|
Slaan posted:What was the point of drawing each panel twice with slightly different coloring? 102mb pdf download. He's using a megs to  ratio.
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 17:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 07:40 |
|
|
Heh, most of his complaints you can paint a Conservative with too!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 18:11
|
|
Have you seen my apex seals? I seem to have lost them.
|
I know this isn't an email but it pisses me off. Over at Freep someones posted a story about physicists at CIT discovering a new way to visualize warped space and time. Cue a bunch of monkeys posting the exact same Spirograph joke. quote:New? Bah! quote:I discovered that first one with a Spirograph in 1970. And so on, along with the usual disdain for science and knowledge. quote:I see the weed and funding at Cal Tech have been increased lately.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 18:55
|
|
|
my father in law's girlfriend is otherwise an entirely wonderful woman, and in fact much nicer than my father in law. Unfortunately, she has the habit of forwarding my wife the most insane bullshit filled conservative email forwards, most of which have to do with the subject of immigration. For full disclosure, I'm English, my wife is American. I spent 8 years living as an immigrant in the USA and she knew me this whole time. She never quite reconciled the concepts of "immigrant=bad" and "boyfriend's son in law=immigrant". I think maybe it's the whole "immigrant but also white and english speaking" thing that's confusing her. Here's her latest forward: quote:My great great grandfather watched as his friends died in the Civil War, my brother watched as his friends died in WW II, and I watched as my friends died in Vietnam.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 19:44
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone, Number one way public policy is formulated: Forwarded chain emails!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 19:53
|
|
|
Crazy Letter posted:But it seems no one cares about the Well, I'm at least glad that there's only one American citizen that's being offended.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 20:27
|
|
|
crime fighting hog posted:Today I got a letter, more of a postcard really, of a cartoon of Jesus being cruxified while being stomped on by an ostrich. The ostrich is looking at me saying "YOU MAY HAVE GOD ON YOUR SIDE, BUT WE HAVE JUDGES AND THE ACLU!!!" This is where political discourse has gotten us. "Liberals are perfect non-arrogant ostriches and will crush your children and their grandchildren."
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 20:27
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Number one way public policy is formulated: Forwarded chain emails! I notice that the person who posted this boasts about what their family saw in the military, but didn't have the balls to serve themselves..
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 20:41
|
|
|
quote:6. Learn the LANGUAGE like immigrants I love this one. My grandfather came here in 1965 from Greece and still doesn't speak a word of English.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 20:58
|
|
|
Nathilus posted:I disabused my friend of that notion by proving to him mathematically that welfare fraud was less that peanuts when compared to the bottom line.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 21:01
|
|
|
EnsGDT posted:I love this one. My grandfather came here in 1965 from Greece and still doesn't speak a word of English. Hell, take it back a few hundred years more to the pilgrims. How many of you speak Wampanoag?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 21:02
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:How? I've tried on a couple occasions to look for a comprehensive, unbiased look at the extent of welfare fraud, but never came up with much. Simply assume literally every dollar of welfare is fraud, then look at how it compares to the bottom line.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 21:24
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Simply assume literally every dollar of welfare is fraud, then look at how it compares to the bottom line. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 21:25
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:How? I've tried on a couple occasions to look for a comprehensive, unbiased look at the extent of welfare fraud, but never came up with much. I ran with crazy numbers. I think we agreed on 30% of all welfare recipients committing some level of fraud, with 10% receiving payment completely fraudulently. A big turning point in the discussion was when I was able to make him realize that welfare itself is a tiny portion of entitlements spending. Social security and the medi* programs take the lions share of the cash and due to their natures you don't have to worry about fraud. The truth is you can inflate the numbers to 50% fraud and welfare is still a relatively minor expenditure over all. Not NASA level minor, but it's no medicare. The important thing is to hammer home the differences in scope between welfare and other entitlements because it's not obvious to most people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 21:37
|
|
|
Nathilus posted:I ran with crazy numbers. I think we agreed on 30% of all welfare recipients committing some level of fraud, with 10% receiving payment completely fraudulently. A big turning point in the discussion was when I was able to make him realize that welfare itself is a tiny portion of entitlements spending. Social security and the medi* programs take the lions share of the cash and due to their natures you don't have to worry about fraud.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 21:50
|
|
|
Rich white people fraud was beyond the scope of our discussion and would have muddied the waters. Presumably he's cool with them stealing billions from welfare just like he's cool with wallstreet ripping off America. His beef was poor people unjustly getting money and thus eating a huge hole in our economy, !!!oneoneone. The point was to show him that poor people actually being given money is a tiny portion of entitlement spending. Even unemployment takes a bigger piece of the pie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 22:04
|
|
|
EnsGDT posted:I love this one. My grandfather came here in 1965 from Greece and still doesn't speak a word of English. The hilarious thing is that this criticism wasn't true "in the past." Immigrants from Europe had experienced the same sort of xenophobic attitudes over the past 150+ years because the first generation didn't always learn the language. see: Italians.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 22:39
|
|
|
Habibi posted:The hilarious thing is that this criticism wasn't true "in the past." Immigrants from Europe had experienced the same sort of xenophobic attitudes over the past 150+ years because the first generation didn't always learn the language. see: Italians. The response to this goes "Yeah, but MY ethnic group took care of their communities, not like 'these people'."
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 23:43
|
|
|
Habibi posted:The hilarious thing is that this criticism wasn't true "in the past." Immigrants from Europe had experienced the same sort of xenophobic attitudes over the past 150+ years because the first generation didn't always learn the language. see: Italians. there's an old Will Eisner book called "Life on Dropsie Avenue" which looks at the life of a street commonly inhabited by immigrants over a couple of centuries, and the most amazing part is that each immigrant group (Irish, polish, Italian, Jewish) acts essentially the same way. They become a semi-ghetto for a while, then their kids learn English, then they integrate, then they become extremely resentful about these newcomers not integrating or learning the language.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
Not sure I've seen this one in here:quote:This is kinda scary! No wonder things are in such a mess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 15:39
|
|
|
GraveyTrain posted:Not sure I've seen this one in here: There's no official snopes article, but there is plenty of discussion: http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=54884 The most damning thing is that there is no "International Health Organization". Perhaps they mean the WHO, but not even getting the name right is really lazy. And here's an article linked from that discussion about how cancer survival rates are misleading, http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/cancer-rates-and-unjustified-conclusions/ In sum, [citation needed]. I have nothing on the private sector percentages, except that it seems to have precisely no correlation on the state of the economy (this is making the highly dubious assumption that those numbers are anywhere close to correct).
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:05
|
|
|
I like that working in the public sector means never really having a job. Do people forget about what happens when you let an industry run rampant with no regulation? The whole banking crisis in 2008 is completely the fault of the government?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:18
|
|
|
quote:These government hacks know what's best for GM, Chrysler Yeah, that mean ol'government taking over GM and Chrysler without even listening to their feelings. It's not like they flew to DC and practically begged on their knees to be bailed out or anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:31
|
|
|
Pfirti86 posted:Yeah, that mean ol'government taking over GM and Chrysler without even listening to their feelings. It's not like they flew to DC and practically begged on their knees to be bailed out or anything. Well, that and the success story that GM has become in the last few years. Seems like the government did an outstanding job to me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:33
|
|
|
And apparently W. Bush's 55% private-business-experienced cabinet didn't keep our economy from making GBS threads the bed in 2008 anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:33
|
|
|
Chenghiz posted:And apparently W. Bush's 55% private-business-experienced cabinet didn't keep our economy from making GBS threads the bed in 2008 anyway. don't you remember? The economy was humming until THOSE CLOWNS IN CONGRESS screwed everything up!
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:36
|
|
|
Chenghiz posted:And apparently W. Bush's 55% private-business-experienced cabinet didn't keep our economy from making GBS threads the bed in 2008 anyway. The only reason it poo poo the bed was because it knew that GWB was going to be out of office soon. Big biz got scared that the democrats might take the White House, so the economy tanked. My dad, while not using that specific argument, does say "watch what happens to the stock market when a democrat takes office".
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:36
|
|
|
Thenipwax posted:The only reason it poo poo the bed was because it knew that GWB was going to be out of office soon. Big biz got scared that the democrats might take the White House, so the economy tanked. The DJIA gains nearly 4000 points overall?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:39
|
|
|
Thenipwax posted:The only reason it poo poo the bed was because it knew that GWB was going to be out of office soon. Big biz got scared that the democrats might take the White House, so the economy tanked. You think that argument's bad, try the one where "All the prosperity under Clinton was due to things that Reagan passed. That's how it works. They didn't start producing fruits until under Clinton, and he got all the credit!" 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:40
|
|
|
Ninja_Orca posted:You think that argument's bad, try the one where "All the prosperity under Clinton was due to things that Reagan passed. That's how it works. They didn't start producing fruits until under Clinton, and he got all the credit!" Wasn't there like a president in between, who even oversaw a (relatively mild) recession?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:42
|
|
|
Ninja_Orca posted:You think that argument's bad, try the one where "All the prosperity under Clinton was due to things that Reagan passed. That's how it works. They didn't start producing fruits until under Clinton, and he got all the credit!" Heh, my dad likes this one. He'll still go on about Clinton's fake deficit-reducing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:46
|
|
|
I always hear (and there may be a bit of truth to it) that the economy flourished under Clinton because of the rise of the internet. I guess they forgot who "invented" the internet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:53
|
|
|
Thenipwax posted:I like that working in the public sector means never really having a job. There's still people blaming that on government forcing banks to lend to poor people, which falls under "too much regulation". I had somebody tell me that last week and I was just like  since I admittedly didn't really have a fairly succinct explanation ready for why it all happened - I don't talk politics much in real life so I'm not used to this stuff. She was pretty reasonable and respectful though she disagreed with me on pretty much everything though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 16:55
|
|
|
Thenipwax posted:I like that working in the public sector means never really having a job. I actually know someone who thinks that the banking crises happened because the government was regulating too much and thus providing the illusion of security. So it's the goverment's fault that banks were reckless, because they didn't let the banks risk everything and fail. Or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 17:17
|
|
|
Pornographic Memory posted:There's still people blaming that on government forcing banks to lend to poor people, which falls under "too much regulation". They literally believe the exact opposite of what happened. Banks were lending to poor people and then trading the debt in the form of sub-prime mortgage backed securities. The definition of a sub-prime mortgage is a mortgage which is given to a borrower deemed risky or with poor credit. The reason this happened was because the government didn't have regulations in place to stop banks from lending money to people who couldn't pay it back. In the end, it didn't matter: The American taxpayer covered the bank's money lost in sub-prime mortgages instead of letting them fail, which depending on how you argue it could have caused anything from a few billionaires bloo-blooing or a run on banks and complete collapse of the credit system. In reality, the bailouts were passed to prevent any chance of civil chaos or any shift in the power structure. The elites said "Wait, wait! We learned our lesson!" and we paid to keep the current elites in the elite instead of allowing the market to bring in new elites. babies havin rabies fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Apr 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 17:24
|
|
|
The first thing I usually ask conservatives I'm debating with is whether they're for smaller government or bigger government. Obviously they always say "SMALLER!". Pointing out that Reagan and GWB oversaw the biggest expansions of government in their lifetimes doesn't seem to sink in. They're still convinced that democrats want to subsidize the lazy. I just wish people would be loving honest in their debating. That's too much to ask I guess. I bring up hard stats and all I hear is "you can spin anything".
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 17:28
|
|
|
Thenipwax posted:The first thing I usually ask conservatives I'm debating with is whether they're for smaller government or bigger government. Obviously they always say "SMALLER!". Pointing out that Reagan and GWB oversaw the biggest expansions of government in their lifetimes doesn't seem to sink in. They're still convinced that democrats want to subsidize the lazy. Ask them if they can define a logical fallacy. If they can't you're better off not talking to them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 17:31
|
|
|
babies havin rabies posted:Ask them if they can define a logical fallacy. If they can't you're better off not talking to them. Define it? Hell, they're experts at using tons of them in every argument! My dad was drunk the other night and itching for an argument and his argument that this is a CHRISTIAN nation is that the money says "In God We Trust" on it. The funny thing is that he isn't even religious at all, but he's acting like it because his girlfriend is. I kept telling him that wasn't an argument, but in his mind he kept saying: "checkmate "
Thenipwax fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Apr 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 17:33
|
|
|
Hey you hosed yourself there, man. Don't talk about religion or politics when you drink.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 07:40 |
|
|
babies havin rabies posted:Hey you hosed yourself there, man. Don't talk about religion or politics when you drink. Which is why I don't drink around my extremely conservative in laws. I always find it strange when someone pretends to be of a particular political leaning to attract a mate. It's such a pain in the rear end to pretend you're something you aren't
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 17:48
|
|
