@AFTSOV >Jesus roasted a single mom in the book of John

First, I am not sure what your definition of "roasted" is in this context. Yes, Jesus did speak the truth to people even when it was not the convenient answers that they wanted to hear. But he did so with purpose. It was done so in order to give proper guidance to those who had sinned, not simply just to ridicule them.

One big problem with political correctness in our culture is that it prevents those who are looking to prescribe a means to better themselves from speaking out as easily, as it is considered just as bad to diagnose the problem accurately as it is to mock someone. Both of these ruffle feathers, so both are often considered taboo by those who want to coddle groups from any bad consequences.

In order to correct someone, you need an accurate diagnosis of their faults. This often means you will bring discomfort to those who you want to help. But the discomfort is not the goal, but rather just another obstacle to overcome. When it comes to just plain mockery (what I would consider "roasting"), the goal is just to bring said discomfort without any desire to help fix the issue.

www.snopes.com/fact-check/vaccines-sudden-adult-death-syndrome/

Snopes is already on the case of debunking misinformation about the vaxxes not causing SADS to happen. See? Why would you possibly think that the mRNA shots are causing people to die? The article DIDN'T SAY anything about vaccines, therefore it can not be the cause! They just happen to have no idea why there is an uptick in the number of SADS deaths! Pay no attention to it correlating right around the time the clot shots were being mandated! That's just a coincidence, you right wing extremist!

Also, I not exactly a part of their "debunking," but they mentioned that SADS stands for Sudden Arrhythmic Death Syndrome, not Sudden Adult Death Syndrome. Still does not make the case that there is no issue with the clot shots, of course, but be aware if they ever try to use that trick. But this time, they went with the tried and true "there's no evidence" claim, which just means they have no intentions of looking for the real cause.

@houseoftolstoy I don't think that any regular of this site is going to starve this time around. The problem is when the pressure on the bottom people gets to be too much and they erupt. If you're living in a place with a George Soros villain running around packing your court systems with people who want this to happen then you basically will be open season for the zombies. For lack of a better precise description it's contrived class warfare. You just have to take an honest look around where you are, what the poor people are being told, and what your local elites think of the people. Assuming that you're in Europe or the US then there are just too many specific situations to be able to give perfect advice, and some dumb shits who aren't directly affected by this, or are rich being able to afford computers, and cars, etc will pretend that nothing is happening because they lack the empathy to understand what others will be going through, and they are in a world view where nothing can go catastrophically bad.

Let us hope we do not go full retard with price controls. Then we are looking at starvation.

I think that it's likely that they'll go at least half retarded with price controls. The current system is very good at fucking with things in new ways. They'll figure out that they can get 70% of the effect of a "price control" by fucking with something upstream or downstream in a way that aisn't called as such. Then they'll deny, then gaslight, then finally come out with "... and it's a good thing" type write ups about it.

See: Another US Food Processing Plant Erupts In Flames www.trp.red/feed/status/132451

This could be massive coordinated insurance fire type stuff going on after many people figure out some internal calculation that shows that they can't make money in today's economy, or it could be something truly wicked like a mass coordinated destruction of the food supply. If you only assume the more innocent insurance fire scenario then something in the system has been instituted such that the market isn't able to respond to prices as it should, or that it could but it's been projected that people won't or can't pay it.

As this system crashes don't expect the excuses to be simple and straightforward like the Soviets when they did the same to paper over their failing system. With the free access to information those sorts of simple descriptions just aren't going to cut it. It's always going to be something else. In addition, as people start really dying in America it won't be called collapse violence, but rather it will be "a massive uptick of vehicle fatalities", "Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (which is one that they're playing with now)", "Suicide", "Gun violence", etc. They're not going to help anyone out by compiling all of the misery and death into a neat new world view for you. It will all be disjoint data that is divided up into it's own specialist realms. Someone like Trump can put the pieces together in a manner that normal Americans can figure out, but that has been decided to be uncouth behavior.

What we're really in need of is an evil clown.

@destraht It is no shock that we are having major issues with our food, given everything else in the economy has been screwed over by the scamdemic policies. Having issues with food is just way worse than any other thing, since unlike things such as having the newest car or paying more for a used car, you cannot just wait to buy food. And with food prices looking to rise even more, those who are already struggling will be far worse off.

I think people in the US (myself included) will not outright starve, but other countries are going to have problems. Probably a lot of civil unrest and governments overturned (as we saw in Sri Lanka). It would be exceptionally retarded if the US were to run out of food, as we have a huge amount of farmland that makes us a net exporter in food. Sure, we do have to import food to have fruits and vegetables available year round, but we should theoretically have enough staple foods to come out okay. It will still suck and it will be expensive, but we can survive. Let us hope we do not go full retard with price controls. Then we are looking at starvation.

@TiberiusBravo87 I think @woodsmoke is trying to convey that the term of "liberal" does not really match the true meaning of the word when it is applied to the American left/Democrats. Often, the term "classical liberal" is now used to describe those who are indeed fully on board with ideals of freedom. Many of the people who refer to themselves as classical liberals also call themselves libertarian.

When using the term "liberal" to describe the American mainstream left, it is not all that great of a fit in the purest sense. That is, the American left do not care about freedom in it's fullest extent, given all the nanny state laws they advocate for. Many political factions want to claim that they value freedom, but you will see that they are often not consistent with this claim, as many on left who claim to value "freedom" want to make it illegal for people own firearms or want more intrusive laws with businesses in many various ways. Many on the right will also not want full freedom for everything, as they will often advocate for the banning of drug use and gay marriage. Whether or not you agree or disagree with the policies, someone who wants full freedom would want as little restrictions as possible.

I find liberal is a term I use less and less to describe the American left. I usually just call them leftists, as I find it more fitting since I certainly do not see them as valuing freedom as what a classical liberal (or just liberal before it was appropriated by the American left). Of course the American left is all too happy to use the term liberal for themselves, as it allowed them to previously claim that they were all about freedom (and freedom is a term that many people like).