I don't think he backpedaled lol. He just never had any idea wtf. But he's consistently had no idea wtf. He tried to explain it with the horrible 1<2 but 2!>1 thing.
I don't think he backpedaled lol. He just never had any idea wtf. But he's consistently had no idea wtf. He tried to explain it with the horrible 1<2 but 2!>1 thing.
Why are people still responding to this guy?Originally Posted by Skyylya
Because poopdeck has been dead recently and it's interesting.
This is where your understanding of this conversation is severely lacking. Regardless of anything that I've said or not said, you for some reason thing that I have to offer reasons as to why Romney will do a better job and as I've stated explicitly I don't think he will.
You seem to think you're an intelligent person as well, but you still are missing this.
Kuro: why will Romney do better
Me: I don't think he will
Kuro: but what makes you think Romney will do better than Obama
Me: I don't think he will, I just don't like Obama
Kuro: but what policies of Romney's do you think will make him better.
Seriously Kuro you've said a lot of things that make sense but participate in the conversation and don't just respond blinded by your need for me to support a position I didn't take. All of you have seriously missed out on this.
Eurell you don't understand what I mean by the 20% at all so drop that. And the 2>1 and 1<2 was stupid.
20% is not a majority, but 20% do have the majority of the bad debt student loans. Just like only 10% of the population of this country have 80 or 90% of the wealth. Same principal, get it now? The small population of all college students online, comprise the majority of the bad debt. I don't think I can say that more clearly.
Who ever said anything about me being racist? lol
Time to go to work. Have an exceptional day.
When someone else pointed how they had grants or w/e and were busting their ass at school and working hard enough for you to appreciate that he deserved the money, you called him the exception, not the rule. You kept saying that the majority of people receiving assistance were abusing the system. Then you pointed out how you it was 20% that were 'leeches' or w/e you called them. Again, the problem is that you aren't even understanding what you are saying.
No, you completely missed what I said please go back and re-read it.
He was talking about him being on welfare and I said that he is the exception and not the rule as far as I'm concerned and I'm glad that these programs exist for people like him. The 20% was strictly related to students using federal financial aid to go to school and that of the entire US college student population is about 20% online. And, as far as bad student loan debt goes this 20% of online students constitutes over 50% of the total bad student loan debt.
It was two separate issues.
Ok, so you think the majority of people on welfare are abusing the system then? (your only evidence of this being your one friend's sieter and her babies).
But you only think its about 20% that abusing the grants (which is where you kept claiming to have the most proof because you worked in this field).
This is what you're saying?
Here, let me help you. This is why people have been asking you for specific reasons why you think Romney will do a better job:
You made this claim, then offered zero explanation or elaboration on why you think so. The question was asked on page two and you've constantly evaded and accused everyone of not understanding what you mean, and then continued not explaining your position.
If everyone isn't understanding, explain it to us. How specifically would Romney's experience as a businessman help the country economically?
this guy acts like Obama does not have economic advisors helping him, and then acts like Romney is a guy coming up with these plans all by himself.
I wish our schools did a better job with critical thinking.
Saying that at least he is a businessman is a very minor statement. I dont know why you all want there to be more substance.
And Eurell the 20% is talking about student loans, not welfare. You are combining two different conversations.
My last post kept that separate. I'm just making sure that those are your thoughts on those 2 subjects.
Except it isn't a minor statement. It's called curiosity. You said being a businessman he might be able to help, implying he will do better out at the very least may do better.
Obama has been taking cues from Warren Buffet.
Hedge Funding is not business. It's some guy being in charge of a company to sell out and make money. Look at Sears. You think it's hurting because of taxes?
So again. How does being a businessman qualify you? It was a simple question and all you keep doing is saying LOL I NEVER SAID IT MADE HIM BETTER. Just answer the question or stop talking. This is the last time I'm repeating myself.
I think we need to get off this subject because the dude has already made up his mind. To be fair, the dude never said that he would vote for Romney although you did imply he was a better choice without explaining why other than he's a business man which doesn't tell anyone a damn thing.
So my personal question is this, why would you vote for Ron Paul?
Warren Buffet quotes : http://quotecorner.com/Warren-Buffett-quotes.html
Would it be better if I just said Obama would be better but I can't stand him and don't want him for four more years even if Romney is worse? I don't have specific details but I liked Ron Paul since appeared more focused on domestic concerns and fixing us. I can't give you more details than that.
This would be better, only because you actually admit you like romney more for no reason other then "because". At this point, even if obama was undeniably better, you'd still prefer romney in office "just because".
I don't know what to tell you dude, but you're a bad person.