Angry Liberal

By the way, libtards almost never advocate for smaller government. Giving more power to the government in hopes that they will regulate large corporations is a mistake. If you let the government have that type of power, they will only be in cahoots with the large corporations for the purpose of profiting off a racket, something that is already happening. In case you don't know, the government made it illegal to sue drug companies over damage caused by vaccines. You can't fix corporation corruption with government power, only the free market can do that. So stop pretending to be Voltaire and realize that the only thing that needs to be larger is your brain, not the government.

Aha. Yeah... No

The fact that your response to my response to your response to my meme is only three words says a lot about your mental capacity.

No... it really doesn't

Prove it! If your intelligence is really more than incorrect grammar, then make a logically sound argument!

"Prove it! If your intelligence is really more than incorrect grammar, then make a logically sound argument!"

Ok. I'll even do it without insulting you

" libtards"

See, one of the reasons why I didn't really want to talk with you

"(liberals) almost never advocate for smaller government."

Yes, didn't say they did.

"Giving more power to the government in hopes that they will regulate large corporations is a mistake."

Not really how big government works. The idea is that through the usage of Taxes and Regulations we force the big Companies to not be c**ts

"If you let the government have that type of power, they will only be in cahoots with the large corporations for the purpose of profiting off a racket"

Maybe, it certainly is a possible outcome, but I think thats not as likely as you think

"the government made it illegal to sue drug companies over damage caused by vaccines."

See this is an example of big Government gone wrong. The idea of big Government in my head is that the Government watches the Corps and not watches the people for the Corps. To make sure they do so, we force the Politicans to introduce Consumer Friendly laws that would make our exploitation difficult if not outright illegal

"You can't fix corporation corruption with government power, only the free market can do that."

What? By letting them make more money they will eventually see the error of their ways and stop? By informing the consumer to not by the products of a Monopoly? My friend, government, as distastful as it maybe, is the only way to fight big Corporations.

"So stop pretending to be Voltaire and realize that the only thing that needs to be larger is your brain, not the government."

Among other things a reason why I didn't want to talk with you

"makeliberalsthinkagain"

This as well

If you don't want to talk with me, then why did you make this long response? Anyways, my argument exactly, is that the of point of a free market is letting people work out their own problems instead of relying on the government to fix all of our economical issues. The reason large corporations are becoming more unstoppable and corrupt is because we gave the government too much power, thinking it would help us. Look at what the Obama presidency brought us. Record welfare use, record national debt, lowest economy growth, and record poverty levels. The larger the government, the larger the problems. Did socialism ever work? (by the way, the Scandinavian countries are not socialist, they run on free market economics) No! And the only reason you would support its ideology is because your brain doesn't work either!

"If you don't want to talk with me, then why did you make this long response?"

"Prove it! If your intelligence is really more than incorrect grammar, then make a logically sound argument!"

"is that the of point of a free market is letting people work out their own problems instead of relying on the government to fix all of our economical issues"

The point of the free market is not societal change, but to make money

"The reason large corporations are becoming more unstoppable and corrupt is because we gave the government too much power"

How is regulating Corporations and Taxing the c**ts empowering government?

"Look at what the Obama presidency brought us. Record welfare use, record national debt, lowest economy growth, and record poverty levels."

So, I don't know from what year, but you realize the guy went through an economic recession and brought out America Stronger than ever?

"by the way, the Scandinavian countries are not socialist, they run on free market economics"

On Social Free Market Policies.

You hopefully realize, I wasn't arguing Socialism, but Social Democracy? The Scandinavian Countries are all Social Democracies. Because if you confused my stances as Socialist that would be embarrassing... oh wait.

You advocate for the government to fix our economy and fix our problems. Transferring responsibilities and power from the people to the state is precisely what socialism is about.

"You advocate for the government to fix our economy and fix our problems. Transferring responsibilities and power from the people to the state is precisely what socialism is about."

You assume too much

So using step-by-step deduction is assuming too much?

Look, I don't even know how you came to that conclusion. But no where did I say we should take power /away/ from the people. Because I have offered vaugley Social Policy opinions I am now a Socialist. That is not a step-by-step deduction my friend

You still can't even use punctuation correctly. You even spelled "vaguely" wrong. But anyways, here's the deduction: you advocate for the government to fight corporation corruption; since you said that the government is only way to fight big corporations, you are implying that the government hasn't done enough intervention yet as you are saying we need it; therefore you are implying the need for the government to have more power and means to do so; since many people wouldn't just let the government get bigger, the government therefore has to limit the power of the people.

Increasing government size always turns out at the expense of the people. Also, when you say corporations are corrupt, which ones are you even talking about? The massive ones that play a role in our daily lives, or simply larger expanded businesses, or what? Maybe you could be a little more specific instead of making strawman arguments. You're quoting my words out of context and supposedly rebutting them, which is a logical fallacy.

"You still can't even use punctuation correctly."

I don't think you got the message: I_AM_GERMAN_I_NO_WRITE_ENGLISH_VERY_GUT_JA?

"the government is only way to fight big corporations, you are implying that the government hasn't done enough intervention yet as you are saying we need it"

Yes

" therefore you are implying the need for the government to have more power"

No. How in the name of god? I am implying that the Government needs to e harder on Corporations! You don't need to give them more power for that!

"since many people wouldn't just let the government get bigger, the government therefore has to limit the power of the people."

So by your logic, the only way to fight Corporations with government is big government and to get big government we need t give it more power, which they will use to oppress people? Obviously you have failed at Government 101 and Democracy 101. Let me put it this way: THE GOVERNMENT = CAN REGULATE COMPANIES WITH NO NEED for MORE POWER = COMPANIES GET FEARFUL OF GOVERNMENT AND DON'T BE C**TS TO CITIZENS. Was für ein Horst

Just look at Denmark or any other Social Democratic nation for you to understand my point

P.s.
"Look at what the Obama presidency brought us"

I did, and here are the results:

"The economy gained a net 11.6 million jobs. The unemployment rate dropped to below the historical norm.
Average weekly earnings for all workers were up 4.0 percent after inflation. The gain was 3.7 percent for just production and nonsupervisory employees.
After-tax corporate profits also set records, as did stock prices. The S&P 500 index rose 166 percent.
The number of people lacking health insurance dropped by 15 million. Premiums rose, but more slowly than before.
The federal debt owed to the public rose 128 percent. Deficits were rising as Obama departed.
Home prices rose 20 percent. But the home ownership rate hit the lowest point in half a century.
Illegal immigration declined: The Border Patrol caught 35 percent fewer people trying to get into the U.S. from Mexico.
Wind and solar power increased 369 percent. Coal production declined 38 percent. Carbon emissions from burning fossil fuel dropped 11 percent.
Production of handguns rose 192 percent, to a record level.
The murder rate dropped to the lowest on record in 2014, then rose and finished at the same rate as when Obama took office."
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/obamas-final-numbers/

I even included my sauce

How are you so sure there exists a correlation between the Obama presidency and some of those events during that time? Besides, you're forgetting how Obamacare hurt our nation. Doctors were lost, prices for premiums rose by up to forty percent, and health insurance only became more expensive. Also, you spelled "source" wrong.