@Save the Loli EXPOSED

im not an anime fan recommend me something normal
Capture.PNG
 
Well... what's the context?
He wanted to know how banks would enforce Fedcoin (which he doesn't believe in since he loves the Biden economy and simps for the Uniparty), and I told him, but like many individuals with diminished IQ, the dumb faggot didn't understand the nuance so thinks I believe banks are secretly holding dollar barbecues.
Lying faggot.
You asked for how banks would get people to use Fedcoin, I told you how they would. I don't know what point you're trying to prove here since my IQ is higher than 85.
 
I don't know what point you're trying to prove here since my IQ is higher than 85.
Coins or paper money are still valid to exchange for digital Fedcoin, but since the bank is shredding/melting them down, they're harder and harder to come by.
Yes I asked and you gave a hilariously awful answer that showed you have no understanding of economics and you knew it was a retarded answer because you tried lying about making it. can you explain what nuance you're talking about? That's the exact thing you said. Why did you lie about making that comment?
 
Last edited:
Yes I asked and you gave a hilariously awful answer that showed you have no understanding of economics and you knew it was a retarded answer because you tried lying about making it.
Yep, I sure said that, in reference to you asking how Fedcoin might get enforced. That's exactly how they will do it when Fedcoin is rolled out, not what they're doing right now.

BTW I'm pretty sure anyone who thinks "[...]America is more less functioning as normal[...]I can walk through my Neighborhood doing the same things I did 10 years ago" has no right to comment on economics. That's "I take stock tips from Jim Cramer" levels of braindead.
 
That's exactly how they will do it when Fedcoin is rolled out, not what they're doing right now.
So you believe that is something that's going to happen then? If that's something you actually believe why did try lying about making it?
(which he doesn't believe in since he loves the Biden economy and simps for the Uniparty),
"You're a leftist!"
China didn't have much civil unrest under Mao outside of the years of literal massive famines and internal bullshit like the Cultural Revolution. Or if you want a more fair comparison, Chinese meat consumption in 1994 versus 2024. Somehow it doesn't seem to have been an issue back then.
The pot calling the kettle nigger.

See what I mean about him calling you a Neocon when you make him look like a fucking schizophrenic retard. He also keeps responding over and over again digging his grave deeper and deeper bumping a thread made to troll him because I guess he thinks he'll look stupid if he doesn't get the last word in? You don't need much help there buddy.

That's peak Lolcow behavior when you can take a persons own words and prove they're a retard chimp. It's also Lolcow behavior when you don't know when to stop responding.

 
Last edited:
So you believe that is something that's going to happen then? If that's something you actually believe why did try lying about making it?
Yep, it just isn't happening now like you claim I think it is. Please stop living up to your username.
See what I mean about him calling you a Neocon when you make him look like a fucking schizophrenic retard. He also keeps responding over and over again digging his grave deeper and deeper bumping a thread made to troll him because I guess he thinks he'll look stupid if he doesn't get the last word in? You don't need much help there buddy.

That's peak Lolcow behavior when you can take a persons own words and prove they're a retard chimp. It's also Lolcow behavior when you don't know when to stop responding.

View attachment 5601922
How is pointing out that China was stable under Mao "leftism?"
 
Yep, it just isn't happening now like you claim I think it is. Please stop living up to your username.
Whether it's happening now or not is irrelevant because it's something you still said fully believing which still makes you look like an idiot. You knew it was a retarded take which is why you lied about posting it, then receipts were posted so now you have to desperately save face when it would be easier to just let the thread die instead of repeatedly bumping with increasingly dumber responses. You're literally a Lolcow.
How is pointing out that China was stable under Mao "leftism?"
Yeah, just like how Stalin did it. By torturing and murdering millions of people. But nah, they were just having a picnic at Tiananmen Square.

You might want to stop responding and bumping an obvious bait thread because you look dumber with each post.

What's with this trend of opening threads to roast esteemed users?
Because retards like Save the Loli take the bait and keep responding to them.
 
Whether it's happening now or not is irrelevant because it's something you still said fully believing which still makes you look like an idiot. You knew it was a retarded take which is why you lied about posting it, then receipts were posted so now you have to desperately save face when it would be easier to just let the thread die instead of repeatedly bumping with increasingly dumber responses. You're literally a Lolcow.
You mean I caught you being a dumb faggot claiming I believe banks are barbecuing dollar bills, and now you're butthurt I caught you in your stupidity. Just like I did in another recent thread when you believed "per capita" and "per person" meant two different things. Goddamn you're stupid.
Yeah, just like how Stalin did it. By torturing and murdering millions of people. But nah, they were just having a picnic at Tiananmen Square.

You might want to stop responding and bumping an obvious bait thread because you look dumber with each post.
Woah, you sound like you're agreeing with the premise that China was stable under Mao! Welcome to the party, comrade!
 
Because retards like Save the Loli take the bait and keep responding to them.

I agree with him in some stuff and I disagree with him in some other stuff.

But I think he needs credit that he usually presents his points rather well written and reasoned, and he makes it quite easy to follow on his logic. He also has a proneness to leave the conclusions out and not outright do the classic structure where you end up stating that this is your opinion after a long spergery. His writings usually read as open pondering.

That doesn't mean he doesn't have an agenda to push or an ideology, though I'm not entirely sure what that ideology exactly is.

I'm not easily fooled with this sort of thing, and I can tell he has a vast, legit, knowledge of History, Politics, Philosophy and Religion. He's able to hold his own in some rather niche topics and he comes up from time to time with rather obscure facts about the most random shit.

If I was to guess, I'd say he's some History/Philosophy major. One that is either rather old or had a rather tough University time.

I can also understand why he would look at Red China with heart shaped pupils and at the United States with jaded disgust. I do think however he is deep inside his heart an American patriot. The America he is loyal to is just very patently dead, if it ever existed to begin with, and what it exists is a subverted America that actively works to destroy the values @Save the Loli, and a sizable portion of other Americans, consider to be quintessentially American. Whatever those might be.

His seemingly admiration for China is a double whammy of an admiration for East Asia in general and the admiration in particular for a rising country that appears to be doing things pragmatically and whose strategies, at least in what pertains to its place and influence in the world, are seemingly effective. He also appears to admire that they somewhat manage to combine Socialism with Nationalism in a way that they have somewhat of a welfare state and active policies to sustain, nurture and promote their culture and traditions.

In that regard, I would call him misguided and naive, but I think he must realize this at some level.
 
I think he needs credit that he usually presents his points rather well written
I respect you trying to play devil's advocate and all but his arguments play like this.

1. Make exact same claim he made several times already worded slightly differently.
2. Refuse to acknowledge arguments people make that complete eviscerate your retarded claims and also refuse to elaborate on his own claims in anyway shape or form.
3. Post link to an article that doesn't say what he think it does or you just post it and hope people don't check to make your points seem valid because you're too lazy to defend your claims.
4. Gets pissy when people don't follow his schizophrenic logic and make shitty ad-hominem attacks at people instead of ever refuting your points.
5. Keep responding over and over getting increasingly dumber, more hostile and less relveant with each and every response.

You see it right here, whether you believe him or not he is just totally incapable of being appealing/convincing at all. He's like a breadtuber what he says might sound convincing until you think about it at all and then it falls apart which is why he never explains or elaborates on his points.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Ewan McGregor
I respect you trying to play devil's advocate and all but his arguments play like this.

1. Make exact same claim he made several times already worded slightly differently.
2. Refuse to acknowledge arguments people make that complete eviscerate your retarded claims and also refuse to elaborate on his own claims in anyway shape or form.
3. Post link to an article that doesn't say what he think it does or you just post it and hope people don't check to make your points seem valid because you're too lazy to defend your claims.
4. Gets pissy when people don't follow his schizophrenic logic and make shitty ad-hominem attacks at people instead of ever refuting your points.
5. Keep responding over and over getting increasingly dumber, more hostile and less relveant with each and every response.

You see it right here, whether you believe him or not he is just totally incapable of being appealing/convincing at all. He's like a breadtuber what he says might sound convincing until you think about it at all and then it falls apart which is why he never explains or elaborates on his points.
I can see why you think that given you don't understand the difference between "per capita" and "per person". You're basically the nog at the Stephen Hawking lecture guffawing "aw shiiiet dat nigga in a wheelchair said yo anus haw haw haw." It's sad, really. My guess is you're either ESL (and need to go back) or you went to an 80%+ black public school and started looking up to your intellectual equals Ty'Juan and DaQwandrae.
 
Back