Why don't you bus in the white people then?
They did it and they won. Fucking do it, too.
Is it illegal to do it for people within the state? More than 75% of white people who could have voted didn't.
Baroque music is classical music. The classical era is merely one period of classical music, and is not what "classical music" means.
>no, but my point is that you're missing my point. if niggers voting for jones stops cuts in SSI, medicare, medicaid, etc, then the majority of those monies will actually be going to white people
Literally false. Non-whites use more per capita and more total. The majority of the money is also coming from white people. The net effect from those programs is whites pay, non-whites take.
> more total
1) true
2) let's hypothetically say whites take 55% - they pay way more than 55% They pay more than they take out - fact.
Yes, pinko faggot.
Welfare by race
https://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/
> caucasian 16.8 % 11,405,000
> black 39.6 % 26,884,000
yes, it would actually.
Evidence >>11035336
> shifting the goalposts
The shifted goalposts still rebuke your claim, pinko faggot.
>I'm saying the majority of the benificiaries are white
Which you can't prove.>>11035335
And your implication was that if the majority of beneficiaries are whites, that means that program is good for whites. The majority of people having to pay for the programs are also white, so the majority of people getting fucked by the programs are white. The number of whites getting fucked by paying for the programs is larger than the number of whites benefiting from them. They are a net drain on whites, and a net gain for non-whites, pink faggot.
That's one program. Your statistic also has no Hispanic category. It's a federal data base that combines Hispanics and whites into one category.
Welfare by race
https://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/
> caucasian 16.8 % 11,405,000
> black 39.6 % 26,884,000
> Hispanic 21.2 % 14,392,000
You can't explain why programs that hurt whites on a per-capita basis should be supported, pinko faggot.
> "welfare" is not a thing. you know that, right?
It's an umbrella statistic referring to a variety of government expenditure programs.
> You also realize that your "welfare" statistic doesn't include SSA expenditure – not even SSDI or SSI, right?
Why are you so obsessed with taking money from working whites to give to retired boomers, you pinko faggot?
>SSDI
> SSDI and SSI are not for retirees you dipshit, and its like 80+% whites as well.
No, you dipshit, those statistics were white+mestizo combined into one category.
Are these the only programs you support?
> why are you so concerned with SNAP
I'm concerned with everything that has an aggregate effect of transferring wealth from whites to non-whites, pinko faggot.
>oh right, the magic "when the statistics don't agree with me claim the magic mexians did it"
Yeah, literally anybody but a left wing faggot realizes that mexicans are lumped in with whites.
> its an agricultural subsidy.
Yeah, it is. What's your point? I never said I was so obsessed with it. I am obsessed with programs that transfer wealth from whites to non-whites.
And you'll never be done with me, pink faggot. You're never getting your free shit.
> you haven't proven how significant the hispanic numbers are in that stat, period
Yeah, because you literally can't, retard. That's why the zog does it, retard.
The only reason whites get more money in social security is because they put more money into in the first place. It's based on employer contributions and payroll taxes. Whites put more in than non-whites and get more back - but on average less back then they put in. The net effect is a transfer of wealth from whites to non-whites. The average white would be better of with Social Security abolished and simply saving their money.
And when did I even mention SNAP, you fucking retarded pink faggot?
>even still 40% of the beneficiaries of SNAP are whites. I'm one of them
So, more non-whites per capita, and in absolute terms. if 60% of the beneficiaries are non-white.
And you acted like it was some principled stance to boost white birth rates, when in reality you're just using welfare yourself.
> it doesn't realize it is filtered.
Other people can see my posts and see that you're a retarded pinko faggot who shills for the Democrat party, so it doesn't matter if you can't see them.
>How in the flying fuck 60% of the population suddenly vanish?
well, that's only 40% of registered voters, not even 40% of the voting aged populace. It was like 20% of people who actually could vote, voted.
>>11038648
> Are you trying to convince yourself you're not the bad guy?
pro-whites are everything righteous and just in this world, goblin.