Can we please have no more PRATTs on this board?

[Rightguide]

Another PRATT: Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme.

Well, some people do collect more than they put in.

Social Security <i>is</i> a Ponzi scheme
By Andrew Napolitano , | Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/social-security-is-a-ponzi-scheme

March 16, 2005
The Social Security Ponzi scheme
By Noel Sheppard

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2005/03/the_social_security_ponzi_sche.html

 

[pecksniff]

Another PRATT: Covid was not created in a laboratory:

This bears repeating.

 

[pecksniff]

Regarding high crime rates in "blue-run shitholes": That is because 1) poverty is concentrated in cities and 2) poverty breeds crime and 3) poor people vote D, and have very good reasons to. It is not because of 4) any bad decisions made by D municipal leaders.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Regarding high crime rates in "blue-run shitholes": That is because 1) poverty is concentrated in cities and 2) poverty breeds crime and 3) poor people vote D, and have very good reasons to. It is not because of 4) any bad decisions made by D municipal leaders.

Poverty is caused by crime to a great extent...you have the causality backwards. And Dems love them some criminals.

 

[Rightguide]

Regarding high crime rates in "blue-run shitholes": That is because 1) poverty is concentrated in cities and 2) poverty breeds crime and 3) poor people vote D, and have very good reasons to. It is not because of 4) any bad decisions made by D municipal leaders.

Crime is caused by among other things, the pro-crime policies of Democrats. Democrats are the most destructive force in America today.

 

[pecksniff]

. . .the pro-crime policies of Democrats.

 

[PaxNurgle]

Crime is caused by among other things, the pro-crime policies of Democrats. Democrats are the most destructive force in America today.

Can you explain exactly which policies are "pro-crime" and WHY these policies lead to more crime?

Of course you can't.

Intellectual debate is clearly not your strong point. Copy-pasting articles from far-right news/propaganda media, on the other hand- nobody does that better than you.

Like, here's an example: San Francisco police no longer investigates or prosecutes automobile break-ins. Which has led to an explosion of property- related crimes in that city. And if you were to cite a source for this information (which you always do) you would cite a CREDIBLE source, like in this case the San Francisco Chronicle- not some far-right propaganda fringe website.

If you had wanted to start an intellectual debate, you could have cited this statistic, although you would then need to be clear whether this was "Democrat" policy or simply the result of an underfunded, understaffed and ineffective police force. But this is the type of debate I hope to have on a board like this. Not just copy/paste stuff- or (back to the original point of the thread) citing Points Refuted a Thousand Times. Because you cannot have an honest or intellectual debate with someone who (for example) still cannot admit that Joe Biden rightfully won the 2020 election.