wow. my restating of YOUR idiotic strawman somehow equates to ME suggesting that union corruption effects macro-economics?
or are you simply illiterate?
ill break it down to 3rd grade level for ya:
I said "unions are all corrupt", and YOU responded with the macro-economics bullshit strawman. restating YOUR buffleheaded attempt to change the subject was a demonstration of your obvious incompetence.
i have never made any claim that unions in any way effect the economy as a whole.
your moronic assertion that "unions built this country" is equally foolish
one could make a better argument that SLAVERY built this country, since slaves actually did shit, while union bosses sit on their fat asses leeching off those who actually do shit, and steal a slice of the workers' already meager wages.
the corruption at UAW has not yet been presented, because you still havent dealt with the teamsters shit that is already in evidence.
try to follow the arguments, i know, it's super complicated, cuz TWO actual assertions remain outstanding, and for your benefit i shall restate them:
1 ) democrats controlled the congress when the cannabis prohibition laws were drafted, and they controlled the presidency at the time too, with the noted exception of Nixon
2 ) every union in america is a corrupt mob influenced racket
disproving EITHER of these assertions would be a victory
i dont usually go out on a limb and make declarations like this, since in most cases opinions and points of view get involved to muddy the waters.
in these cases, these statements are simply factual, stated in refutation of previous arguments.
if you were capable of proving these statements wrong, you would win this argument, but instead you have tried to change the subject, called me a fag, and posted gifs.
and in conclusion...
I get it. I think you do to. Shit ain't really funny. But.....
