Why I should be President

Animal power is one of the least efficient methods of transportation. Animals get their energy from food. It doesn't just get there by itself. I doesn't sound like you know this.

 

I like totalitarian governments as long as you have the right person running it. You will hear me say that a lot. It doesn't matter what type of government you have as long as you have the right leaders. I don't think speaking another language should be a factor in getting a job in the U.S.

 

You are ignored. Please stop spamming my thread.

 

Yeah and even when you're sitting there, stationary, in a car, your body is using up umpteen amounts of energy merely to survive. Your body uses energy no matter what.

And you REALLY think that people are consuming so little energy that if they were forced to use their own bodies to power simple machines in order to get places more often, that they'd starve or something? REALLY?!?!?!

LOOK at these fat fuc*ing monstrosities running around. LOOK at them. Do you think THEY consume so little calories that their bodies wouldn't be able to power a simple machine around? Granted they're so out of shape due to NO EXERCISE that they would have a hard or impossible time doing it, but that's irrelevant.

Look, there's no good excuse here no matter how many times you keep trying to keep them coming and there's not even gonna be ANY OTHER OPTION in the near future when overpopulation and outsourcing our jobs to China and India destroys the economy, so if I were you I'd be fuc*ing posting threads that demand that we start getting healthier to where we have the physical ability to use our own bodies and go places.

 

I'm really not to technical about this type of stuff yet. I'm 17 so haven't taken a lot of courses on this type of stuff, but from what I understand, U-233 is fissionable and Thorium is not. Thorium then turns back into U-233 and the reaction keeps going as long as you add more thorium.

 

What does that mean?

 

Ok, let's make it a competition.

 

President? I wouldn't cast a vote for you if you were running for a dog catcher's assistant much less the POTUS.

 

Why is that?

 

Vocabulary is not important IMO, understanding IS. you mention more technology as a solution, but it is evident that with more technology people have been more and more isolated. my web site briliantly explains what the solution is

 

IMO politics are only complicated because it is all about deceiving: there is nothing complicated about following laws and being honest, but the whole idea for the politicians is to deceive and rob society. we need leaders not parasites called politicians. we need ONE LEADER. ONE. a good man that we can trust.

 

I took another look at your OP when I saw you mentioned elsewhere that you clearly stated your plan... I will make red parts I agree with and blue parts I dissagree with

 

Because I don't think you could handle the responsibility. I think you would be akin to Hitler or Pol Pot. That isn't even an exaggeration, during the only exchange I've ever had with you on this board, you said that I should be thrown into a gas chamber or lined up and shot for merely expressing my opinion.

Totalitarianism has been tried many times before and millions of people have died as a result of some (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)bag who thinks he knows better than everyone else and is willing to kill innocents to prove it. That's why I don't think such a (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)bag should be POTUS.

 

You know I've heard this hypothesis before. More advanced medicine means longer lives. Perhaps we can find a way to genetically engineer food so we never run out. And we find ways to combat natural disasters and cheat death more and more. I think you would need morality though. We could have a lot of technology, but without a moral compass it would be extremely dangerous.

 

ok, after your take over plot I had to give up reading the rest. read my web site the answer how to take over the world is there.

 

Didn't you post this several months back? You weren't convinced with my prior logic? I'll restate:

Minimum qualifications for president of the USA:
1. 35 years old - I agree with the current age restriction to eliminate "hormonal" decisions. Have you ever looked at violent crime? Statistically, it committed by those in the age range of 14-30 (i.e. testosterone overload). Do you really want a 16 year old with a finger on a nuclear launch button? I don't.
2. B.S. degree in engineering, science or accounting (for the concept of balance - i.e. money doesn't grow on trees even if money is derived from paper).
3. 10 years of private industry experience to show commitment and dedication (thus, if the person has a Ph.D., the age that the person actually considers running might rise by a few years).
4. Although I am single, I would argue that marriage (and kids) should be considered as a strong incentive for a presidential candidate. I personally don't care if the Earth blows up in 10 years, however, a married person with kids has an investment in the future and that person should be interested in the long term success of a country.

 

Ok, what is your website?

 

1. We shouldn't have a black guy as president either then, since black people are more like to commit violent crime. You can't judge everybody by their age. A lot of young people are much more mature than most adults. I don't think I would want anyone's finger on a nuclear launch button.
2. Look at our last 2 Presidents. Their budgets are perfectly balanced (sarcasm).
I know I'm not qualified, but this thread is more about the ideas I have than if I'm qualified or not.

 

What was that thread about?

 

Whether or not people have the right to self determination and secession. Your argument was that governments should only be able to get larger and never smaller and you voiced your willingness to kill people in order to maintain that.

 

They would kill themselves with wars anyway. Actually, I'd be saving lives. For every one person that is killed, thousands will be saved.

 

No, no. Let's be clear, you didn't say that people who tried to secede should be killed. You were saying that people in that thread who merely supported the idea of self determination should be thrown in gas chambers or lined up and shot.

 

"1. We shouldn't have a black guy as president either then, since black people are more like to commit violent crime. You can't judge everybody by their age. A lot of young people are much more mature than most adults. I don't think I would want anyone's finger on a nuclear launch button.
2. Look at our last 2 Presidents. Their budgets are perfectly balanced (sarcasm).
I know I'm not qualified, but this thread is more about the ideas I have than if I'm qualified or not." Oldjar

Now you are starting to make sense - especially with point 1, but I'm still not convinced you have "lived" enough to be able to make sound decisions or that you understand the physics concept of balance that can be applied to economics. It is unfortunate that people do not look at things statistically. The result - a person making $20,000 per year spends $10,000 on lottery tickets and the dunce wonders why he/she is short by $10,000 on his/her bills and must apply for food stamps and public housing.

 

Oldjar, to refresh your memory in case you forgot your own words,

 

the "Why I oughta..." young person mentality that a well-known NHL hockey announcer quotes frequently during hockey fights. Thus, the age limit is useful.