|
lol apparently that dude just saw the link in the Wikileaks thread and went "Oh boy cannot wait to show this to D&D and own them super hard"
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:lol apparently that dude just saw the link in the Wikileaks thread and went "Oh boy cannot wait to show this to D&D and own them super hard" That thread is a bunch of jokesters playing along with a handful of legitimate paranoid schizophrenics.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:That thread is a bunch of jokesters playing along with a handful of legitimate paranoid schizophrenics. I broke my rule and posted in there just because I am curious to see how they respond to the whole JM/KM thing
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Should I erase the texture mapping where I cut out one document and placed it onto a pure white background? Lol the source image is literally the first image result on google for "wells fargo business savings statement"
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
emdash posted:http://election.princeton.edu/house-polling-margin/ It's never happening again because of how gerrymandered to hell red states are
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I broke my rule and posted in there just because I am curious to see how they respond to the whole JM/KM thing looked at that thread and couldn't resist laughing at them, im weak
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
Lotka Volterra posted:looked at that thread and couldn't resist laughing at them, im weak I do like the assertion that of all the political enemies the Clinton's could have killed, they went after the guy who did the dumb viral video no one heard of
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
if the tariff discussion continues for much longer, i will bring out econ 201 style graphs, but generally speaking tariffs:
in the short term, tariffs almost always have a net negative impact on national welfare (defined in economic terms) and on global welfare (again defined in economic terms). it hurts consumers more than it helps producers. for some developing countries, however, this short-term cost can lead to long-term benefit as it encourages industrialization* of certain industries and can be used to fund internal improvements.** for an advanced economy, tariffs tend to be an economic drain and bad for national and global welfare.*** among economists, there is near consensus that free trade is good.**** the big question is how to best respond to workers whose livelihoods might be threatened by the removal of trade barriers. it's also really hard to remove trade barriers once they are put in place, because producers obviously dislike lowered profits and can better influence government action than consumers speaking of protectionists, here's a funny bit of polling on trump: https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/761335772016435200 * assuming foreign industry doesn't find a way around tariff policies ** assuming the government actually uses tariff revenue for improvements *** there are certain marginal cases where tariffs can be a net positive for well-developed countries, but these are really rare as they require the government to have almost perfect knowledge of the market and an ability to respond to changes quickly **** how good is a matter of debate, though QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 01:46 on Aug 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
EugeneJ apparently a glutton for punishment, as they're taking that post on tour and getting BTFO everywhere
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I do like the assertion that of all the political enemies the Clinton's could have killed, they went after the guy who did the dumb viral video no one heard of I do enjoy the thought of the Clintons being so petty that they'd murder someone over simply challenging them. Does make me wonder why the entirety of the right wing in America hasn't been found dead in their beds, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:EugeneJ apparently a glutton for punishment, as they're taking that post on tour and getting BTFO everywhere Man, I wish I was capable of jumping to a conclusion that completely devoid of skepticism Must be liberating
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
Lotka Volterra posted:I do enjoy the thought of the Clintons being so petty that they'd murder someone over simply challenging them. Does make me wonder why the entirety of the right wing in America hasn't been found dead in their beds, though. You know how wolves prey on the weak and old? Think the opposite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
zoux posted:The solution to all these questions of trade is, as always, guaranteed minimum income. Da, comrade  Hopefully this election smashes the GOP and the Democrats can finally take full control of the federal government.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
Lotka Volterra posted:I do enjoy the thought of the Clintons being so petty that they'd murder someone over simply challenging them. Does make me wonder why the entirety of the right wing in America hasn't been found dead in their beds, though. Killing the people who are on to you just proves that they were right all along. Come on, this is like conspiracy 101 stuff here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Okay, so people are paid more. Now what do you about jobs that can be done more cheaply somewhere else or that don't need to be done any more because technology has made them redundant? What's the difference between paying someone not to work and having them do work that doesn't actually need to be done? Why do you want businesses in our economy to actively engage in inefficient behavior? I am unsure how to describe the current set up exactly, because in truth I do not know how you would change the old jobs or the obsolete ones. However I do have an answer for the differences between paying them to not work and to work: Doing something outside of the house with other people, friendships and so on, the fact that society judges you based on what you are or are not doing. Whilst we should try and change the later, the former is just something that's normal to most people. As answer to your last point, the reason we want businesses to engage in inefficient behaviour is two fold. The first is that it helps the economy of the nation, more money in the coffers because people have to spend money (insert Keynesian stuff here as it were). Second of all businesses already engage in inefficient behaviour, giving large bonuses to people in charge even when they are making short term decisions that will create problems down the line, to try and curb that might be an idea, but it isn't going to be likely considering the whole shareholder returns issue. I rather think it does. Trade is, as we have seen, no longer simply between nations but between nations and corporate entities, therefore should we approach these things more as a framework. I know, and I am not disputing that, but to me at least it seems to cross over from simple resignation and anger at the current situation to being almost anger at the people on the ground instead of those in the board room. Though that may well just be me. Lightning Knight posted:It's a good thing then that your hypothetical machine will never exist. We should embrace moves towards post-industrial economies where people don't have to put so many hours in at backbreaking jobs all day, every day, every week, every holiday, and work harder to make that a reality. Not cling to the past where grandpa and grandma had to work their asses off to put food on the table. And if the people want to put the time in? I mean I am not saying they do, but if they did. Is it a moral right to be able to tell people to stop doing something even if they wish to continue to do so. I know I know, I am only working in hypotheticals and I am sorry, but is it acceptable to do something like that? I am sorry again for this. To respond to the second paragraph: So the correct idea is to get angry at them for getting angry at their conditions? Rant on a the hypocrisy all you like, I am right there with you, but isn't it a bit rich to pull the old "Well there are other people suffering just like you, not so cool any more is it". It;s like going "There are starving children in Africa" but with economic policy. straight up brolic posted:are you high? Just tired I am afraid. I didn't mean an actual machine, that would be daft, but the way in which we talk about progress and all of that sort of idea. I am interested in how people approach it. I mean is the creation of machines that just make stuff, that put people out of work without there ever being any political solution put in place. Is that progress or simply innovation? Sorry, I don't mean to come across as rude or anything, I am simply sad at the state of play in my own nation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Da, comrade Even in the biggest possible GOP meltdown, it's pretty much impossible for Democrats to get a majority in the House this time around.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
Pakled posted:Even in the biggest possible GOP meltdown, it's pretty much impossible for Democrats to get a majority in the House this time around. Gerrymanders weaken over time, and old whites die every day. If the shitshow continues we'll give from impossible to a longshot, as far as I can tell.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
So have any of the Trump fans torn up the pocket constitution of a protestor yet? Because that's the delicious cherry on the top of this election sundae that I'm waiting for.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Gerrymanders weaken over time, and old whites die every day. I think this is a John Prine lyric
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:https://twitter.com/onthemedia/status/761284316299132928 He should've chosen Fiorina for his running mate, so they can invent videos together.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Gerrymanders weaken over time, and old whites die every day. If the shitshow continues we'll give from impossible to a longshot, as far as I can tell. Supreme Court changes could.make a big difference too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
Gyges posted:So have any of the Trump fans torn up the pocket constitution of a protestor yet? Because that's the delicious cherry on the top of this election sundae that I'm waiting for. If you watch the video you see one guy kind of passively trying haha
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
So Ron Johnson has a new attack ad on Fling old. It's the exact ad he ran prior, only going after Russ's prior ad
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:And if the people want to put the time in? I mean I am not saying they do, but if they did. Is it a moral right to be able to tell people to stop doing something even if they wish to continue to do so. I know I know, I am only working in hypotheticals and I am sorry, but is it acceptable to do something like that? I am sorry again for this. Nobody is saying there should be explicit bans on doing stuff if that's what you want to do. Humans are never going to swim as well as dolphins but we don't throw our hands up and say "Welp, might as well never have swimming competitions again!". If someone wants to work on an assembly line or in McD's or something, ideally they would be able to, even if a machine can do it better. But in a society where most work is seen as relegated to the dustbin of history, people who wanted to feel challenged would be better off, not worse. They would be able to find the things that truly interest them and pursue them, not occasionally manage to spend half a Sunday afternoon on it in between work and resting from work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
Well, I learned an interesting lesson about how paranoid conspiracy theorists rationalize obvious counter-points to their beliefs, they just ignore it and move on to the next one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Remember those papers served wrong? Hillary still took offense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Well, I learned an interesting lesson about how
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
You'd think people would learn not to screw with the Clintons at this point, yeesh
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
I do not think the people who fell for a badly photoshopped bank statement that couldn't even keep the name straight on do not simply count as people I disagree with
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:I am unsure how to describe the current set up exactly, because in truth I do not know how you would change the old jobs or the obsolete ones. However I do have an answer for the differences between paying them to not work and to work: Doing something outside of the house with other people, friendships and so on, the fact that society judges you based on what you are or are not doing. Whilst we should try and change the later, the former is just something that's normal to most people. As answer to your last point, the reason we want businesses to engage in inefficient behaviour is two fold. The first is that it helps the economy of the nation, more money in the coffers because people have to spend money (insert Keynesian stuff here as it were). Second of all businesses already engage in inefficient behaviour, giving large bonuses to people in charge even when they are making short term decisions that will create problems down the line, to try and curb that might be an idea, but it isn't going to be likely considering the whole shareholder returns issue. We're kind of veering off the original topic of trade (although that's probably a good thing), but there are a few points to address here: 1) The goal of something like a GMI is never to stop people from working. That's silly. The goal is actually to drastically increase the bargaining power of labor in the labor market while simultaneously smoothing things out for people who lose their jobs or who simply can't work for some reason. Ideally you'd also encourage local governments to run more volunteer initiatives so people have useful things to do if they want. Helping out around your community is arguably a more socially useful use of time than, say, being a cashier at Walmart. 2) The kind of inefficiency that you're talking about is pointless. Let the businesses engage in more efficient behavior, reap the benefits through taxes, spread those benefits out by giving people money. You don't need to force businesses to employ people for pointless tasks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
We were already making fun of this catch the gently caress up bro
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:We were already making fun of this catch the gently caress up bro Sorry. I'm slow. Honestly all the conspiracy theories around this election are loving gold. I know people who believe that Trump is a Hillary plant. I know people who believe that Trump is a Russian plant. gently caress man I can't handle it anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I do not think the people who fell for a badly photoshopped bank statement that couldn't even keep the name straight on do not simply count as people I disagree with It was more an opportunity to illustrate a more fundamental principle. Also, Hilary lied, 4 Americans died. At least according to the sign I pass on the way to work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
8 years from now we'll have a 7-2 liberal leaning SCOTUS and millions more baby boomers will be dead. It will be a beautiful day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
I don't remember those papers served wrong, who was that guy?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
Justice News Network. Sounds great
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
Reason posted:Sorry. I'm slow. Honestly all the conspiracy theories around this election are loving gold. I know people who believe that Trump is a Hillary plant. I know people who believe that Trump is a Russian plant. gently caress man I can't handle it anymore. Trump being a Democratic plant is my favorite conspiracy theory because it's more logical than the reality of him just being this loving bad at running for president.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
Lotka Volterra posted:Justice News Network. I want to see what's inside their Beef Box
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:8 years from now we'll have a 7-2 liberal leaning SCOTUS and millions more baby boomers will be dead. And Antonin Scalia will still be dead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2016 02:10
|
|