MA,
Who are you talking to?
Who knows.
Weren’t you the one who lectured Iambiguous about answering with a name when asked for one?
I thought you are a teenage girl.
Now what are you talking about…another who knows?
General description of human psychology among Internet denizens of 21st century United States of America.
=D> That is almost funny, but you do not have a sense of humor.
And you do not have a body that would fit your brain.
What is that supposed to mean, other than you taking this conversation off-topic? I get grief for asking simple questions which would enable the OP’s topic to continue?
That’s touching.
Noone is stopping you from continuing the discussion. You can respond to my earlier post if you want. Or not.
Is it not apparent whom I am responding to? It insults me that you have to ask me.
By the way, you’re a girl, an old one but still a girl, so I treat you like one.
You need to get some sleep.
And some kisses on your forehead so that you know you are taken care of. I’m not gonna do that though.
We won’t be engaging again. Parting is such sweet sorrow.
We never engaged in it anyways. But it was nice hoping . . . Bye bye, sweet lady, may God be with you.
Been 6 minutes. I admire your stoicism. You can relax now.
From an interview with the cat -
Natural ~~ unnatural.
I think that offensive…to destroy can also be looked upon as defense…to protect. It just depends on the circumstances. My defense mechanism to protect myself or others swims in the same waters as being on the offensive to destroy, so that I or others may live.
Preservation tends to fall on the side of defense. Now any gook can turn the phrase, “the best defense is a good offense,” into a lie they tell themselves so they can feel justified in their aggressive actions surely, but being overtly aggressive tends to be more of a male characteristic when it comes to violence.
Well, I will take that little pearl of wisdom, Magnus. I need all of the help which I can get.
You might have said “Anyone who will listen”. 
HAGD
voxday.blogspot.hr/2017/06/the-c … erica.html
/quote
If you are a white American, over the course of your lifetime the federal government will, on average and on your behalf, transfer $384,109 of your wealth and income to a single black individual.
According to the data derived from the 2014 federal budget, the average annual net tax/benefit broke down as follows:
White: -$2,795
Black: +$10,016
Over the course of an average 79-year lifespan, a white individual contributes a net $220,805 to the system, whereas over the course of an average 75-year lifespan, a black individual receives a net $751,200. However, since there are 4.6 times more whites than blacks in the USA, the black share has to be divided among the various contributors to sort out a one-to-one comparison.
So, the net cost to the average White American of the average Black American is $384,109. Married? That’s $768,218. Got 2 kids? That’s $1,536,436. 4 kids? Now we’re talking $2,304,654 lifetime.
Diversity is expensive. Now you understand why you won’t have much of an inheritance to leave to your children. Do you really think it’s worth it? And then, those natural conservatives to the south, the Hispanics, will surely improve the situation, right? After all, immigration helps the economy! Well, not so much.
Hispanic: +7,298
In fact, because there are more Hispanics in the USA than Blacks, Hispanics are already a bigger cumulative net drain on the economy, $411,950,000,000 to $389,710,000,000. Needless to say, the ongoing demographic change from a predominantly white society to a less productive, less white one can be expected to have even more serious negative effects on the long-term economic prospects of the United States that it already has.
To quote the original author: “The negative fiscal impact of blacks and hispanics is significant. All of this discussion of a “national debt” and “deficit” is primarily of function of blacks and hispanics. Without them, we would be running budget surpluses today, even when keeping the military the same size.”
/endquote
This system, which transfers resources from whites to blacks and results in blacks having higher birthrates than whites, is supported mostly by white labor and enforced with white violence.
And then white people are supposed to “peacefully” accept their destruction? They’re supposed to condemn people like Dylann Roof, the only people who at least do something to offset this?