at your link. You linked straight to one heavily down voted comment thread under that post. Click the view all comments link and you can see that virtually all the other comments there are positive, mainly, other funny wifi names. If you find one negative post, already heavily down voted, to be too much negativity for you then you are not going to be happy anywhere on the internet.

I wish it really did hurt to be stupid. Those suffering from it would be much more inclined to correct the condition rather than delighting in it like they do now.

Hick-hop

Neptune’s Kiss…