by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .58596061626364. . .112113»

North sonovia wrote:Why I'm just the WA delegate. But I'm flattered :)Epic.He meant because [some] women sometimes claim that the patriarchy prevents us from getting jobs/working, and even when we do get jobs, we don't get paid equally. It's up for you to decide to believe if it's a myth or a fact.

I think the patriarchy is a myth change my mind

Xavier The 1 wrote:I think the patriarchy is a myth change my mind

I agree, for the most part.

North sonovia wrote:I agree, for the most part.

Yes it existed a long time ago but not anymore

North sonovia wrote:Why I'm just the WA delegate. But I'm flattered :)Epic.He meant because [some] women sometimes claim that the patriarchy prevents us from getting jobs/working, and even when we do get jobs, we don't get paid equally. It's up for you to decide to believe if it's a myth or a fact.

Women can't get drafted, so that kind of justifies the pay gap, but not really. if anything we should get paid the same, and we should both get drafted.

North sonovia

Anamonta

Asian islands wrote:Women can't get drafted, so that kind of justifies the pay gap, but not really. if anything we should get paid the same,
and we should both get drafted.

North sonovia wrote:Why I'm just the WA delegate. But I'm flattered :)Epic.He meant because [some] women sometimes claim that the patriarchy prevents us from getting jobs/working, and even when we do get jobs, we don't get paid equally. It's up for you to decide to believe if it's a myth or a fact.

The Pay Gap is a myth, has been for quite a while.
The "Official" way of finding pay gaps is dividing the average income of a male by the average income of a female.
This however, is not a good way to find a pay gap, mostly because women are more pressured into lower paying part time jobs as to take care of their children. However, men are typically pressured into the role of the breadwinner who provides for his family. Now of course, this isn't absolute and there are women in very high positions, as there are men in low positions.

Now yes, men are typically biased towards men and women likewise. But that's a whole other argument.
In any given job, a man will earn the same as a woman if they are in the same position.

This is going off of US law, as per The Equal Pay Act of 1963. In other countries, the gender pay gap is still a problem.

Xavier The 1 and North sonovia

Anamonta wrote:The Pay Gap is a myth, has been for quite a while.
The "Official" way of finding pay gaps is dividing the average income of a male by the average income of a female.
This however, is not a good way to find a pay gap, mostly because women are more pressured into lower paying part time jobs as to take care of their children. However, men are typically pressured into the role of the breadwinner who provides for his family. Now of course, this isn't absolute and there are women in very high positions, as there are men in low positions.

Now yes, men are typically biased towards men and women likewise. But that's a whole other argument.
In any given job, a man will earn the same as a woman if they are in the same position.

This is going off of US law, as per The Equal Pay Act of 1963. In other countries, the gender pay gap is still a problem.

exactly

Xavier The 1 wrote:exactly

If you support his opinion you should like his comment-

i did it

South alderton

Posts I wish I could double like: Part 1.

Alternate pallapati wrote:I'm the imposter, prepare to be thrown out of the spaceship

Alternate pallapati wrote:Sonovia, third grader confirmed

North sonovia wrote:Well is it another robot-backed economy?

United corporate states wrote:the only time i went socialist was because of those dam computers

United carolinas republic wrote:socialism only works in 2 places: in heaven where they dont need it and in hell where they all ready have it

United carolinas republic wrote:its doesnt work LOL never has and I doubt it ever will

North sonovia wrote:I mean, you can't just bluntly accuse socialism of just being plain terrible. It's still possible for it to work under certain circumstances, although these circumstances have to be very special and elaborate, and in history it has failed many times, and not many countries have ever achieved the goal of successful socialism. It works in theory, but when you try it in real life, it normally doesn't pan out well. This is called de jure and de facto.

Sweden is an example of successful socialism (socialist mainly by welfare policies), but it has a low population, a clean environment with a good agriculture, and little national debt. Of course it worked for them. It can work for cute little pacifist countries with populations that even have the goddamn option to be politically apathetic.

Now compare cute little pacifist Sweden with India.

India is a socialist-leaning country, and although not all of India is poor, this country has high poverty rates and their government is just sitting back absolutely thriving. This most likely isn't a coincidence, if you ask me. It's the second most-populated country with 1.1B+ people, and it's impossible for welfare to work for them.

In some cases it will work. In most cases, it will fail. In some more cases, it fails horribly and the economy falls into recession.

But it will never, say it with me now, I repeat, never, ever work for America. Capitalism is the only successful ideology in opposition to socialism that has worked. The day America will become socialist never mind, Biden is in office, hold on...

The day America becomes socialist (and it works out for us) is going to be on the same day when hell freezes over, and that is final.

North sonovia wrote:I said that they're socialist through welfare. My entire argument was literally about socialist welfare. The only citizens deserving welfare are the disabled who can't work, not lazy people who choose to remain poor. If the government gives them money, who says they'll buy food with it? Who knows, maybe they could end up buying drugs with it. That situation is defined as the government literally helping citizens ruin their own lives.

Sweden is socialist through welfare and Capitalist through free-markets. It's called mixed economics. The welfare part, I despise. The free-markets part, though, I like. I just think Sweden is very left-leaning because of their high populations of Liberals that drown out the populations of Conservatives, and many non-Conservative stances on many different things as well, which I no longer have time to specify on due to the fact that my online classes will start shortly.

Also, is English your L2? I'm wondering based off of your spelling. It's either you're bilingual (sign of intelligence), but still learning, or you're a 12-year old politically-brainwashed kid who still doesn't know how to spell.

North sonovia wrote:Yep, not even going to.

Class in less than one minute, farewell. Not welfare.

United corporate states wrote:well that was heated

United carolinas republic wrote:i dont get why someone from a right wing region would even show a lil mercy to socialism

Anamonta wrote:"State Capitalism" sure is a funny way of saying Communism

United corporate states wrote:no its not capitalism more like crony capitalism

Anamonta wrote:North American Left and European Left are two very different things, it's a travesty to even compare them.

North autrion wrote:Hey guy's what's up I know I seem like a left-wing nation when I say Democratic Republic, but I'm more focused on the economy and the right to bear arms, etc then to suppress my citizens like Communism, Socialism, and Fazism. I have opinions like the Libertarian Party. Anyways just wanted to say hi, that's all!

Asian islands wrote:What the f*ck happened while I was gone

North autrion wrote:Everything happened that's all some argument between mixed economics and such. For once in my life I agree with somebody, which is the leader of the region.

Asian islands wrote:Some lady told me she didn't want to work in the sewer and I just shook my head and told her, "Don't let the patriarchy hold you down."

South lawrencia wrote:I missed some crazy things

United corporate states, Anamonta, and North sonovia

Biden is a fu****g idiot wanting to ban the Second Amendment, a direct violation of our original constitutional rights. Most Democrats are like that with gun control and banning, Stupid sh** like that. This is why I hate Democrats because all they want to do in my opinion is violate our original constitution.

Anamonta

Asian islands

North autrion wrote:Biden is a fu****g idiot wanting to ban the Second Amendment, a direct violation of our original constitutional rights. Most Democrats are like that with gun control and banning, Stupid sh** like that. This is why I hate Democrats because all they want to do in my opinion is violate our original constitution.

I mean, you can't really ban the second amendment, he would have to propose a new amendment to get rid of it. which is very unlikely as there have only been 27 amendments in US history, this is of course not counting the 10 from the bill of rights. but he can definitely try to make it more difficult to own a firearm and add restrictions, which would suck.

North autrion

Did anyone see my forums post on the NSGD?

Yeah, actually you have a point. Asian islands Let's hope restrictions are not put on firearms.

North sonovia wrote:Did anyone see my forums post on the NSGD?

Not yet...

North autrion wrote:Yeah, actually you have a point. Asian islands Let's hope restrictions are not put on firearms.

well would you mind adding onto this sh:t and defending me please

North autrion wrote:Not yet...

Oh.

North sonovia wrote:well would you mind adding onto this sh:t and defending me please


When I said this, I thought you'd seen this.

North autrion

North sonovia wrote:Oh.When I said this, I thought you'd seen this.

Fair enough, I was talking about not seeing the forum post yet. :)

Israel needs to chill a little

So pep

Asian islands wrote:Israel needs to chill a little

No, The Palestinians do.

Jerusalem was the birth-place of Judaism and when Christians and Muslims come along saying that they OWN the place?

That’s a no no.

So I completely agree with Israel here.

Civil response

Asian islands

So pep wrote:No, The Palestinians do.

Jerusalem was the birth-place of Judaism and when Christians and Muslims come along saying that they OWN the place?

That’s a no no.

So I completely agree with Israel here.

Just because it was the birth place of a religion doesn't mean they own the land either

And I don't think one side should get to claim it, they both have lived there for a long time so they should share it, without confilct.

So pep

Asian islands wrote:Just because it was the birth place of a religion doesn't mean they own the land either

And I don't think one side should get to claim it, they both have lived there for a long time so they should share it, without confilct.

Yes, I agree.
Imma just back down

So pep wrote:Yes, I agree.
Imma just back down

why must you back down, I agreed with you there-

So pep

North sonovia wrote:why must you back down, I agreed with you there-

Because I don’t want to get into an argument and then reported for ‘flaming’

North sonovia

So pep wrote:Because I don’t want to get into an argument and then reported for ‘flaming’

Then your defense needs to be a Civil response.

Edit: was it that bad of a joke?

Hakuri, So pep, and Civil response

North sonovia wrote:Then your defense needs to be a Civil response.

Edit: was it that bad of a joke?

Lol

Im not very good at keeping calm in arguments

«12. . .58596061626364. . .112113»

Advertisement