ThreePointTakedown

How do you figure?

Unfortunately, few. It comes down to a few issues. What they believe and why. If the why is something they can't or won't explain, then we have a problem. They are either being dishonest to me or themselves. Either way we're not having a real discussion. They are not capable of changing their mind because they can't tell me how they got there in the first place.

What if they had both and now don't?

Keeping classy. Arguing the facts and just the facts all the time. No room for hyperbole or conjecture.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/24/many-americans-cannot-pay-for-an-unexpected-1000-expense-heres-why.html#:~:text=Fewer than half of Americans,level when compared to 2022. would these places have the capacity to help feed roughly 44% of the US population?

There are solutions that we know of to problems that have persisted. Money is a credible solution to some of them regardless of your feelings. We've established that in this discussion. Not having the privilege of money or family to fall back on makes it incredibly difficult/risky to just pull up roots and fully change your situation. You know this because you said it yourself, you have a comfortable situation. It might not be the best. But that you might struggle with an unknown outcome keeps you from wanting to take the risk of changing it for the sake of someone else's benefit. You are not alone. That mentality permeates myriad issues of national/global importance. Many of the people keeping solutions from being discussed are ones that are not going to live to see the consequences of inaction.

Nope. That was a question for you. One you expertly dodged. If you'd like I can repeat it?

At every step I have explained how it isn't. But you can't or won't understand that. Some problems can't be 'willed' out of. I have a feeling you know that. You just don't want to admit it. One of the reasons is that you love calling out people that flip flop and can't stand the thought of someone doing it to you. Changing your mind is important and difficult. You, not the figurative you... YOU! and your presence, make it hard for anyone to admit that they may have been mistaken or mislead. Best of luck,

So scale this. If enough people did this how much land would be needed? Where is the tipping point to where its not viable again? How much time would it take to work to grow all this food? Would they be able to work and take home the original amount of money. The money that we all agreed wasn't enough to begin with. That's why they started growing food. So now they have food. But can't pay rent or water or power. So they are farming other peoples' land in a city. They have no home. How is that a solution to the original issue?

How is it that you can look at an exception to the rule. Something, that, by its definition does not apply to the vast majority of the population, and think you have a 'gotcha'? For all the people able to think clearly, the goal was to offer up an option for groceries that cost too much. The example was to start farming your own veggies and/or raising your own livestock. But this is the key point; when you had little to no money to do anything else. My retort was that doing anything like this would cost money. More money than a struggling person or family could afford to spend on doing anything like this. The retort to the retort were examples of cities offering up projects to help curb hunger or individuals that changed their lives entirely to adopt a farmer-type lifestyle. They/them think its a point on their side that anything like this is taking place. Rather than addressing the group or scenario that was the subject of the discussion. I have conceded that these projects are happening and my excitement in hoping that they work and grow. But as of right now, they are not the answer to all the struggling people that would or could need these programs. I'm sorry that your argument fails at every level. That's up to you to reconcile with. Calling me names will not undo the fact that you move the goal posts when you can't find a solution to the problem. That you want to hold on to the 'personal choices' excuse until the bitter end is a testament to how close minded you are. Everything you accuse me of is an admission of guilt. It never bothers me. The demographics are shifting. People are evolving away from religion(that's one of the things I imagine is the reason you think this way, maybe not the religion itself but it's influence on the 'don't question too much' for fear of losing the comforting lie rather than the harsh truth that we're all gonna die and there is nothing after this, sorry... spoiler alert) that keeps you from being comfortable in your own skin. Examples: being against the queer, trans, and athiest communities for no reason that they can articulate other than 'sky daddy tells me to'. You dislike people and you won't be honest about why. Maybe you don't even know why. But you should try. It'll hurt a little. You'll lose some friends or family members. But like Ma said when you went to school, 'If they treat you like that they aren't really your friends.' And remember, people on the other side are way more accepting of you as a person than conservatives have ever been. If you need an example, just point a camera at any conservative politician and listen to them answer a 'controversial' question or how much they squirm trying not to. They only care about people like them. That's how they were raised. Break the cycle. Its gonna be a great Wednesday. I look forward to all your well thought out responses.

You've lost the thread of this argument. Your goal posts are moved so far you aren't even having the same conversation. With yourself, mind you. And you're losing, if that is possible. Well done. Gonna use small words for this one. A person in a bad money spot. Cannot invest money the don't have to buy the things needed to grow food or raise cattle or chickens in a city/suburb. Whether the local laws are being changed or not. Sorry that you're having a mini meltdown about this but it isn't possible. You've given plenty of cover for the person that offered the idea in the first place and drove it off the rails. You've gone so far trying to rehab this moronic point that you aren't addressing anything close to the original issue. Hope this helps.

Do you understand the context of the hole you've dug yourself into? The suggestion was that a person or family could grow their own food or raise livestock to make ends meet. You've sited a project backed by a city/local government with money that maybe but not necessarily available to the people in the scenario we were talking about. You've offered a solution to a problem that we are not talking about. That something similar to farming is happening does not address the issue that we(royal we), not YOU, were discussing. I'm glad this is happening. Hope it works. But you haven't addressed the issues at hand. You just moved the goal posts, as usual, to distract from the fact that your solution breaks down at some point and you can't reconcile it. (the 'personal choices' idiocy you always bark at every scenario, in case you forgot, which by your several rambling posts, you did) Someone cannot simply decide to grow their own food, on their own property(if they happen to own it, but more likely rent) and feed themselves and/or their family for an entire year. Without significant cost to do so. Which is the whole issue. So this option is not feasible to offset the cost of food at a grocery store. I'm glad we can all agree to this now. Thank you. It has been a wonderful journey and we're all better for it.

So you're saying that a priest that assaults members of their congregation is an accurate representation of everyone in the entire system? See how ridiculous that sounds? That is how you just tried to prove your point about travel. Does one instance make something true in the aggregate?

Someone smarter and more reasonable than you? Yup.

So you admit you have not examples and are lazy and lost this argument? Great. Thank you for butting in to make no point whatsoever.

That was a joke. In reference to underpants gnomes. Do you get it now? You are missing some key steps in your plan to make it viable or relevant. A young'un would've gotten it.

You have an example that satisfies my question? How a family can grow enough food to feed themselves for a year in a city or suburb? If you did you'd have included it. Something that might be viable in 5, 10, ir 15 years is still not a viable option now. Try again.

Still dodging and now you're moving the goal posts because your suggestion is still stupid. Lets get back to people in cities and suburbs growing their own food and raising beef. Walk me through how that could be feasible as an alternative to buying groceries at a store? The reason people stay in the financial struggles that they find themselves in is because taking a risk is scary and the consequences to not being able to feed your family or put/keep a roof over your head is enormous. A safe but minimal existence, living pay check to paycheck is not ideal to most but it is still living. Hardly striving. But the privilege that you can't see right now to suggest that people struggling should take on a huge financial risk to do something they have little knowledge of is outrageous. If that's not virtue signaling, I don't know what is. You have experience farming and/or raising livestock. Good for you. What % of the population shares even a tiny bit of that knowledge. Let alone the resources needed. No such thing as a free cow. You know that. The idea is only viable to a vanishingly small number of people and they probably have the resources to take that risk. Do you have any other ideas for someone or a family stretched as thin as possible and still not able to afford food? You can just say, "no" at least that would be honest. I won't hold my breath.

Transporting people that don't speak the language and are ill equipped for the weather you are sending them to. Sending them out of spite by the way. As a punishment for the people being transported and for those that will need to take care of the people. If you're pro-life you should be pro-every life no matter what condition or how they got here. But you're not. It just helps you sleep at night for having horrible ideas of right and wrong, good and bad. It isn't something you can admit out loud unless you are 100% sure everyone feels exactly the way you do. That's why you feel so free to vomit your garbage ideas in an anonymous forum. Because saying, 'I don't care about the well being of huge portion of our planet and they can eff right off if they try to come here for a better life cuz 'merica!' Probably doesn't sit well with descent humans and you'd be asked to leave the Waffle House.

Do they need to be beaten to be kidnapped? Is that a prerequisite? It isn't. Try again.

So you have no idea how much or if that's even possible in a city or suburb? With the amount of land necessary for that. Just a suggestion that you feel solves the problem but doesn't. So try again to answer the question or admit it was a dumb suggestion.

As much as you would like to think that is how it works, it isn't. Things are true because they have not been proven false. That you want to assume something because you feel it adds weight to your case just proves you are ok with being lazy and regurgitating something that was fed to you. Exactly as you feel people on the opposing side of your ideology do as well. Congrats you are a sheep too. Thousands of people have been kidnapped and bused to blue cities*. Not 7m+. You have a long way to go before we get there. That you want to skip all the step to... profit means you are either ignorant or malicious. Which is it? I know you feel safe in your assessment because being wrong is just as satisfying as being right if you don't accept that you're wrong. Which is the case here. You very well could be right but we have no way of knowing because your process has corrupted the information. Go back to the source and see if it all does add up then come back with something new. Till then, just sit there in your wrongness and be wrong(a line from The West Wing, great show, give it a watch) *Have you ever asked why cities tend to be blue or progressive or liberal? Its because we know we all have to row together to make things work. Are there some that buck the system? Of course. We are exposed to new ideas and we are challenged to have new thoughts and ideas about things. Small towns just don't have the diversity of thought or experience. Doesn't make them bad. Just different. That conservatives feel they have the moral high ground because they lack the life experience of blue city folk is such a dumb trope that keeps them from growing. Why do you think people resist change so much? That when people travel they become more liberal or progressive with their thinking? Its not a vice. That conservatives can't figure that out and would rather see the world burn then to help people is a testament to failed ideology. Give it up.

You're so defensive of your position that you keep using your imagination to come up with ways to prove to yourself that you aren't wrong. You are. But use that imagination to think of a scenario that you can't rationalize your way out of and your scenario will fall apart. Because what you really don't want to admit is that you have no empathy for people other than the ones you feel are worthy. That circle keeps getting smaller the older and angrier you get. I know, I know, psycho-babble. But your lashing out is more proof that I am right. Thanks. We all know people like you. They have horrible ideas but they are attached so deeply to who they feel they are as people that they can't let them go. Like a religion. Your prayer or mediation is denying people the benefit of your years of experience and struggle because you feel slighted and that they should 'suffer' like you did. I'll tell you a secret, you didn't make it out ok if this is your attitude towards others that are struggling. People that go through trauma don't want it visited on anyone else because of the effect it had on them. Some of those people don't have the tools to break the cycle and so perpetuate the trauma on those around them because they feel that its 'normal' because they lived through it. How is it that someone that volunteers to help people as you say you do. Does not have sympathy or empathy for other groups?

How much capital would it take to start growing enough beef or veggies for a family to eat in a year?

Can't afford to do much of anything else other than live, eat, and work. Your suggestion is to uproot and move? Of course it would be. Now that your scenario has collapsed, will you alter your thinking? Sure you will.... BAHAHAHAHAHA!