Page #2
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 ...#60
New Comment Rating: 0 Similar topics: 1.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 2.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF III 4.Be honest!! 5.Is this about you 🤷♂️, those that live in glass houses should not throw stones. Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
You want to read about the REAL world issues?
Loss of Morals.
"Abortion is of course widespread, both among the married and the unmarried, ever since it became legally available following the Supreme Court Roe vs. Wade decision to make abortion legal up to the third trimester of pregnancy. The U.S. laws on abortion are now more permissive than almost all other Western countries. As a result, there are now over a million abortions a year, most not for serious health reasons but more often for convenience, as proclaimed in the feminist slogan: "A woman has absolute rights over her own body". This is a highly dubious moral principle, since a woman's whole physiology and psychology show forth her natural orientation towards being the host and nurturer of new human life not her own - the only door, in fact, through which a new human person can enter the world with rights of its own like hers."
The woman has the ONLY door way for a new human to come into the world, why is it so hard to understand the fact that a woman should be held more responsible for the doorway of life?
only registered users can see external links
" Breakdown of Family Structures"thanks in part to johnson saying mothers didn't need the fathers around when he put welfare in place,
" Lack of Role Models" instead of solders and generals and inventors being held to high regard, people look to ball players and musicians for role models,
oh I could go on but folks like cat and annanas will push the idea I am the idiot, I am the 1 watching the world go to shit while their kind shovels coal into the boiler of the locomotive towing it.
You, Phart, are entitled to your opinion, but, it doesn’t make it right. A CHILD is not yet a child in the first 15 weeks of a pregnancy. It’s no more a child than a man wanking in the shower. Women have the right to CHOOSE if they want to carry a pregnancy to term.
Lazy lazy lazy
With Cat's beliefs ,and millions of others, george floyds death could be labeled a late term abortion. He was not a human since he was not college educated. Or he was not human until he was 71,
where would the line be drawn if there was nothing blocking this ideology?
only registered users can see external links
Why would anyone who has done a honest job feel like they need to hurry up and grab a lawyer? this speaks volumes about what has happened the past 4 years ,perhaps further back.
It has been found to be offensive to those that don't think.
ALL the courts did was allow STATES to regulate abortion.
It is NOT BANNED, it is simply being regulated by numerous states.
get informed.
And if you want to fuck like a chimpanzee all the time and use abortion for birth control , move to a state that it's unregulated.
only registered users can see external links
Phart, you are one in a million.
only registered users can see external links
It's BANNED in a lot of states already and Trump wants a NATIONAL abortion ban.
Women are getting sent home, when the baby inside of their womb is DEAD,
because doctors are too afraid to help them.
They are coming for birth control TOO.
Learn more…
No, as of today, no state in the U.S. completely bans abortion when the mother's life is at stake; all states with abortion restrictions include an exception to save the life of the pregnant person, even if they have very strict limitations on abortion access in other circumstances.
Key points to remember:
Legal exception:
While many states have significantly restricted abortion access, nearly all include an exception for situations where the pregnant person's life is in danger.
Medical judgment:
Doctors usually make the determination of whether an abortion is necessary to save the mother's life based on their medical judgment.
State variations:
Although the "life of the mother" exception is generally present, the specifics of how it is defined and implemented can vary significantly between states.
Women complain about being held more responsible for unwanted pregnancy, and Dgraff, you just explained it. THey are the 1's that have to get in position. They are the 1's that agree to the action, why then pass all the blame?
And you can always take a vacation trip to Nevada and pay for it in cash instead of new cars and changing the colors in the bath room every 6 months.
I always gave my girlfriend flowers in pots that could be kept alive for years, as i would have hoped she wanted our relationship to do.
and her daughter baked a veggie baby-- her nickname is broccoli!
And there will no national ban. Lib fear mongering!
Just another tax is all it is,
only registered users can see external links
AI Overview
Learn more…
Yes, Ruth Westheimer, also known as Dr. Ruth, was a trained sniper in the Haganah, the Jewish Zionist underground paramilitary organization that later became the Israel Defense Forces (IDF):
Training
Westheimer was trained as a sniper and scout because of her height of 4 ft 7 in (1.40 m). She learned to throw hand grenades, assemble a Sten gun with her eyes closed, and was so accurate she could put five rounds in the center of a target.
Experience
Westheimer was seriously wounded by an exploding shell during the Israeli War of Independence in 1948. She said she never killed anyone, but she knew how to throw hand grenades and shoot.
Decision to join
Westheimer chose to join the Haganah because she felt wanted and needed in the Jewish state of Palestine. She said, "I did not know that I had good aim. So when they did some selection, whatever, they put me in a group and they taught me how to put the Sten gun together".
Westheimer became a beloved sex therapist, author, and media personality. She hosted a weekly radio advice show called “Sexually Speaking” that took questions from listeners about sex.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
I hope more employers get sued for firing people for not taking the shot.Serves them right forcing people to take a unknown chemical into their bodies.
I’m being held against my will. It’s a conspiracy to deprive me of my freedom. I’ll take her food and rub her leg, but, first chance I get, I’m out of here.
ok ananas, argue with this 1
--------------------------------------- added after 3 minutes
And just what have the democrats done for health care they stuck with obama care and that is unaffordable
--------------------------------------- added after 8 minutes
Oh yeah I remember what they did to help me they imposed a fine attached to my taxes because I had no health care insurance
Some help thanks a lot democrats
Which is: pay through the nose or die!
It's a decent plan to get rid of poor people.
Less people who have difficulty to afford food.
But, isn't it those people who are voting for Trump?
Thanks to obama, that is fucked up now.
The government should make sure dr's are qualified, hospitals are clean, and leave the health care selection to the people, and let the dr's decide what is best for his or her patient. Insurance literally can decide if you get a life saving medicine first or if a cheaper, less viable alternative is offered. costing recovery time and lives.And you know what the insurance is that pulls that stunt moreso than others? MEDICARE that is run by the fucking government.
I don't think it's a good idea to have a system of employer paid healthcare.
It gives a big advantage to big companies, that already have a big advantage over small companies.
When you lose your job, because of a horrible health problem, you lose your health coverage too. It's not like that never happens, am I right?
It has no consequences for the employers.
That sounds like attempts to fix the downsides, a bit.
If you just had health insurance yourself, like we have in my country,
you would never be at risk of losing it, when you lose your job.
And it's no answer to the competition argument.
it's NOT free,it is costing everybody to provide you coverage,not just you
All income below €75.518 is taxed at 36,97%.
All income above €75.518 is taxed at 49,50%.
That's because our right-wing government eliminated the lowest tax bracket in 2022.
In 2022 all income below €36.410 was taxed at 19,17%.
We have health insurance too.
Private health insurance paying for private healthcare, just like you.
We just don't let our employers provide it for us.
I showed you the big buildings of the health insurance companies, right?
We have 10 PRIVATE health insurance companies:
• Achmea
• ASR
• CZ
• DSW
• Salland Zorgverzekeraar
• EUCARE
• Menzis
• ONVZ
• VGZ
• Zorg en Zekerheid
I have DSW. They just announced the premium for 2025; €158.50 per month, a premium increase of €9.50 per month.
I have told you that our healthcare is privatized many times before.
We used to have that "socialist" healthcare, but that was abolished in 2006.
Then it became more expensive very quickly. It's pretty good, some put us at #1 others at #11, but it is also the second most expensive, AFTER YOU. Your healthcare quality scores #23 in the world, by the way.
Most of our taxes go to social security. Everyone pays into it,
and when you retire you get it back.
If you get fired or you quit, the employer is no longer obligated to pay for your insurance. that's when the cobra thing kicks In. costly, yep but it is close to the amount the employer was paying.
It only makes it harder to negotiate wages and other benefits,
because there is no better leverage against you, than your health.
It makes you think twice on finding another job, making you exploitable.
It doesn't serve the working people, only the owner class.
But, that's what you like, isn't it? You want to be a serf to the owner class.
Negotiating wages, should not even be a thing. you go work, do your job, excell in your job, your employer sees the work,likes it,pays you more.
That is the issue with unions. to often a high wage is being paid,and little work being done, nothing outside the sharply defined job requirement ,and the employer can do nothing about it.
Will reply more later.
Those young people in your system have to compare employees on the healthcare package they have, not just on the wage they pay. That makes it MORE COMPLICATED.
If there is an independent choice in heath insurance, your pick of employee doesn't involve thinking about healthcare. You can just pick an employer that pays the highest wage. Then you can pick whatever heath insurance you want. It's much more flexible. Don't like your employer? Find another! Don't like your heath insurance? Find another!
It's CAPITALISM! Freedom of choice of employer, while at the same time having freedom of choice as a CONSUMER.
You confirm what I said; you want to give ALL THE POWER to employers.
That's being a serf to the owner class.
They are not paying people enough, but raising their prices too much.
That's why people cannot afford groceries. It's not the Democrats' fault,
it's your fault, for voting to be a serf. You like people being exploited.
Don't like inflation? OK, raise the interest rates, so lending will become more expensive. That will be bad for a moment, some small companies will go bankrupt,
it will raise unemployment, and people will be forced to take jobs that pay less.
OK, so now your 100 dollars will be worth the same next year. No higher prices,
but still a lot more poor people who cannot pay those prices. Because their INCOME WENT DOWN!
As a former business owner, I do expect you to understand these things.
Obama care is indeed still too expensive, but at least he made it impossible for insurance to deny paying for healthcare, because of bullshit pre-existing conditions.
If you want a healthcare system based on insurance, you want everyone to pay into it, to lower the prices for the people who need it. That makes a fine a good idea.
However, why do you think insurance is so expensive in the US? It's not because you have the best healthcare or that most of the money goes to research, it's because IT'S MAKING MANY PEOPLE VERY RICH. People like Vivek Ramaswamy are becoming very rich by screwing the system, without adding anything of value to it. Insurances make a lot of money, but they don't add any value. Big Pharma companies (like who I work for) do add value, because people need their products, but they are also enriching lots of people who are not adding any value.
It's BIG BUSINESS, so it's as expensive as possible, to make as much profit as possible. The price is about perfect if 10% of people cannot afford it. Then 90% pays through their nose, sells their house when they get cancer, get a loan when they have a kid and pay most of their income, when they need medication. Cha-Ching!
Am I right or not? So, how do you reduce the price of healthcare then?
What plan, while maintaining the BIG BUSINESS, can reduce the prices?
Reduce waste? Sure, then they just make more profit! Thanks!
Of course, as a socialist, I say take out the profit incentive. Just pay me and my colleagues the same wage and we will make the products at a much lower cost, because the profit would not enrich any owners and big shareholders. And just keep paying the scientists at universities, who are now developing the new pharmaceuticals. Maybe they might be more inclined to invent CURES, instead of TREATMENTS, because cures don't make money for the wealthy, treatment is the big business. Just pay the surgeons and nurses a good wage and build hospitals with government money. Instead of investors getting wealthy, you provide people with good hospitals.
But, that's socialism, which both Republicans and Democrats hate. They want that big business. Republicans want that big business to make the most profit over the people's backs, Democrats just want it to be a bit more fair to people. That's why the come up with maximum prices for frequently used drugs, like insulin at $35, which most Republicans voted against. It makes it a lot better for patients, but still too expensive, because of the big profits.
Trump doesn't have a plan, because it would never be a socialist plan and the only alternative is the Democrats' plan. He will repeal Obama care, which allows the insurances to deny people over bullshit pre-existing conditions again. That might reduce the price a bit, because less people will get the healthcare they need,
but it will screw you, when you need it. What's the use of paying a bit less for
health insurance, if you don't get any healthcare when you need it?
As of September 2024, at least 17 restaurant chains have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2024, which is more than the nine that filed at the same point in 2023.
The trucking industry has seen many bankruptcies in recent years, including:
2023
About 88,000 trucking companies and 8,000 freight brokers ceased operations.
2020
More than 3,000 trucking companies went out of business, a significant increase from the previous year.
J.C. Penney: Filed for bankruptcy in mid-2020 and announced the closure of 242 stores
Neiman Marcus: Filed for bankruptcy in 2020
Belk: Filed for bankruptcy in February
Stage Stores: Filed for bankruptcy in May
Other department stores that have closed or merged include:
Lord & Taylor: Closed 100%
Sears: Closed 96%
Dillard's: Closed 8%
Abraham & Straus: Merged with Macy's in 1995
Bamberger's: Merged with Macy's in 1986
The Bon Marché: Merged with Macy's in 2005
Bullock's: Merged with Macy's in 1996
Burdines: Merged with Macy's in 2005
Carter Hawley Hale Stores: Merged into Macy's West in 1996
only registered users can see external links
Just to show a few examples. stop listening to mainstream and look at the reality.
that have been used for many decades.
only registered users can see external links
If you are looking at bankruptcies, then use the trend of the overall national numbers and not some anecdotes.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
The gross domestic product (GDP) is the most important one.
It's breaking record after record:
only registered users can see external links
It's just never ending up in the wallets of the working class,
but that's the system that you support, so don't cry about it.
Kamala Harris wants to redistribute that wealth, so more of it ends up in the wallets of the working class. Trump wants to do the opposite; he wants to cut more taxes for the wealthy and cut expenses for everything that the working class is depending on. The wealthy will become even more wealthy and everyone else
will see their expenses skyrocket. If you think life is expensive now, then expect
to be singing a different tune if Trump wins.
You mention that Kamala Harris WANTS TO redistribute wealth. In your opinion, why do you think that the Democrats haven't done this in the past 4 years? Do you feel that Kamala Harris was an effective Vice President?
Young people, who want to build a future, are burdened by a massive debt.
That's because the system is set up to favor the rich and the wealthy, who can pay for their kids to study, but don't want to pay taxes so the kids of poor people can study. The middle class/working class is therefore putting on massive debt,
if they want to study. Democrats are trying to change that, Republicans are not. Biden wanted to redistribute wealth, by using tax money to relieve the debt that they shouldn't have had.
How about them raising minimum wage? They couldn't get it done for everyone, because Republicans all voted against it, but they did get it done for all government workers. That's redistributing wealth to the people on minimum wage.
How about the child tax credit? The expansion cut child poverty nearly in half
to a record low of 5.2%. Don't you think that is redistributing wealth?
I can go on, but you could have easily googled it.
"8 Ways the Biden Administration Is Improving the Lives of Service Workers"
only registered users can see external links
You all seem to think Biden is a demented old fool, so who did all of that?
Don't you think Kamala Harris was working in the background to help him?
You could have googled that too:
only registered users can see external links
In any case, Kamala was tasked to investigate the causes of the border crisis.
She went to the areas that have the most immigrants to observe, talk to Americans in the area and talk to the immigrants themselves, to find out why so many people leave their own country, to pay a human trafficker to transport them to the border, to sit in the desert waiting to get in to the US. [Most come from South American countries, that suffered a complete economic collapse. It would take too much time to go over them all. One stands out though; Venezuela. It has huge oil reserves, that are easily accessible, but they cannot sell it to make money to feed their people, to Europe that doesn't have its own oil reserves and sanctioned Russia because of Ukraine, while the US is now fracking at record pace making Texans live in toxic air, while everyone is paying high prices at the pump. Why is that? Why do you think the people of Venezuela are fleeing? Trump imposed economic sanctions in August 2017 that affected Venezuela's petroleum industry by prohibiting the trading of Venezuelan bonds in U.S. markets.]
The border investigations of Kamala Harris has resulted into their bipartisan border bill. It addresses a lot of the causes for immigration, that she found out. Republicans voted against the bill, because Trump wanted to run on immigration. He doesn't want to solve it (or any other problems), because angry Americans are his base.
Do you feel that Mike Pence was an effective Vice President?
Do you feel that JD Vance is helping Trump to win?
Yes, the Democrats did accomplish redistribution of wealth with the programs that you cited. The student loan relief plan, raising minimum wage and the child tax credit helped redistribute wealth to the younger working people but unfortunately someone like myself, I wasn't able to capitalize on those programs. Perhaps I should consider myself "blessed" that I began working long enough ago and that my employer had a pension plan in place...... Yes, after working 32 years I am receiving a fixed pension that no longer financially meets my needs because of how the American's "wealth" was redistributed.
Regarding Mike Pence as a Vice President, I don't have to consider Mike Pence's accomplishments because 1) he didn't seek the Presidency and 2) and for the most part, Donald Trump was able to deliver what he promised.
and because of how the American's "wealth" was redistributed?
Your retirement funds are at risk of being unaffordable by the government.
Democrats want to address the Social Security shortfall by extending the payroll tax to those with higher incomes. That would be a redistribution of wealth that would help YOU.
Republicans don't want to do that, they want to CUT Social Security.
Donald Trump only promised and delivered on tax-cuts for the rich,
that's redistribution of wealth from the poor to the already wealthy.
Billionaires Are $2.2 Trillion richer since 2017 Trump-GOP Tax Law.
Even after Covid. Are the working class $2.2 Trillion richer since 2017?
He is now promising even more tax-cuts for the rich and he is promising to cut lots of redistribution of wealth policies that benefit the poor and working class.
Well amoung friends that may be a bit harsh to say but,it was the first thing that came to mind.
First off, if you are to fucking dumb to get a scholarship for college, you probably need to roof houses or build power lines.
THe public is already paying for k thru 12 and getting little in return for it's investment but a bunch of lazy ass punk kids that are on 12 pills and can't do anything but punch buttons on a cell phone.
If kids won't invest in themselves enough to make use of the free 13 years of education, there is NO reason to continue it.
I could go on but your socialist views are shared by to many in our Republic and they are tearing this country apart. the truth is the student loan relief was to BUY VOTES from the young and dumb cell phone button pushers that didn't learn about debt and how to stay the fuck out of it. Next they will buy a 2 million dollar house and expect the tax payer to Relieve them of the debt THEY CREATED.
when people invest money to have a better retirement,the dems are trying to tax what they COULD earn,not what has been actually earned,I can't remember the name of it but the thinking is you will earn 10% for example so they tax for that instead of the 3% you actually earn,what incentive is there to invest if you are going to be fucked out of money you aint even earned?
I just don't get why you think that how people are doing says anything
about the economy. People should be poor, to favor the economy, right?
Why are you not very happy for the economy, when everyone is starving?
That's great! It means no money is being wasted on the filthy peasants!!!
“ A proposal in the Biden-Harris Administration’s 2025 budget[1] would require households with more than $100 million in wealth to pay income taxes of at least 25 percent of their annual income, including their unrealized capital gains — gains in the value of assets that they have not yet sold. Critics argue that unrealized capital gains, which are a primary source of income for many extremely wealthy households, are mere “paper” gains that do not constitute real income (though they meet a textbook definition of income).[2] But unrealized gains make asset owners better off in very real ways. Claiming that unrealized gains are not “real” is akin to claiming that individuals such as Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk are not rich unless they sell their companies’ stock.”
How many people do you know that earn more than $100 million?
Save us Mr wizard
The economy is great for rich people, not for the middle class.
Trump's tax-cuts already shifted 2.2 TRILLION DOLLARS to the rich.
Who is paying for that? THE MIDDLE CLASS!
Your GDP per capita is the highest in the world.
That's because Americans are the hardest working people in the modern world.
But you DON'T have the least poor people or the strongest middle class.
That's because the whole pie, except for a few crumbs, goes to the rich.
What are you smoking, if you don't understand that?
Did you not read that Warren buffet,who normally endorses democrats did NOT endorse either candidate this election? and he has sold BILLIONS in stocks recently?
Gee i wonder why? When the poor people of the US and the Rich, can see what the future may hold if harris wins, it can't be just hogwash
Selzer poll, a widely respected organization with a strong record,
shows vice-president leading Trump 47% to 44% in Iowa... IOWA!!!
only registered users can see external links
--------------------------------------- added after 46 seconds
And she loved it
to Tartrazine. If he has good evidence to link Tartrazine to those illnesses, he would
have a very good case to pressure the FDA to ban the substance. He just makes this claim confidently, but he makes unsubstantiated claims a lot.
He could very well be 100% correct, but don't just believe him, investigate it.
They are allowed for use in cosmetics in Europe, but I don't think in food.
If it was as clearly dangerous as he says, we would have already banned it.
There are much more harmful chemicals, that are clearly causing illnesses, like PFAS, and Glyphosate, that progressives have been fighting for to get banned, for years or decades. They have been getting nothing but hate and obstruction from Republicans.
I have been telling you about that, but you didn't seem to care much then.
Why do you think I would be against banning a chemical for use in food, when there would be clear evidence or justified suspicions that it could cause illnesses?
I am always supporting REGULATION. It's you who supported Trump's DEREGULATION.
only registered users can see external links
Haven't I been telling you about cheap unhealthy factory slob, being sold for huge profits, as "food"? Yes, they are killing you. And they are getting tax-cuts while they do it.
Corporations are constantly lobbying your politicians to be allowed to keep using poison, dumping poison in the water and adding poison to food. Why do you think I'm against the funding of politicians by corporations? It's because they never give money to politicians to protect YOUR interests, or your LIFE, it's only to benefit their profits.
Why can you only accept something, when it's coming from someone who you like?
Sure, sometimes Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is right on something, but mostly he's an idiot.
Or he's a fraud. If he wasn't mostly an idiot or a fraud, you wouldn't like him.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
I wont even drink a diet soda
Are you referring assessments by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)?
You lot don't like those organizations, remember?
You are voting for the guy who wants to eliminate them all.
Someone just told you that they read or heard something?
In any case; that's the most useless source in existence.
Don't outsource your research to random people on the street.
It's you trusting someone to understand information and accurately
communicate their conclusions to you, most likely without telling you their sources.
That's called a rumor. It could be true, but there is no way to know.
I can't go out in public without seeing people forced to do without all they need to fix their car, just get by with what will get them to work this week, a tire this month, a tire next month. Their roofs have tarps on them, their clothes have holes.just basic things you can't help but notice if you are awake.
dgraff thinks he can get that information from the street.
I can look at my neighbors, but that doesn't help me figure out if Aspartame is a safe substance or not. That requires research. These things are even difficult to determine in years of large studies, so no, I don't listen to some random person
on the street or a politician of questionable ethics, who has been wrong on almost everything when it comes to health issues.
Not only do I care what happens to people around me, I am an active member of the Socialist Party, the only real people's party. The only party in my country that constantly talks to people on the street and rings doorbells to ask people how they are doing. The party provides contacts in every city, for people to just reach out and talk about their problems. When we hear of a problem, any one of us can volunteer to go talk to those people. I have been one of them, who visits people who are living in a cold house, because the rental corporation didn't do maintenance on their heating system for decades. We help them get the rental corporation to listen, by organizing the neighborhood and get their voice out.
If necessary, we organize protest actions, with the people, to force the rental corporation to take their responsibility. It's just one example.
Even then, the people we talk to provide us with valuable insight, but the party also has a Science Bureau that investigates the state of society, using statistics and personal inquiry. That's how the Socialist Party uncovered the childcare benefits scandal, in which many people have been devastated by the actions of their government. only registered users can see external links
It's from health studies, from government organizations like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), The European Medicines Agency (EMA), the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), isn't it?
Or do you think the Aspartame manufacturer would investigate if their product
is safe, so they can self regulate?
Because there isn't a better alternative. It's all we got to protect us.
You surely cannot trust companies to do the right thing themselves.
It does help a lot if you don't let big companies give money to politicians.
When Big Pharma pays your politicians, they want something back for it.
Do you think you can shut down the FDA, IARC, WHO, FAO and the JECFA, and then product additives like Aspartame, Tartrazine, Potassium bromate, Propylparaben etc are just no used anymore, because of concerns for your health?
Do you think the pharmaceutical companies can decide for themselves
if Eliquis, Simvastatin or vaccines are a net positive or net negative for different groups of patients or the public at large?
Do you think your doctor can tell you?
Do you think the media can tell you?
Do you think you can decide that for yourself?
Are you able to test those substances yourself on millions of people?
Are you able to tell the manufacturers to not put that in all the food?
Are you just going to reject 100 years of medical advancement and just die, when you get sick, because you don't or cannot trust the manufacturers?
Now try giving me a straight answer instead of dancing around the question
I don't care about just Aspartame, because I already don't consume anything with Aspartame in it, because I don't trust it either.
Is that a straight answer on Aspartame? If you don't think so, then you
are the problem, thinking everything is black and white. I deal in facts
and the facts are inconclusive. The stuff is questionable enough to avoid it, but I don't care about some random fearmongering online.
These are the facts: IARC classified aspartame as possibly carcinogenic
to humans (IARC Group 2B) and JECFA reaffirmed the acceptable daily intake of 40 mg/kg body weight.
Do you consume alcohol? That's 100% sure to be carcinogenic to humans. The choice you make affect your health, not just on Aspartame.
You are probably making choices every day, that are far worse than consuming 2 cans of a diet beverage with Aspartame in it, per day. If you drink 2 cans of a regular beverage, with sugar, that affects your health too.
Personally, I go for regular soft-drinks, when I drink soft-drinks at all, because light soft-drinks are just goddamned awful, I even prefer water.
There are hundreds of food additives that are supposedly safe for consumption, but we should just trust them on. You cannot avoid all
of them, because then you STARVE.
It's not just the processed food, because farmers use lost of chemical
on their crops and treat their cattle with lots of chemicals.
Personally, I don't have the time to study all the chemicals that the food industry is using. That's what I want the government to do. Not just for me, but for everyone who doesn't bother reading labels, because I'm paying
for their cancer treatment too.
That's where the corruption angle comes in. I want the government
to represent ME, not manufacturers who BRIBE them to be lenient
on all the chemicals they want to put in MY FOOD.
for bribes, openly. If Elon Musk wouldn't like guns, he would take yours, as soon as he's elected. He might take your gas guzzlers away from you, just because Elon wants to sell his electric cars. Kamala isn't going to do that, until you can afford them. Trump would make you sell a kidney.
The only thing with artificial sweeteners in it, that I 'consume' is my favorite chewing gum; XyliFresh Peppermint Sugar Free. I take one after lunch at work, because I'm not going to brush my teeth over there. The artificial sweetener in it is 99.6% Xylitol, 0.3% Aspartame and 0.1% Acesulfame-K. It doesn't have that horrible aftertaste.
I'm not worried at all that an amount as low as that might hurt me.
Other than that, I don't like light products, mostly because of the taste, but also because they don't work. When you taste something sweet, your brain sends a signal to produce insulin. The insulin lowers your blood sugar, because it was a false alarm; it's wasn't sugar, but sweetener. A low blood sugar turns on your hungry signal, making you eat, before you otherwise would have been hungry.
"Natural" is a strange term. Do you think milk from cows is "natural"?
Cows are domesticated and bred through to give up to 14,000 liters
of milk per year. That's far more than the original wild cow. They get fed only ensiled grass, from a field with only grass and no other plants. They would die of malnutrition, but they get lots of feed supplements to prevent that; up to 250 different artificially manufactured vitamins and minerals from mines all over the world, like cobalt, copper sulfate, iron sulfate, manganese, etc. What is officially prohibited, but still done,
in the US is using growth hormones. They are also using lots of antibiotics. Do you think that's "natural"?
Then some idiots said milk pasteurization, that's not natural, so they drank raw milk and all got sick. You cannot drink raw milk from a shit-covered stable and not get sick, but that's what people think is natural. I was talking about RFK Jr, who might become Trump's health minister. The idiot got brain worms, because he eats roadkill. You don't want him to decide what's natural. Humanity isn't natural. But we now live up to 100 years of age, while the all natural cavemen had an average life expectancy of 20-25 years and in the Bronze and Iron Age, the adults already got a bit older: 30-45 years old. Shivering but-naked in the jungle, eating snails is natural. I prefer "civilized" over "natural".
The idea that "natural" is good is nonsense and what is called "natural" too. It's called the Naturalistic fallacy.
I live in a country with the second largest agricultural exports
in the world, after the US, which is 229 times larger.
We are informed about agriculture from school to TV.
All the feed supplements were just discussed on a Dutch TV program called "Keuringsdienst van waarde". It's in depth consumer information on all sorts of subjects. I watch every episode.
only registered users can see external links
New Comment Go to top