Ocasio Cortez - the world ends in 12 years

[jimnyc]

And Al Gore said similar shit about 12 years ago - and nothing at all panned out. Both nuts, her SO much more though. She is someone who is so dang popular now, and has the attention of the younger generation, and even a slice of those before her - and yet she's a flaming effing idiot!

---

Ocasio-Cortez on millennials: 'We're like the world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change'

The world is going to end in 12 years unless the government takes action, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said Monday at a Martin Luther King forum in New York City.

Here’s an excerpt from her interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates:

“And I think the part of it that is generational is that millennials and people, in Gen Z, and all these folks that come after us are looking up and we’re like, the world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change. You’re biggest issue, your biggest issue is how are going to pay for it? — and like this is the war, this is our World War II. And I think for younger people looking at this are more like, how are we saying let’s take it easy when 3,000 Americans died last year, how are we saying let’s take it easy when the end person died from our cruel and unjust criminal justice system?

How are we saying take it easy, the America that we’re living in today is dystopian with people sleeping in their cars so they can work a second job without healthcare and we’re told to settle down. It’s a fundamental separation between that fierce urgency of now, the why we can’t wait that King spoke of. That at some point this chronic reality do reach a breaking point and I think for our generation it reached that, I wished I didn’t have to be doing every post, but sometimes I just feel like people aren’t being held accountable. Until, we start pitching in and holding people accountable, I’m just gonna let them have it.”

https://news.grabien.com/story-ocasio-cortez-millennials-were-world-going-end-12-years-if-w

[jimnyc]

Huh? So someone may bust their asses their entire lives, and she thinks that's immoral? :rolleyes:

Why should it be immoral for anyone to exist based on their finances? What an effing idiot! Sounds like she thinks those very wealthy should once again be taking care of those who don't have. Robin Hood. :rolleyes:

---

'Immoral' our system 'allows billionaires to exist'

It’s “immoral” how America’s economic system “allows billionaires to exist,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), said Monday at a Martin Luther King forum in New York City.

Here’s an excerpt from her interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates:

COATES: “I hate to personalize this, but do you think it is immoral for individuals to, for instance — do we live in a moral world that allows for billionaires? Is that a moral outcome and and of itself?”

OCASIO-CORTEZ: “No, it’s not. It’s not.

(Cheers and applause)

It’s not, and I think it is important to say that — I don’t think that necessarily means that all billionaires are immoral. It is not to say that someone like Bill Gates,for example, or Warren Buffett are immoral people. I do not believe that.”

COATES: “Like, he kicks his dog, stuff like that.”

OCASIO-CORTEZ: “Yeah, I don’t — I’m not saying that, but I do think a system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don’t have access to public health is wrong.

(Applause)

And I think it’s wrong that — I think that it’s wrong that a vast majority of the country does not make a living great wage. I think it’s wrong that you can work 100 hours and not feed your kids. I think it’s wrong that corporations like Walmart and Amazon can get paid, they can get paid by the Government essentially, experience a wealth transfer from the public for paying people less than a minimum wage.”

https://news.grabien.com/story-ocasio-cortez-immoral-our-system-allows-billionaires-exist


Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tells Colbert 'how many f*cks' she gives and you can probs guess the number

You can probably tell from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's frankly stellar Twitter presence that she is a force to be reckoned with.

But, rather predictably, AOC and a few other vocal freshman members of congress have been told by senior politicians to "wait your turn, go slow," as Colbert put it. AOC has been quick to make a name for herself for her incisive tweets and fiery Twitter takedowns of GOP members.

Colbert asked her a question that a few us probably already know the answer to: "On a scale of zero to some, how many fucks do you give?" Colbert asked her.

"I think it's, uuuh, zero," replies AOC.

Extreme same!

https://mashable.com/video/stephen-colbert-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/#ovlLrl5MAsqf

[jimnyc]

DUMB: Socialist and Dem Mouthpiece Ocasio-Cortez Says Walmart-Amazon Employees Make Less Than Minimum Wage – FALSE

Democrat mouthpiece and Socialist darling spouted off against capitalism again on MLK Jr. holiday.

Ocasio-Cartez accused Walmart and Amazon of paying their employees less than minimum wage.

Once again the Socialist freshman does not have the slightest clue what she is talking about.

Walmart‘s entry level pay rate of $11 an hour greatly exceeds the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. In fact, it actually exceeds the minimum wage in all but three states, according to Reuters.

Amazon announced in October it’s raising the minimum wage for all U.S. employees to $15, effective next month. The new minimum wage will benefit more than 250,000 Amazon employees — including part-time and temporary employees — as well as another 100,000 seasonal employees.

Once again Ocasio-Cortez has NO CLUE what she is spouting off about.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/01/dumb-socialist-and-dem-mouthpiece-ocasio-cortez-says-walmart-amazon-employees-make-less-than-minimum-wage-false/

[Abbey Marie]

Jut heard a poll of Dems showed 74% would consider voting for her for President if she was 35.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Jut heard a poll of Dems showed 74% would consider voting for her for President if she was 35.
Holy mother of God............ http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/hand-gestures/facepalm-hand-gesture-smiley-emoticon.gif (http://www.sherv.net/)

[KarlMarx]

In 12 years?

I remember on the first Earth Day in 1970 being told that, because of pollution, the world would cease supporting all forms of life by 1985. Well, I guess that one didn’t happen.

So excuse me if I say We don’t get fooled again.

That being said, we CAN reduce carbon emissions significantly if we do one simple thing.....

Duct tape Alexandria Obstructed Cortex’s big mouth shut!

Honestly, has that woman read anything more challenging than a comic book?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KarlMarx]

Jut heard a poll of Dems showed 74% would consider voting for her for President if she was 35.

What do you call an American with an IQ of 10?

Answer: The Democratic Party


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Drummond]

I am SO sick of this 'pollution is bad, we must change our ways to save the planet' crap.

I really am.

If, repeat if, there's any problem, it's far less than doom-mongers say it is. Me, I doubt it's much of anything. I believe the claims are essentially propaganda to help global (GlobalIST) machinations of one sort or another. Additionally .. I suspect that a psychological game is being played ... to convince them that nationalistic thinking is literally deadly, we must be rid of it, so that the 'great global village' thinking achieves universal acceptance.

Hello, Globalism itself, and hello, the rise of extremist Socialism as the 'norm'.

There's a simple case to be made which exposes the 'we can save the planet, if we act NOW' argument as utter nonsense. I'm surprised more people haven't realised it ...

Pollutants are ejected into the environment thanks to man-made activities. OK, that's a 'given'. Now ... if in fact they've done damage, and are continuing to ... WHAT could we ever do about it ?

We don't have the technology to reverse the processes that cause it. So, to WHATEVER degree, we'll continue to add pollutants into the environment. We can slow its progress. We cannot stop it.

As for the pollutants already out there ... WE HAVE NO WAY OF REMOVING THEM, OR MITIGATING THEIR EFFECT.

This means one thing. If Mankind died tomorrow, & all pollution ceased, damage would STILL go on happening.

So you see, all this 'if we slow our pollution rate, we'll save the planet' propaganda is ONLY propaganda. It is NONSENSE. Which begs the question ... why do Left-leaning types insist otherwise ?

See my point ?

We can slow our rate of adding to the existing 'problem'. We've no way of stopping it. We've no way of reversing it. IF damage is done, it'll continue.

Why do the Left defy sheer commonsense, and say otherwise ?

BECAUSE EVERY LAST BIT OF THIS IS NONSENSE ????

[Noir]

Huh? So someone may bust their asses their entire lives, and she thinks that's immoral? :rolleyes:

Why should it be immoral for anyone to exist based on their finances? What an effing idiot! Sounds like she thinks those very wealthy should once again be taking care of those who don't have. Robin Hood. :rolleyes:

One things for sure - y’all really like talking about this woman because her name is everywhere.

As for billionaires, I think it’s non-controversial to say that income inequality (especially extreme cases like billionaires) doesn’t represent a peak in the moral landscape. How to account for that in a national system I don’t know, but in every sense the bedrock of capitalism is inequality and all that it brings.

[CSM]

One things for sure - y’all really like talking about this woman because her name is everywhere.

As for billionaires, I think it’s non-controversial to say that income inequality (especially extreme cases like billionaires) doesn’t represent a peak in the moral landscape. How to account for that in a national system I don’t know, but in every sense the bedrock of capitalism is inequality and all that it brings.

Capitalism presents an equal OPPORTUNITY and all that it can bring. Socialism and other forms of economics/government simply ensures that most (not ALL) are equally miserable. The "elite" will always be better off than the peons. Folks like this particular woman firmly believe they will be at the top of the food chain and have the right to tell others what their place in society should be. If she believed in true economic equality, her and her ilk would take no mare salary (and other benefits) than the average citizen. I can assure you that her salary does NOT reflect the average income of the typical US citizen.

[Bilgerat]

https://scontent-mia3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/50754235_1804116733026549_4872770964317798400_n.jp g?_nc_cat=111&_nc_ht=scontent-mia3-1.xx&oh=8f06906129df069d358a31b171d4adbe&oe=5CC1B4EB

[pete311]

It's a dumb statement if serious, but it appears pretty clear the remark was off the cuff figure of speech.

[Drummond]

One things for sure - y’all really like talking about this woman because her name is everywhere.

As for billionaires, I think it’s non-controversial to say that income inequality (especially extreme cases like billionaires) doesn’t represent a peak in the moral landscape. How to account for that in a national system I don’t know, but in every sense the bedrock of capitalism is inequality and all that it brings.

CSM's exactly right, of course.

You think that fully-applied Socialism, complete with the so-called 'equality' you're so thrilled about, is society's decent answer ? No ... Socialism requires, in real terms, that the fullest opportunities possible in a Capitalistic system can't be realised by anyone at all. It is a method by which standards are levelled-out so that (at best) nothing more than a degree of material mediocrity is ever possible.

Muse on this one, Noir ...

TRADE UNIONS.

Invariably, they're Socialist, and their leaders are 'proudly' Socialist.

So let's say these Union Socialists get all fired up about supposedly 'dismal' pay received by their membership. In full Socialist fervour, they convince the workers that THEIR principles will fight for THEM. So, strikes occur. The Union involved wins better pay (.. never mind about how it's afforded ... Socialist militants never think about such things). The membership is delighted.

Unions fight further wage battles, winning them. Pay goes up considerably. Everyone in the Union is happy, and they feel the Union has done, and is doing, great things for them.

Along comes REALITY, forcing one of these eventual outcomes:

1. The UNAFFORDABLE pay rates won by the Unions become unsupportable. The money paid can't be afforded, because the productivity necessary to earn that money hasn't kept up with wage demands. Outcome ... the business goes under, and mass layoffs happen.

2. The Union does so good a job at meeting everyone's needs and expectations, that people question what further use they can be. Why continue with a Trade Union whose purpose for being no longer actually exists ??

Here's the point: Unions can only dare do a LIMITED amount of 'good', if they're to enjoy long-term success. Exceed those limits .. they wipe away the very point of themselves. Thus .. Unions, in truth, only DARE offer improvements of a purely mediocre nature.

Socialist Utopianism is a fantasy. An outright LIE, in fact. It's self-limiting, therefore, guarantees to stunt whatever full potential can exist.

[Abbey Marie]

Holy mother of God............ http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/hand-gestures/facepalm-hand-gesture-smiley-emoticon.gif (http://www.sherv.net/)

Unreal, right?
The Hollywood-loving crowd makes decisions based on buzz as much as anything.

[jimnyc]

One things for sure - y’all really like talking about this woman because her name is everywhere.

And that means jack shit. It's the CONTENT of what is being discussed that matters - and her being the topic of discussion, as being an idiot for the ages, isn't something where "no news is bad news" applies. Everything vomiting out of her mouth is an embarrassment. Being an attention whore with retarded ideas isn't something that means much to me. Her ideas have nowhere to go and even her own party knows that.

[jimnyc]

It's a dumb statement if serious, but it appears pretty clear the remark was off the cuff figure of speech.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I know you haven't chimed into the endless threads, but that doesn't change the fact that endless amounts of idiocy are coming out of her blabbermouth. She has a track record thus far of - being dumb.

[Noir]

You think that fully-applied Socialism, complete with the so-called 'equality' you're so thrilled about, is society's decent answer ?

You are more than welcome to quote anything I’ve said that’s remotly like the statement you implied.


Capitalism presents an equal OPPORTUNITY and all that it can bring.

Kinda, but not really. Especially if you fall on the less lucky side of the coin, your opportunities are greatly diminished, and in an unfettered capitalist system potentially irreconcilably so.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You are more than welcome to quote anything I’ve said that’s remotly like the statement you implied.



Kinda, but not really. Especially if you fall on the less lucky side of the coin, your opportunities are greatly diminished, and in an unfettered capitalist system potentially irreconcilably so.

Problem is, conservatives and other intelligent people see this idiot woman and think, what a useless a loudmouth moron, while liberals/dems and their ilk see her and think what a genius, what a god!--Tyr

[CSM]

You are more than welcome to quote anything I’ve said that’s remotly like the statement you implied.



Kinda, but not really. Especially if you fall on the less lucky side of the coin, your opportunities are greatly diminished, and in an unfettered capitalist system potentially irreconcilably so.

Not necessarily true. I come from an extremely poor family and have managed to do fairly well. We never had the freebies they hand out these days; every one of my 7 siblings and my parents worked their butts off. Some of us managed to take advantage of the opportunities presented (for myself, most of those opportunities came via the military) and did more than just ok. Socialism would not have been as kind, I think.

[Noir]

Not necessarily true. I come from an extremely poor family and have managed to do fairly well. We never had the freebies they hand out these days; every one of my 7 siblings and my parents worked their butts off. Some of us managed to take advantage of the opportunities presented (for myself, most of those opportunities came via the military) and did more than just ok. Socialism would not have been as kind, I think.

Well I’m sure you got ‘freebies’ in terms of education etc, and certainly coming from a lower income household puts someone at a disadvantage, but there are much greater disadvantages on offer - like being born without the physical and mental health of your peers, etc.

[CSM]

Well I’m sure you got ‘freebies’ in terms of education etc, and certainly coming from a lower income household puts someone at a disadvantage, but there are much greater disadvantages on offer - like being born without the physical and mental health of your peers, etc.

Any higher education I received was either paid for by myself or as a result of my contract with the US military. Physical and mental handicaps at birth occur regardless of form of government and to suggest otherwise is pure unaduterated BS. Even "free" healthcare doesn't prevent that. Of course, there will always be the argument "but it is so much worse for..." (choose your favorite group of "victims" and insert here). I submit that many socialist countries have far worse problems than those seen if capitalist countries.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Unreal, right?
The Hollywood-loving crowd makes decisions based on buzz as much as anything.
And the demtrash want to LOWER the voting age to SIXTEEN... as if 18 year olds aren't IGNORANT enough.

What does that tell you?

It tells me the democrats need really STUPID people to vote for them.

I think the voting age should be RAISED to 21.

[Elessar]

And the demtrash want to LOWER the voting to SIXTEEN... as if 18 year olds aren't IGNORANT enough.

What does that tell you?

It tells me the democrats really need STUPID people to vote for them.

I think the voting age should be RAISED to 21.

In many ways I agree with you. At 18 many have no life experience to make logical choices
being only exposed to peers, uncaring parents/guardians, or Snake Oil politicians.
The minimum legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages in the USA is 21.

However, the fly in the ointment is the law that at 18, registration for Selective Service in case of
time of national crisis or war is mandatory, but only to males. Kind of a gender conflict to me in this
age of supposed 'gender equality'...but that is another issue.

[Drummond]

You are more than welcome to quote anything I’ve said that’s remotly like the statement you implied.

Do you not recognise a question when you see one, Noir ?


Kinda, but not really. Especially if you fall on the less lucky side of the coin, your opportunities are greatly diminished, and in an unfettered capitalist system potentially irreconcilably so.

I think, Noir, that you're speaking from a perception centred on your familiarity of the UK specifically. Does what you presume to be true, apply at all uniformly to other countries ?

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Oh there's no VOTER FRAUD... according to the SHIT STAIN DEMOCRATS... oh REALLY?

https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1089334468228321280
(https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1089334468228321280)

https://i.ibb.co/kBPd0GD/no-border-walls-no-voter-id-laws-figured-it-out-yet-nancy-pelosi-chuck-schumer.jpg

[KarlMarx]

I am SO sick of this 'pollution is bad, we must change our ways to save the planet' crap.

I really am.

If, repeat if, there's any problem, it's far less than doom-mongers say it is. Me, I doubt it's much of anything. I believe the claims are essentially propaganda to help global (GlobalIST) machinations of one sort or another. Additionally .. I suspect that a psychological game is being played ... to convince them that nationalistic thinking is literally deadly, we must be rid of it, so that the 'great global village' thinking achieves universal acceptance.

Hello, Globalism itself, and hello, the rise of extremist Socialism as the 'norm'.

There's a simple case to be made which exposes the 'we can save the planet, if we act NOW' argument as utter nonsense. I'm surprised more people haven't realised it ...

Pollutants are ejected into the environment thanks to man-made activities. OK, that's a 'given'. Now ... if in fact they've done damage, and are continuing to ... WHAT could we ever do about it ?

We don't have the technology to reverse the processes that cause it. So, to WHATEVER degree, we'll continue to add pollutants into the environment. We can slow its progress. We cannot stop it.

As for the pollutants already out there ... WE HAVE NO WAY OF REMOVING THEM, OR MITIGATING THEIR EFFECT.

This means one thing. If Mankind died tomorrow, & all pollution ceased, damage would STILL go on happening.

So you see, all this 'if we slow our pollution rate, we'll save the planet' propaganda is ONLY propaganda. It is NONSENSE. Which begs the question ... why do Left-leaning types insist otherwise ?

See my point ?

We can slow our rate of adding to the existing 'problem'. We've no way of stopping it. We've no way of reversing it. IF damage is done, it'll continue.

Why do the Left defy sheer commonsense, and say otherwise ?

BECAUSE EVERY LAST BIT OF THIS IS NONSENSE ????

Good points Drummond

The Earth has had much more extreme climate change than we are seeing at present...

Just a few examples, since I tend to go overboard at times 😀

The “snowball Earth” event around 650 Million Years ago . The ENTIRE planet was covered in glaciers.

The Permian Extinction around 250 Million Years ago... nearly 90 percent of all life on the Earth died.

I am quite sure that, had we had a Carbon Tax back then, we could have avoided both of them 🤣🤣🤣


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Not necessarily true. I come from an extremely poor family and have managed to do fairly well. We never had the freebies they hand out these days; every one of my 7 siblings and my parents worked their butts off. Some of us managed to take advantage of the opportunities presented (for myself, most of those opportunities came via the military) and did more than just ok. Socialism would not have been as kind, I think.
As did I..
Nobody ever gave me a damn thing, except maybe hard time- (those that did usually that paid a damn heavy price, tho").
I worked (long and very hard hours)for everything I got. Enjoyed the physical labor as it kept me in very fit shape. Could easily have went the brainpower route and made far, far more money.
Hell, even wished that I had done just that, now looking back at it all, with hindsight being 20/20..
Noir hasn't a clue.. .-Tyr

[Noir]

Any higher education I received was either paid for by myself or as a result of my contract with the US military.

And did you receive education prior to your higher education?


Physical and mental handicaps at birth occur regardless of form of government and to suggest otherwise is pure unaduterated BS. Even "free" healthcare doesn't prevent that. Of course, there will always be the argument "but it is so much worse for..." (choose your favorite group of "victims" and insert here). I submit that many socialist countries have far worse problems than those seen if capitalist countries.

Yes of course handicaps (and other bad luck) will occur regardless of the economic systems in place - a purely capitalist system will do little to nothing for these people, which is why a middle ground is important.

[Noir]

Do you not recognise a question when you see one, Noir ?

Great - so then the answer to your question is no.


I think, Noir, that you're speaking from a perception centred on your familiarity of the UK specifically. Does what you presume to be true, apply at all uniformly to other countries ?

I think there’s a fair amount of overlap yes - if you disagree feel free to expound.

[Drummond]

Great - so then the answer to your question is no.

You think that fully-applied Socialism is NOT the answer ?

Interesting. If true ... well done.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

https://i.ibb.co/nzC0xKS/Dy-F23-KEX4-AATYFB.jpg

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I'm tellin' ya... this is the funniest shit I've ever seen on twitter... these guys kill me... I've watched this a dozen times and bust a gut every time...

The Hodge Twins on AOC...

https://twitter.com/hodgetwins/status/1064709275975479296 (https://twitter.com/hodgetwins/status/1064709275975479296)

[Abbey Marie]

I'm tellin' ya... this is the funniest shit I've ever seen on twitter... these guys kill me... I've watched this a dozen times and bust a gut every time...

The Hodge Twins on AOC...

https://twitter.com/hodgetwins/status/1064709275975479296 (https://twitter.com/hodgetwins/status/1064709275975479296)

God, we are in trouble.