|
They just divided 195,000 by 323 to get 603. It would actually be 60300% and that means Obamacare is even more deadly than first calculated. 
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2013 22:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 19:11 |
|
|
Lightning Jim posted:On another note, one of my family members on Facebook is hard-core NRA/Tea party. For the most part I've just your typical NRA stuff, but then I saw this: Everything I ever needed to learn about conservatives, I learned in five minutes on April 19, 1995. Or on July 27, 2008:      Broad generalization and guilt by association sure is fun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
I guess we can feel safe that right wing kooks are less organized and proficient at killing than their muslim counterparts?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2013 23:02
|
|
|
Dirty Job posted:How many people were killed by all different types of guns? That's the big elephant in the room. They're cherry picking "rifle" deaths while the majority of firearm related death and injuries are from handguns.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 00:08
|
|
|
Does that rifle deaths figure include suicides?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
Lightning Jim posted:"interprit". Also: is the first even real, or is it just some scenario he made up? "Predident" is still my favorite. A typo in a forum or email or whatever is fine, but on an image macro? It feels so much like they just don't care then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
jackofarcades posted:Nah, I've seen this before. For example: The only way forward is to remove all that tyrannical health-control. If regular people were allowed to practice medicine in self-defence, then no doctor would dare mal a practice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 01:20
|
|
|
 That or "#DIV/0! percent" I suppose, it's still mathematically incomprehensible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:Does that rifle deaths figure include suicides? If it does it's handwaved with 'well they'd use OTHER methods' which has been statistically shown to be false. Easy access to a gun means easy suicide, the other methods aren't as easy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 01:33
|
|
|
Very few people commit suicide by long gun, I imagine it's pretty drat tricky to do it unless you take off your shoes. That doesn't change the fact that 1/2 to 2/3 of gun deaths are suicides, the vast majority of which are obviously handguns, something around 15,000.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:If it does it's handwaved with 'well they'd use OTHER methods' which has been statistically shown to be false. Easy access to a gun means easy suicide, the other methods aren't as easy. I was suicidal at one point years ago. Wrote a letter, never attempted it though. All I can say is thank loving god there wasn't a gun in the house. I went through every way I could think of to possibly die and the issue at hand was all of them either made it so the last few minutes alive would be very painful, or wouldn't cause death for absolute certain. A gun on the other hand.....
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 02:07
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:If it does it's handwaved with 'well they'd use OTHER methods' which has been statistically shown to be false. Easy access to a gun means easy suicide, the other methods aren't as easy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 03:01
|
|
|
Sir Rolo posted:
This stuff is great because it't so batshit crazy it makes Republicans look bad. "Oh we know this guy is a maniacal dictator who wants to destroy America. But we didn't bother being strict about sequestration because we felt like being nice." gently caress, I wouldn't vote for them. The tea party really is the best thing that ever happened to the American right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 03:15
|
|
|
 This one just really got me mad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 03:42
|
|
|
TheJunkyardGod posted:
Ask him for a single direct citation from Obama himself that he wishes to actively confiscate guns. The rules are that the Drudge Report, Fox News, and Infowars cannot be used. He will likely refuse to play by those rules, but it's worth a shot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
ProperGanderPusher posted:Ask him for a single direct citation from Obama himself that he wishes to actively confiscate guns. The rules are that the Drudge Report, Fox News, and Infowars cannot be used. He'll probably go on about slippery slopes and how Hitler took away peoples guns (actually he reduced restrictions on guns but don't let facts get in the way)
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 03:57
|
|
|
Ehh, I made a really scrambled argument that didn't make the sense I wanted to. It just bothers me that gun owners can feel so persecuted the way some people actually are in real life. And that's the thing. It's not that they think Obama wants to take away their guns(well, they do, but not in this image). It's that he's not speaking up for them they way he speaks up for muslims.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 03:58
|
|
|
I find these conspiracy theories about the Boston Marathon bombing fascinating/funny for a number of reasons: (1) they posit a government that is so devious that it would perpetrate a false flag attack, but incompetent enough that they would leave enough open clues that point to their involvement that an Internet user living in his mother's basement can detect the government's role in the attack mere hours after people are killed. This is an oddly comforting notion in its own way. There is nothing more frightening than a government that commits a false flag attack that no one knows about. Gladly, we have Internet detectives to find out the Truth. (2) They point to the presence of a Craft International hat as proof of some kind of involvement with PMCs or. . . something. This in particular is truly emblematic of conspiracy theories at large: they point to obscure minutiae and supposed inconsistencies, while ignoring the elephant in the room. In this case, the disturbing (at least for someone people) fact that the US military actively and openly uses PMCs like Craft and Blackwater/Xe/Academi with very little oversight and often with disastrous results. Conspiracy theorists are truly useful idiots.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
Sir Rolo posted:
As a person who works with statistics on a daily basis, this one pisses me off. The Govt. actually stopped collecting stats and conducting research because of a law banning the CDC from funding gun violence research. Though Obama signed an executive order allowing federal funded research again, I'm not sure if we'll see anything substantial for some time, if it's even allowed to go on for at least 5-years or so. But no, keep telling yourselves that the government only stopped doing the stats research because they figured out it was just gangs shooting children and the subject just wasn't worth researching further. 
Handsome Ralph fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Apr 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
ProperGanderPusher posted:Ask him for a single direct citation from Obama himself that he wishes to actively confiscate guns. The rules are that the Drudge Report, Fox News, and Infowars cannot be used. Breitbart, Examiner.com, Worldnetdaily, Newsbusters, some others I'm forgetting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 05:11
|
|
|
I like how the line color doesn't match the brackets around the presidents' terms. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 14:35
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:I like how the line color doesn't match the brackets around the presidents' terms.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 14:50
|
|
|
The line color is based on who has the majority at the time, it's a pretty lovely way of making a graph.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
The line going down must be caused by the other line changing color, not the other way around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 16:44
|
|
|
Haven't the Republicans had the majority in the House since 2010?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
dalstrs posted:Haven't the Republicans had the majority in the House since 2010? Yep, and the dems only had it for four years anyways till the republicans retook the majority in 2010.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:As a person who works with statistics on a daily basis, this one pisses me off. The Govt. actually stopped collecting stats and conducting research because of a law banning the CDC from funding gun violence research. Though Obama signed an executive order allowing federal funded research again, I'm not sure if we'll see anything substantial for some time, if it's even allowed to go on for at least 5-years or so. I like to think that my reaction to ones like this are like most: My eyes instantly glaze over and I move on to the next thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:Yep, and the dems only had it for four years anyways till the republicans retook the majority in 2010. There's also the effects of all of the new Republican governors who, among other things, decided that laying off public employees is of vital importance in a job crisis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 00:21
|
|
|
Mom called me out to show me this 'funny, I JUST THINK IT'S FUNNY OKAY IT ISN'T RACIST" FB post. Now, if someone starts the sentence with "I'm not a racist, BUT," we know what follows is racist. So if someone starts the sentence with "I just think it's funny so don't call it racist," the same applies. Yes, Mom. Someone making a fake diploma with "OBAMA BIN LYING" and crying out that he should be impeached is funny. When you have to explain to your silent daughter that "see, it's like Osama Bin Laden! It's funny!" it isn't funny.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:Yep, and the dems only had it for four years anyways till the republicans retook the majority in 2010. In addition to that the Democratic control of the Senate for that magical 60 votes was reliant upon the Lieberman factor and only for a handful of months.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
I'm just gonna ask but what the hell is the vertical axis? I guessed employment first but employment was never that low unless I seriously wasn't paying attention.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 03:11
|
|
|
That's the percentage of people over the age of 16 who are employed. It's a terrible measure of economic prosperity because a drop in employment can be caused by people dropping out of the workforce to retire, go to school or raise children. Edit: You'd have to dive into the statistics to figure out what chunk of the employment rate is due to the recession and what part is due to boomers retiring. Dr. Arbitrary fucked around with this message at 03:31 on Apr 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 03:26
|
|
|
Here's one that popped up on my FB feed. My response: "This is incorrect, actually. The socialist thinks "Everyone should be able to live like this." The capitalist thinks "Only those people who have performed enough of a specific job society places sufficient value upon should be able to live like this." The guy who just hates nice houses is probably an Anarchist." The other guy hasn't responded yet. Edit: He responded! "Not again, (Spiritus Nox)...Not Again." This is literally the second time I've ever talked politics with this guy. Double Edit: Haha holy poo poo, unfriended and blocked. Because I told him the textbook definition of communism. What a loving loser. Spiritus Nox fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Apr 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
Never again, or so it would seem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
You know, it's cool if you don't like talking politics, but you should most likely not post lovely political memes in a public format if that's how you roll.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 04:18
|
|
|
Guido van Possum posted:Never again, or so it would seem. It's funny because his dad has some cushy job whose precise description eludes me at the moment, and his family lives (as far as I know, it's been a while since I've seen him in person) in a house about that nice. I guess he just can't bear the thought that he might be just a wee bit privilaged. I don't know why some people have such a loving heart attack over this. I am privelaged as poo poo and will readily admit it. I didn't even frame it like I was personally calling for the death of capitalism or anything, I just pointed out that since one of my honors courses had me spend a month reading Marx this semester that he had his definitions wrong, and he flips the gently caress out. He should see me when I actually get pissed at someone. Spiritus Nox fucked around with this message at 04:22 on Apr 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 04:18
|
|
|
Spiritus Nox posted:Here's one that popped up on my FB feed. I think this would be a more appropriate comparison really:  Somebody has to clean D-battery cells, might as well be this 3 year old in Bangladesh. I'm sure she is well compensated and will get to live in that nice house someday if she just works hard enough. Mo_Steel fucked around with this message at 16:35 on Apr 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
Spiritus Nox posted:My response: "This is incorrect, actually. The socialist thinks "Everyone should be able to live like this." The capitalist thinks "Only those people who have performed enough of a specific job society places sufficient value upon should be able to live like this." The guy who just hates nice houses is probably an Anarchist."
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:I think this would be a more appropriate comparison really: It should say "A capitalist see this, and says, "Everybody should live live that...except for me...because I'm better than that"
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 19:11 |
|
|
Interlude posted:Eh that's not really honest is it? Neither capitalism nor socialism would result in everyone living in a large suburban McMansion, there just aren't enough resources. The only reason some can do it with capitalism is because it relies on others not being able to do so. It's honest to the extent that socialism is about improving the lot of the people as a whole as opposed to his stereotype house-burners. The problem with resources isn't a problem with socialist philosophy, it's a problem of practicality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 17:08
|
|